| Literature DB >> 23429706 |
Patricia Janssen1, Farah Shroff, Paula Jaspar.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Massage is a time-honored method by which women have received comfort throughout the millennia, yet it has not been rigorously evaluated in the modern day delivery suite. No study to date that we are aware of has evaluated the effect of massage therapy by a regulated massage therapist on labor pain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of massage therapy provided by registered massage therapists in managing pain among women in active labor.Entities:
Keywords: epidural analgesia; labor pain; massage; randomized controlled trial
Year: 2012 PMID: 23429706 PMCID: PMC3528187 DOI: 10.3822/ijtmb.v5i4.164
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Ther Massage Bodywork
Figure 1Flow Diagram for Study Participants.
Sociodemographic Characteristics of Participants
| Massage | Usual Care | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18 – 24 | 6 (16.7) | 3 (8.8) | |
| 25 – 29 | 11 (30.6) | 7 (20.6) | |
| 30 – 34 | 14 (38.9) | 19 (55.9) | |
| 35 + | 5 (13.9) | 5 (14.7) | 0.46 |
| Has partner | 32 (97.0) | 31 (93.9) | 1.00 |
| Education | |||
| High school or less | 7 (20.0) | 3(8.8) | |
| Post secondary/trade | 11 (31.9) | 11 (32.4) | |
| University degree | 17 (48.6) | 20 (58.8) | 0.40 |
| Employed | |||
| Full Time | 26 (72.2) | 30 (88.2) | |
| Part Time | 2 (5.6) | 1 (2.9) | |
| Unemployed | 8 (22.2) | 3 (8.8) | 0.24 |
| Partner Employed | |||
| Full Time | 31 (93.9) | 30 (90.9) | |
| Part Time | 0 | 1 (5.0) | |
| Unemployed | 2 (6.1) | 2 (6.1) | 0.61 |
| Language spoken at Home | |||
| English | 30 (81.1) | 28 (70.0) | |
| Other | 1 (18.9) | 12 (30.0) | 0.26 |
| Caucasian | 19 (51.4) | 19 (47.5) | 0.96 |
| East Asian | 13 (35.1) | 15 (37.5) | |
| Other | 5 (13.5) | 6 (15.0) | |
| Tobacco use during pregnancy | 3 (8.1) | 1 (2.5) | 0.47 |
| Illicit drugs | 1(2.7) | 0 | 0.57 |
| Alcohol | 0 | 1(2.5) | 0.50 |
| Height (cm) Mean (sd) | 163.5 (8.4) | 164.3 (6.7) | 0.69 |
| Pre-pregnancy weight (g) | 58.7 (10.9) | 61.1 (10.4) | 0.34 |
| Mean (sd) | |||
Pregnancy Characteristics of Participants
| Massage | Usual Care | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Doula present for Labour | 5 (13.9) | 3 (8.8) | 0.71 |
| Attended Prenatal Class | 23 (63.9) | 24 (70.5) | 0.55 |
| Visits for assessment prior to admission | |||
| 0 | 28 (75.7) | 29 (72.5) | |
| 1 | 9 (24.3) | 8 (20.0) | |
| 2 | 0 | 3 (7.5) | 0.23 |
| Discharged from assessment room after receiving analgesic | 6 (16.2) | 7 (17.5) | 0.88 |
| Gestational age (days) mean (sd) | 280.3 (5.7) | 278.4 (7.5) | 0.22 |
| Admission status of labour | |||
| Dilation (cm) mean (sd) | 3.3 (1.4) | 3.4 (1.4) | 0.74 |
| Length(cm) mean (sd) | 0.5 (0.5) | 0.5 (0.5) | 0.95 |
| Station of vertex | −1.5 (0.9) | −1.1 (1.1) | 0.10 |
| Membranes ruptured | 17 (45.9) | 11 (27.5) | 0.09 |
Obstetrical Interventions and Labour Outcomes
| Massage | Usual Care | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cervical dilation at time of epidural | 5.7 (2.1) | 5.3 (2.0) | 0.51 |
| First stage of labour (min) | 897.4 (507.4) | 788.6 (336.8) | 0.28 |
| Second stage of labour (min) | 136.0 (89.6) | 125.0 (81.7) | 0.36 |
| Augmentation of labor | |||
| Amniotomy | 13 (35.1) | 24 (60) | 0.03 |
| Oxytocin | 24 (64.9) | 21 (52.5) | 0.27 |
| Entonox | 28 (75.7) | 29 (72.5) | 0.75 |
| Narcotic analgesia intravenous or intramuscular | 6 (16.2) | 7 (17.5) | 0.88 |
| Epidural analgesia | 30 (81.1) | 26 (65.0) | 0.11 |
| Mode of delivery | |||
| SVD | 20 (54.1) | 25 (62.5) | |
| Assisted vaginal | 8 (21.6) | 8 (20.0) | |
| Cesarean section | 9 (24.3) | 7 (17.5) | 0.71 |
| Total score on McGill | |||
| Present Pain Intensity Scale | |||
| 3–4 cm | 13.3 (8.3) | 16.9 (6.5) | 0.82 |
| 5–6 cm | 13.3 (8.0) | 15.8 (10.0) | 0.48 |
| 7–8 cm | 19.4 (16.0) | 28.3 (10.4) | 0.28 |