OBJECTIVE: To assess the risks and benefits associated with caesarean delivery compared with vaginal delivery. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study within the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health. SETTING: 410 health facilities in 24 areas in eight randomly selected Latin American countries; 123 were randomly selected and 120 participated and provided data PARTICIPANTS: 106,546 deliveries reported during the three month study period, with data available for 97,095 (91% coverage). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Maternal, fetal, and neonatal morbidity and mortality associated with intrapartum or elective caesarean delivery, adjusted for clinical, demographic, pregnancy, and institutional characteristics. RESULTS: Women undergoing caesarean delivery had an increased risk of severe maternal morbidity compared with women undergoing vaginal delivery (odds ratio 2.0 (95% confidence interval 1.6 to 2.5) for intrapartum caesarean and 2.3 (1.7 to 3.1) for elective caesarean). The risk of antibiotic treatment after delivery for women having either type of caesarean was five times that of women having vaginal deliveries. With cephalic presentation, there was a trend towards a reduced odds ratio for fetal death with elective caesarean, after adjustment for possible confounding variables and gestational age (0.7, 0.4 to 1.0). With breech presentation, caesarean delivery had a large protective effect for fetal death. With cephalic presentation, however, independent of possible confounding variables and gestational age, intrapartum and elective caesarean increased the risk for a stay of seven or more days in neonatal intensive care (2.1 (1.8 to 2.6) and 1.9 (1.6 to 2.3), respectively) and the risk of neonatal mortality up to hospital discharge (1.7 (1.3 to 2.2) and 1.9 (1.5 to 2.6), respectively), which remained higher even after exclusion of all caesarean deliveries for fetal distress. Such increased risk was not seen for breech presentation. Lack of labour was a risk factor for a stay of seven or more days in neonatal intensive care and neonatal mortality up to hospital discharge for babies delivered by elective caesarean delivery, but rupturing of membranes may be protective. CONCLUSIONS: Caesarean delivery independently reduces overall risk in breech presentations and risk of intrapartum fetal death in cephalic presentations but increases the risk of severe maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality in cephalic presentations.

AIM: Pregnant women and their doctors need to know the maternal risks associated with different methods of delivery. There are few publications with ideal study design and adequate power to establish the relationship between maternal mortality and mode of delivery. The present retrospective cohort study was undertaken to evaluate the intrinsic risk of maternal death, directly attributed to cesarean delivery (CD) compared to vaginal delivery (VD), and to evaluate further the differential risk associated with antepartum and intrapartum CD. METHODS: After exclusion of medical or obstetric comorbidities, all deliveries, either vaginal or cesarean, were critically analyzed. The surviving mothers who had either method of delivery represented the two comparative groups. In the same period, relevant clinical information of every maternal death was noted. RESULTS: Twenty seven mothers died among the 13 627 CD mothers and 19 died among 30 215 VD mothers. CD was associated with a 3.01-fold increase in the risk of maternal mortality, compared with VD. The risk of antepartum CD differed from intrapartum CD (OR 1.73 vs OR 4.86). There was a significantly increased risk of maternal death from complications of anesthesia, puerperal infection and venous thromboembolism. The risk of death from postpartum hemorrhage did not differ significantly (95% CI 0.7-3.95). CONCLUSION: CD is increasingly perceived as a low-risk procedure. However, the present study clearly demonstrates that the risk of maternal death due to CD is significantly high, particularly when performed in labor. Therefore, CD should only be practiced when conditions clearly demand it.

BACKGROUND:Acupressure is increasing in popularity as an alternative treatment in obstetrics and gynecology.

OBJECTIVES:To summarize and assess evidence regarding the effects of acupressure on duration of labor and mode of delivery.

SEARCH STRATEGY:Four major databases and Google Scholar were searched using terms related to labor and acupressure, without language restrictions, up to November 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomized controlled trials were included if they examined the effect of acupressure at any acupoint during childbirth on duration of labor and/or mode of delivery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two reviewers independently extracted data. The outcome measures were duration of labor and mode of delivery. Random-effects models were used to pool results.

MAIN RESULTS:Thirteen studies were included in meta-analyses. Acupressure increased the chance of vaginal delivery when compared with placebo/no intervention (odds ratio [OR] 2.329, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.348-4.024, P=0.002; risk difference [RD] 8.9%, 95% CI 2.7%-15.0%, P=0.005). Acupressure decreased the duration of the active phase by 1.310 hours (95% CI -1.738 to -0.882; P<0.001) and the second stage of labor by 5.808 minutes (95% CI -1.615 to -0.807; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS:Acupressure could have a role in reducing the rate of cesarean delivery and decreasing the duration of labor in parturient women. However, there is a need for more reliable randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of Lavender essence inhalation on severity of labor pain and duration of labor.

METHODS AND MATERIALS:This single-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted on 120 pregnant women in two groups. The experimental group received 2 drops of Lavender essence inhaled at three stages (4-5, 6-7, 8-9 cm cervical dilation) and severity of the labor pain and duration of labor was measured before and after intervention. The control group was treated with distilled water as a placebo in the similar ways, too.

RESULTS:The results showed that difference in the labor pain before and after intervention in two groups was significant (P = 0/001). But there was no difference in mean duration of the active phase and the second stage of labor between the two groups.

CONCLUSION:Lavender essence aromatherapy may be an effective therapeutic option for pain management for women in labor.