Affiliation:
1. School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work The University of Queensland St Lucia Queensland Australia
2. Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Metro North Health Herston Queensland Australia
3. The Ritchie Center, Hudson Institute of Medical Research and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Monash University Melbourne Victoria Australia
4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service Birtinya Queensland Australia
5. Faculty of Medicine The University of Queensland Herston Australia
Abstract
AbstractIntroductionLabor is both a physiological and physical activity that requires energy expenditure by the woman. Despite this, women are often fasted in labor, with hydration requirements addressed predominantly by intravenous therapy. Little is known about how best to manage this in nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor, who can be prone to lengthy labors. Therefore, we undertook a systematic review and meta‐analysis to determine the effects of intravenous hydration regimens on nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor.Material and methodsA systematic review and meta‐analysis were conducted. Databases searched were PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science using the search strategy combination of associated key concepts for intravenous therapy and nulliparous laboring women. The primary outcome was excessive neonatal weight loss. Meta‐analyses for categorical outcomes included estimates of odds ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated; and for continuous outcomes the standardized mean difference, each with its 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed visually and by using the χ2 statistic and I2 with significance being set at p < 0.10.ResultsA total of 1512 studies were located and following screening, three studies met the eligibility criteria. No studies reported excessive neonatal weight loss. Increased rates of intravenous therapy (250 mL/h vs. 125 mL/h) during labor were not found to reduce the overall length of labor (mean difference −0.07 h, 95% CI −0.27 to 0.13 h) or reduce cesarean sections (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45–1.23), when women were not routinely fasted.ConclusionsOur review found no significant improvements for nulliparous women who received higher intravenous fluid volumes when undergoing induction of labor and were not routinely fasted. However, data are limited, and further research is needed.
Reference29 articles.
1. US Department of Health and Human Services CDC.Births: Final Data for 2019. Accessed 18/05/2023.https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/index.htm
2. Induction of labour at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation;Middleton P;Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2020
3. Induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks: A systematic review and an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised trials