Background: Recent obstetrical practice tends to avoid the use of manual uterine fundal pressure (MUFP);however, data showed that MUFP is actually employed. We here attempted 1) to determine the obstetricians’ attitu...Background: Recent obstetrical practice tends to avoid the use of manual uterine fundal pressure (MUFP);however, data showed that MUFP is actually employed. We here attempted 1) to determine the obstetricians’ attitudes towards MUFP via questionnaire, and 2) to examine whether MUFP shortens the 2nd stage of labor, with the latter tested as a pilot study. Methods: A questionnaire-based study was carried out (n = 122) at meetings of Obstetrics on May 5, 2017. Then, we conducted a pilot case-control study from August 23 to September 6, 2020. Participants (n = 29) were divided into two groups;women who did and did not want MUFP;i.e., MUFP (n = 14) vs. (Non-MUFP) group (n = 15). Results: Of 122 doctors, 99.18% (121/122) used MUFP at cesarean section. 95.90% (117/122) of institutions used MUFP in spontaneous delivery. 95.08% (116/122) obstetricians considered MUFP effective and helpful. 85.24% (104/122) considered that MUFP should be employed after station +3. In the case control study, MUFP vs. Non-MUFP group showed the second-stage-duration of 58.5 (50.25 - 71.25) vs. 48 (39 - 59) minutes, without statistical significance (P = 0.101). However, importantly, MUFP, compared with Non-MUFP group, showed a significantly shorter duration from head visible on introitus (apparition) to delivery;i.e., 21.26 ± 7.32 vs. 30.13 ± 10.61 minutes (P = 0.014). Conclusions: MUFP is still used widely and MUFP shortened the duration of head apparition to delivery time. Larger-sample studies are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of MUFP.展开更多
文摘Background: Recent obstetrical practice tends to avoid the use of manual uterine fundal pressure (MUFP);however, data showed that MUFP is actually employed. We here attempted 1) to determine the obstetricians’ attitudes towards MUFP via questionnaire, and 2) to examine whether MUFP shortens the 2nd stage of labor, with the latter tested as a pilot study. Methods: A questionnaire-based study was carried out (n = 122) at meetings of Obstetrics on May 5, 2017. Then, we conducted a pilot case-control study from August 23 to September 6, 2020. Participants (n = 29) were divided into two groups;women who did and did not want MUFP;i.e., MUFP (n = 14) vs. (Non-MUFP) group (n = 15). Results: Of 122 doctors, 99.18% (121/122) used MUFP at cesarean section. 95.90% (117/122) of institutions used MUFP in spontaneous delivery. 95.08% (116/122) obstetricians considered MUFP effective and helpful. 85.24% (104/122) considered that MUFP should be employed after station +3. In the case control study, MUFP vs. Non-MUFP group showed the second-stage-duration of 58.5 (50.25 - 71.25) vs. 48 (39 - 59) minutes, without statistical significance (P = 0.101). However, importantly, MUFP, compared with Non-MUFP group, showed a significantly shorter duration from head visible on introitus (apparition) to delivery;i.e., 21.26 ± 7.32 vs. 30.13 ± 10.61 minutes (P = 0.014). Conclusions: MUFP is still used widely and MUFP shortened the duration of head apparition to delivery time. Larger-sample studies are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of MUFP.
