Sentences with phrase «for multiparous»

However, no evidence - based programme is available for multiparous women or older first - time mothers.

Of women in our study with prolonged second stage diagnosed, 20.5 % were delivered in less than 3 hours (for primiparous women) and in less than 2 hours (for multiparous women) from the time of complete dilation.

For multiparous women, the most common indication was fetal malpresentation (25.8 %), followed by nonreassuring FHR tracing (24.6 %) and failure to progress (19.5 %).

Rates of cesarean section for multiparous women, when women with previous cesarean sections were excluded, were not different (p value cut - off for statistical significance after the Bonferroni correction 0.002).

The vaginal delivery rate for women who had not progressed despite 2 hours of oxytocin augmentation was 91 % for multiparous women and 74 % for nulliparous women.

In this study, the 95th percentile rate of active phase dilation was substantially slower than the standard rate derived from Friedman's work, varying from 0.5 cm / h to 0.7 cm / h for nulliparous women and from 0.5 cm / h to 1.3 cm / h for multiparous women (the ranges reflect that at more advanced dilation, labor proceeded more quickly)(Table 2).

No difference in long - term outcomes for planned home versus planned hospital births for multiparous women.

Overall, and for multiparous women, planned birth at home generated the greatest mean net benefit with a 100 % probability of being the optimal setting across all thresholds of cost effectiveness when perinatal outcomes were considered.

However, higher rates of a composite outcome of perinatal morbidity and mortality were seen for nulliparous women having homebirths (adjusted odds ratio 1.75; 95 % CI, 1.07 — 2.86), with no differences for multiparous women.

For the three non-obstetric unit settings, transfer rates were much higher for nulliparous women (36 % to 45 %) than for multiparous women (9 % to 13 %)(table 2 ⇓).

Transfers from non-obstetric unit settings were more frequent for nulliparous women (36 % to 45 %) than for multiparous women (9 % to 13 %).

For multiparous women, there were no significant differences in the primary outcome between birth settings.

For multiparous women there was no evidence of a difference in the primary outcome by planned place of birth.

Not exact matches

: «1.1.1 Explain to both multiparous and nulliparous women who are at low risk of complications that giving birth is generally very safe for both the woman and her baby.

1.1.2 Explain to both multiparous and nulliparous women that they may choose any birth setting (home, freestanding midwifery unit, alongside midwifery unit or obstetric unit), and support them in their choice of setting wherever they choose to give birth: Advise low ‑ risk multiparous women that planning to give birth at home or in a midwifery ‑ led unit (freestanding or alongside) is particularly suitable for them because the rate of interventions is lower and the outcome for the baby is no different compared with an obstetric unit.

Homebirth is recognised as safe for low risk women, particularly if it is not the first time they are giving birth (i.e. slightly higher risk for primiparous women than multiparous) as per «Birth Place Study» — British Medical Journal 2011 — amongst other studies.

For healthy multiparous women with a low risk pregnancy, there are no differences in adverse perinatal outcomes between planned births at home or in a midwifery unit compared with planned births in an obstetric unit

The caesarean rate for intended home births was 8.3 % among primiparous women and 1.6 % among multiparous women.

We used multivariable logistic - regression models to adjust for potential confounders, including maternal race or ethnic group (non-Hispanic white vs. other), parity (nulliparous vs. multiparous), insurance status (public or none vs. other), extent of prenatal care (≥ 5 visits vs. < 5 visits), advanced maternal age (≥ 35 years vs. < 35 years), maternal education (> 12 years vs. ≤ 12 years), history or no history of cesarean delivery, and a composite marker of conditions that confer increased medical risk.

This decision uncertainty surrounding the most cost effective option was not found for place of birth in multiparous low risk women without complicating conditions, in whom planned home birth had a 100 % probability of being the most cost effective option across all thresholds of cost effectiveness (table 4).

This decision uncertainty surrounding the most cost effective option was not found for place of birth in multiparous low risk women, on whom planned home birth had a 100 % probability of being the most cost effective option across all cost effectiveness thresholds between # 0 and # 100000 (table 3).

For example, the recent Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development document suggested allowing one additional hour in the setting of an epidural, thus, at least 3 hours in multiparous women and 4 hours in nulliparous women be used to diagnose second - stage arrest, although that document did not clarify between pushing time or total second stage (33).

A prospective study of the progress of labor in 220 nulliparous women and 99 multiparous women who spontaneously entered labor evaluated the benefit of prolonging oxytocin augmentation for an additional 4 hours (for a total of 8 hours) in patients who were dilated at least 3 cm and had unsatisfactory progress (either protraction or arrest) after an initial 4 - hour augmentation period (21).

Using this tool we compared the outcomes of planned home births with those of planned hospital births for primiparous and multiparous women after controlling for the confounding effects of social, medical, and obstetric background.

Power analysis, based on detecting a significant difference in the combined frequency of non-optimal factors during and after childbirth, led us to aim for a sample size of 1600 women, with approximately half being multiparous and preferably half choosing hospital birth.

A closer look at the background characteristics shows that multiparous women with a complicated previous pregnancy, including instrumental delivery in our study, were more likely to opt for hospital birth than for home birth.

These risks may differ among different women (for instance, nulliparous vs. multiparous), and women should understand what the risks are so that they can make informed decisions about their personal circumstances.

In multiparous women, perinatal outcome was significantly better for planned home births than for planned hospital births, with or without control for background variables.

Among women who had a primary cesarean delivery for failure to progress, 42.6 % of primiparous women and 33.5 % of multiparous women never progressed beyond 5 cm of dilation before delivery (Table 3).

For primiparous women, it was assumed that the scars represented previous myomectomies, but the higher rate among multiparous women suggests that some primary cesarean deliveries actually may have been repeat cesarean deliveries that were recorded incorrectly.

The effectiveness of this model of sustained nurse home visiting for families from immigrant communities, the impact of nurse home visiting when delivered as a component within a comprehensive child and family health and development service system, 10 11 and the efficacy for older, multiparous compared with teenage first - time mothers, remains largely unexplored.

Four a priori analyses were undertaken comparing outcomes for the hypothesised subgroups using 2 × 2 factorial ANOVA to assess main (intervention vs comparison group) effects and interaction (intervention by subgroup effects for mothers who were Australian - born vs overseas - born, first - time vs multiparous, had one vs multiple risk factors, and scored EDS ≥ 10 (antenatal psychosocial distress) vs EDS < 10), while maintaining the power of the whole sample.

Comparison of Primiparous and Multiparous Mothers: Healthy Families Program Participation, Outcomes, Challenges, and Adaptations, FY 1999 - FY 2010 (PDF - 316 KB) Galano & Huntington (2012) Pew Center for the States Presents an analysis and comparison of the participation and outcomes of mothers of multiple children and first - time mothers in Healthy Families home - visiting programs in Virginia to examine the idea that first - time mothers would benefit more from these services than mothers with previous children.