medigraphic.com
Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.

2020, Number 11

<< Back Next >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2020; 88 (11)

Description of new paradigms in the labor curve in a second-level care hospital

Urióstegui-Domínguez JA, Ramírez-Palacios CD

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 727-734
PDF size: 200.35 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To describe the labor curve in a sample of primiparous and multiparous patients, with and without conduction of labor.
Materials and Methods: Descriptive, retrospective, case series, single-center study in nulliparous and multiparous patients with full-term pregnancy, at the Hospital de la Mujer Ciudad de México of the Ministry of Health. The variables parity, age, body mass index, delivery of labor, obstetric analgesia, obstetric forceps, weight and Apgar of the newborn were analyzed.
Results: 540 files were reviewed, 304 of nulliparous and 236 multiparous patients. In nulliparous patients with conduction of labor, the total duration was 15 hours and 9 minutes; from 6 centimeters of dilation it was 2 hours and 46 minutes. In nulliparous women without conduction of labor, the total duration was 9 hours and 42 minutes; from 6 centimeters of dilation it was 2 hours and 25 minutes. In multiparous patients with conduction of labor, the total duration was 15 hours and 29 minutes; from 6 centimeters of dilation it was 1 hour and 47 minutes; in multiparous women without conduction of labor the duration was 7 hours and 9 minutes; from 6 centimeters of dilation it was 1 hour and 40 minutes.
Conclusions: We describe a labor curve with an upward sloping morphology and an acceleration of the dilation speed from 6 cm, both in nulliparous and multiparous patients, regardless of conduction with oxytocin. Our results suggest that the pattern of progression of labor in local clinical practice differs significantly from the Friedman curve.


REFERENCES

  1. Vincens L. Concepto de parto, desencadenamiento y elementos del parto. En: González Merlo J, et al. 2018; 203-14.

  2. Miñano J, et al. Concepto de parto, asistencia al parto normal. En: En: González Merlo J, et al. 2018; 215-22.

  3. Friedman E. The graphic analysis of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1954; 68 (6): 1568-75. doi: 10.1016/0002- 9378(54)90311-7.

  4. Friedman E. Primigravid labor; a graphicostatistical analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1955; 6 (6): 567-89. doi: 10.1097/00006250-195512000-00001.

  5. Friedman E. Labor in multíparas; a graphicostatistical analysisi. Obstet Gynecol. 1956; 8 (6): 691-703. doi: 10.1097/00006250-195512000-00001.

  6. Van Dessel H, et al. Ultrasound assessment of cervical dynamics during the firts stage of labor. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1994; 53 (2): 123-7. doi: 10.1016/0028- 2243(94)90219-4.

  7. Lu G, et al. The effect of the increasing prevalence of maternal obesity on perinatal morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 185: 845-9. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.117351.

  8. Chehab M, et al. Parto de la paciente obesa. EMC- Ginecología- Obstetricia 2016; 52 (4): doi: 10.1016/S1283-081X (16)80905-4.

  9. Zhang J, et al. Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 116 (6): 1281-87. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181fdef6e

  10. Zhang J, et al. Ressessing in the labor curve in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 187 (4): 824-28. doi: 10.1067/mob.2002.127142.

  11. Neal J, et al. “Active labor” duration and dilation rates among low-risk, nulliparous women with spontaneous labor onset: a systematic review. Midwifery Women’s Health 2010; 55 (4): 308-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2009.08.004.

  12. Rosenbloom J, et al. New labor management guidelines and changes in cesarean delivery patterns. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 217(10): 689.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.10.007

  13. Moreno-Santillán A, et al. Descripción de la curva de trabajo de parto en un hospital de tercer nivel de atención. Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2018; 86 (6): 368-73. https://doi. org/10.24245/gom.v86i6.1572.

  14. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 117: Gynecologic care for women with human immunodeficiency virus. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins Gynecology. doi: 10.1097/ AOG.0b013e3182054cae

  15. Vigilancia y atención amigable en el trabajo de parto en embarazo de bajo riesgo. Guía de Práctica Clínica: Guía de Evidencias y Recomendaciones. México, CENETEC; 2019. http://imss.gob.mx/profesionales-salud/gpc

  16. Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-007-SSA2-2016. Establece los requisitos de atención de la mujer durante el embarazo, parto y puerperio y del recién nacido. https://www.cndh. org.mx/sites/all/doc/Programas/VIH/Leyes.

  17. World Medical Association Declaration of HelsinkI - Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. doi: https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/medical-ethics/ declaration-of-helsinki

  18. Abalos E, et al. Duration of spontaneous labour in ‘low-risk’ women with ‘normal’ perinatal outcomes: A systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018; 223: 123-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.02.026




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com