论文部分内容阅读
目的:探究会阴无保护接生技术的临床应用及效果分析。方法:选取中山市西区医院2015年1月至2015年9月采用无保护会阴接生分娩的100例初产妇为观察组,另选取100例采用常规接生技术分娩的初产妇为对照组,比较两组患者发生会阴侧切的比率,第二产程所用时间,产程会阴疼痛,会阴裂伤程度,产后出血量,满意度,并对其进行随访,询问产妇是否恢复性生活,是否存在性交痛等症状。结果:两组产妇的会阴Ⅰ度和Ⅱ度裂伤率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。但观察组会阴完整率和会阴切开率明显低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组产妇在第一产程,第二产程和第三产程所用的时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),两组产新生儿窒息、产后出血比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组产妇在分娩后第1天和第3天的会阴疼痛程度明显高于对照组,住院时间明显短于对照组,满意度明显高于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。而两组产妇发生会阴感染的比例差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组产妇的性生活恢复时间和性交痛人数明显低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:会阴无保护接生技术能有效的降低阴道分娩产妇的会阴侧切率,更利于通过产道,提高自然分娩的成功率,并且更有利于产妇的康复。
Objective: To investigate the clinical application and effect analysis of unprotected perineal delivery. Methods: 100 cases of primipara of unprotected perineal delivery from January 2015 to September 2015 in Zhongshan Western Hospital were selected as the observation group. 100 cases of primiparae delivered by routine delivery were selected as the control group. The two groups were compared The incidence of episiotomy in the patient, the duration of the second stage of labor, perineal pain in the labor process, the degree of perineal laceration, the amount of postpartum hemorrhage, and the degree of satisfaction were followed up and asked whether the woman had sex with her or not and had sexual intercourse. Results: There was no significant difference in perineal Ⅰ and Ⅱ degree laceration between the two groups (P> 0.05). However, the observation group perineal complete rate and perineal incision rate was significantly lower than the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). There was no significant difference in the time of labor between the two groups in the first stage of labor, the second stage of labor and the third stage of labor (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in neonatal asphyxia and postpartum hemorrhage (P> 0.05) . The pain in the observation group was higher than that in the control group on the first day and the third day after delivery. The length of stay in the observation group was significantly shorter than that of the control group. The satisfaction was significantly higher than that of the control group (P <0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of perineal infection (P> 0.05). The observation group maternal sexual life recovery time and the number of painful intercourse was significantly lower than the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion: The perineal unprotected delivery technique can effectively reduce the rate of perineal lateral cleavage of vaginal delivery women, which is more conducive to the success rate of natural childbirth through the birth canal, and more conducive to the recovery of pregnant women.