We have located links that may give you full text access.
Birth outcomes and usability of Relaxbirth® for upright positioning intrapartum: A retrospective case control study.
Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction 2018 November 7
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to pilot Relaxbirth® (Relaxbirth®, Ltd., Helsinki, Finland), an investigational device designed to facilitate upright positioning intrapartum. The objective was to 1) compare birth outcomes with and without the use of Relaxbirth®, and 2) assess device usability.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Study design: prospective product use and retrospective case control study at one perinatal center in Ohio.
INCLUSION CRITERIA: ≥18 years old, <300 lbs. women with a low-risk, term gestation of a singleton, vertex fetus, and vaginal birth between January 2013 to June 2016. Participants who used the Relaxbirth® device intrapartum (RB group) were retrospectively case-matched to controls (CON group) according to age, race, insurance, gravida/parity, gestational age and labor type. Birth outcomes (primary outcome) were compared between groups. Providers and women who used Relaxbirth® assessed usability of the device with the Modified System Usability Scale Tool (secondary outcome).
RESULTS: Of the n = 60 included in the final analysis, RB women (n = 30) pushed for a shorter average duration compared to CON women (n = 30) [34 min (±48) versus 60 min (±63), p = 0.023]. RB women did not experience more adverse birth outcomes including: longer second stage duration, operative vaginal delivery, malpresentation, perineal laceration/episiotomy, higher blood loss, or low Apgars. Usability survey results were favorable (Total Average Scores: providers 74.1; RB 83.6).
CONCLUSION: Clinical experience with the Relaxbirth® device was positive at this pilot site. The device was associated with favorable birth outcomes and usability, suggesting potential as a safe and novel adjunct to promote intrapartum choices, upright positioning and maternal satisfaction.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Study design: prospective product use and retrospective case control study at one perinatal center in Ohio.
INCLUSION CRITERIA: ≥18 years old, <300 lbs. women with a low-risk, term gestation of a singleton, vertex fetus, and vaginal birth between January 2013 to June 2016. Participants who used the Relaxbirth® device intrapartum (RB group) were retrospectively case-matched to controls (CON group) according to age, race, insurance, gravida/parity, gestational age and labor type. Birth outcomes (primary outcome) were compared between groups. Providers and women who used Relaxbirth® assessed usability of the device with the Modified System Usability Scale Tool (secondary outcome).
RESULTS: Of the n = 60 included in the final analysis, RB women (n = 30) pushed for a shorter average duration compared to CON women (n = 30) [34 min (±48) versus 60 min (±63), p = 0.023]. RB women did not experience more adverse birth outcomes including: longer second stage duration, operative vaginal delivery, malpresentation, perineal laceration/episiotomy, higher blood loss, or low Apgars. Usability survey results were favorable (Total Average Scores: providers 74.1; RB 83.6).
CONCLUSION: Clinical experience with the Relaxbirth® device was positive at this pilot site. The device was associated with favorable birth outcomes and usability, suggesting potential as a safe and novel adjunct to promote intrapartum choices, upright positioning and maternal satisfaction.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app