Advertisement

Squatting Support Device for Labor

Conference paper
  • 643 Downloads
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 779)

Abstract

Women have a high mortality rate and pain in childbirth before modern medicine. Current natural childbirth might take 12–16 h on labor, the body weight on the spine and pelvic make pregnant women fatigue, it might cause to use medical drugs to relieve pain, or cesarean delivery way. If women use birth squatting allows the pelvis to expand exports about 25% reduction in the second stage of labor, there is less pain, reduce the use of analgesics, increase comfort, increased fetal blood oxygen and carbon dioxide to reduce the value of fetal blood, significantly reduce perineal laceration, and there is less use of episiotomy surgery and auxiliary equipment. Squatting is not easy to maintain even in minutes, therefore, this study used “squatting support device” to provide women with a ramp birth squatting 20–30°, so that the body forward, the body’s center of gravity and support points remained at the same paw on the vertical axis, so that women can effectively contraction of the abdominal muscles to help viviparous through the birth canal. As comparing the time from starting pushing to crowning, ergonomics ankle support squatting is 25.52 min (F = 6.02, p < .05) shorter than semi-recumbent group in average. The time from starting pushing to fetal childbirth is 25.21 min shortened (F = 6.14, p < .05). Score of ergonomics ankle support squatting group is 5.05 to 3.22 (rating from 0 to 10) lower than semi-recumbent group in average as showing in visual analogue scale (VAS). The overall score of ergonomics ankle support squatting group is lower than semi-recumbent group and squatting group (F = 18.12, p < .001) as measured with short form McGill pain questionnaire (MPQ-SF). Ergonomics ankle support squatting group expressed better labor pushing experiences than other groups.

Keywords

Squatting Labor Universal design 

References

  1. 1.
    Shermer, R.H., Raines, D.A.: Positioning during the second stage of labor: Moving back to basics. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Neonatal. Nurs. 26(6), 727–734 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Holland, R.L., Smith, D.A.: Management of the second stage of labor: a review (Part II). Maternal positioning as it relates to the management of the second stage of labor is reviewed. South Dakota. J. Med. 42(6), 5–8 (1989)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mayberry, L.J., Wood, S.H., Strange, L.B., Lee, L., Heisler, D.R., Neilson-Smith, K.: Managing second-stage labor. Obstet. Neonatal Nurs. 3(6), 28–34 (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smith, M.A., Ruffin, M.T.T., Green, L.A.: The rational management of labor. Am. Family Phys. 47(6), 1471–1481 (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Romney, M.: Midwifery: chair versus bed. Nurs. Mirror 160(3), 35–36 (1985)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gould, D.: Normal labour: a concept analysis. J. Adv. Nurs. 31(2), 418–427 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roberts, J.E.: The “push” for evidence: management of the second stage. J. Midwifery Womens Health 47(1), 2–15 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Odenrick, P., Tropp, H., Ortengren, R.: A method for measurement of postural control in upright stance. Biomechanics 10-A, 437–443 (1987)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Allahbadia, G.N., Vaidya, P.R.: Squatting position for delivery. J. Indian Med. Assoc. 91(1), 13–16 (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Golay, J., Vedam, S., Sorger, L.: The squatting position for the second stage of labor: effects on labor and on maternal and fetal well-being. Birth 20(2), 73–78 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Waldenstrom, U., Gottvall, K.: A randomized trial of birthing stool or conventional semirecumbent position for second-stage labor. Birth 18(1), 5–10 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chang, S.C., Chou, M.M., Lin, K.C., Lin, L.C., Lin, Y.L., Kuo, S.C.: Effects of a pushing intervention on pain, fatigue and birthing experiences among Taiwanese women during the second stage of labour. Midwifery 27(6), 825–831 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2010.08.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Crowley, P., Elbourne, D., Ashurst, H., Garcia, J., Murphy, D., Duignan, N.: Delivery in an obstetric birth chair: a randomized controlled trial. Br. J. Obstetr. Gynaecol. 98(7), 667–674 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Taipei University of TechnologyTaipeiTaiwan
  2. 2.Oriental Institute of TechnologyNew TaipeiTaiwan
  3. 3.Da-Yeh University Dacun TownshipChanghua CountyTaiwan
  4. 4.Takming University of Science and TechnologyTaipeiTaiwan
  5. 5.MacKay Memorial HospitalTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations