FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2155759947> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2155759947 abstract "Background This review is one in a series of Cochrane reviews investigating pain management for childbirth. These reviews all contribute to an overview of systematic reviews of pain management for women in labour, and share a generic protocol. This review updates an earlier version of the review of the same title. Objectives To examine the effectiveness and safety of hypnosis for pain management during labour and childbirth. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group’s Trials Register (30 September 2015) and the reference lists of primary studies and review articles. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi‐RCTS comparing preparation for labour using hypnosis and/or use of hypnosis during labour, with or without concurrent use of pharmacological or non‐pharmacological pain relief methods versus placebo, no treatment or any analgesic drug or technique. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Where possible we contacted study authors seeking additional information about data and methodology. Main results We included nine trials randomising a total of 2954 women. The risk of bias in trials was variable, there were several well‐designed large trials and some trials where little was reported about trial design. Although eight of the nine trials assessed antenatal hypnotherapy, there were considerable differences between these trials in timing and technique. One trial provided hypnotherapy during labour. In this updated review we compared hypnosis interventions with all control groups (main comparison) and also with specific control conditions: standard care (nine RCTs), supportive counselling (two RCTs) and relaxation training (two RCTs). In the main comparison, women in the hypnosis group were less likely to use pharmacological pain relief or analgesia than those in the control groups, (average risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.94, eight studies, 2916 women; very low‐quality evidence; random‐effects model). There were no clear differences between women in the hypnosis group and those in the control groups for most of the other primary outcomes. There were no clear differences for sense of coping with labour (MD 0.22, 95% CI ‐0.14 to 0.58, one study, 420 women; low‐quality evidence) or spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.32, six studies, 2361 women; low‐quality evidence; random‐effects model). There were no clear differences for satisfaction with pain relief (measured on a seven‐point scale two weeks postnatally) for women in the hypnosis group who also received pethidine (MD 0.41, 95% CI ‐0.45 to 1.27; one study, 72 women), Entonox (MD 0.19, 95% CI ‐0.19 to 0.57; one study, 357 women), self‐hypnosis (MD 0.28, 95% CI ‐0.32 to 0.88; one study, 160 women), or epidural (MD ‐0.03, 95% CI ‐0.40 to 0.34; one study, 127 women), but a slight benefit in favour of hypnosis was seen for women who received water immersion (MD 0.52, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.00; one study, 174 women (all low‐quality evidence). There were no clear differences for satisfaction with pain relief when it was measured as the number of women who reported they had adequate pain relief (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.20, one study, 264 women; low‐quality evidence). It should be noted that for pharmacological pain relief and spontaneous vaginal birth, there was evidence of considerable statistical heterogeneity, which could not be fully explained by subgroup analysis. For this review's secondary outcomes, no clear differences were found between women in the hypnosis group and women in the control groups for most outcomes where data were available. There was mixed evidence regarding benefits for women in the hypnosis group compared with all control groups for pain intensity, satisfaction with childbirth experience and postnatal depression. For each of these outcomes, data from more than one trial were available for analysis but could not be combined due to differences in measurement methods. There was evidence that fewer women in the hypnosis group stayed in hospital for more than two days after the birth but this finding was based on one small study (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.83). No clear differences between women in the hypnosis group and the control groups were found for the other secondary outcomes where data were available. In the comparisons of hypnosis with specific types of control conditions: standard care, supportive counselling and relaxation training, there were no clear differences found between women in the hypnosis group and those in the standard care control groups or the relaxation control groups for the primary outcomes. Compared with the women in the supportive counselling control group, women in the hypnosis group were less likely to use pharmacological analgesia (average RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.73, two studies, 562 women). They were also more likely to have a spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.43 to 4.07), although this finding was based on the results of one small study. Overall these new comparisons displayed much less statistical heterogeneity than the comparison including all control groups. Authors' conclusions There are still only a relatively small number of studies assessing the use of hypnosis for labour and childbirth. Hypnosis may reduce the overall use of analgesia during labour, but not epidural use. No clear differences were found between women in the hypnosis group and those in the control groups for satisfaction with pain relief, sense of coping with labour or spontaneous vaginal birth. Not enough evidence currently exists regarding satisfaction with pain relief or sense of coping with labour and we would encourage any future research to prioritise the measurement of these outcomes. The evidence for the main comparison was assessed using GRADE as being of low quality for all the primary outcomes with downgrading decisions due to concerns regarding inconsistency of the evidence, limitations in design and imprecision. Further research is needed in the form of large, well‐designed randomised controlled trials to assess whether hypnosis is of value for pain management during labour and childbirth." @default.
• W2155759947 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2155759947 creator A5001875820 @default.
• W2155759947 creator A5003954978 @default.
• W2155759947 creator A5049849826 @default.
• W2155759947 creator A5081673552 @default.
• W2155759947 creator A5091812181 @default.
• W2155759947 date "2016-05-19" @default.
• W2155759947 modified "2023-10-13" @default.
• W2155759947 title "Hypnosis for pain management during labour and childbirth" @default.
• W2155759947 cites W136273487 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1511077914 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1527429586 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1567689647 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1578969050 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1579148669 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1583279628 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1613515670 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1696395662 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1801728880 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1803693292 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1908391549 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1919332000 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1975777163 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1980197548 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1981636505 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W1997440972 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2000594272 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2018650701 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2024348631 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2031151413 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2035501848 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2039810381 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2050789389 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2052116376 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2054433133 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2055492901 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2056724188 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2063738853 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2075144024 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2085955270 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2101161040 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2103654297 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2112921995 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2114965459 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2117364168 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2118325764 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2118880244 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2120336436 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2121052567 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2126567062 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2136296475 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2137881886 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2138033037 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2139995198 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2143796426 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2145200910 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2149741116 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2155759947 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2162669795 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2162883625 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2164004076 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2164931152 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2167646615 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2325587228 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2400652304 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W2953725190 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W4210766687 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W4211079343 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W4235067493 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W4239468547 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W4246789530 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W4247363071 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W4255086662 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W56847156 @default.
• W2155759947 cites W3022088149 @default.
• W2155759947 doi "https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd009356.pub3" @default.
• W2155759947 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/7120324" @default.
• W2155759947 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27192949" @default.
• W2155759947 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
• W2155759947 type Work @default.
• W2155759947 sameAs 2155759947 @default.
• W2155759947 citedByCount "70" @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472012 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472013 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472014 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472015 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472016 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472017 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472018 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472019 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472020 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472021 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472022 @default.
• W2155759947 countsByYear W21557599472023 @default.
• W2155759947 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2155759947 hasAuthorship W2155759947A5001875820 @default.
• W2155759947 hasAuthorship W2155759947A5003954978 @default.
• W2155759947 hasAuthorship W2155759947A5049849826 @default.
• W2155759947 hasAuthorship W2155759947A5081673552 @default.

• next