Mahsa Maghalian1, Mojgan Mirghafourvand2, Fariba Ghaderi3, Shamsi Abbasalizadeh4, Sahar Pak5, Mahin Kamalifard6. 1. Student Research Committee, Department of Midwifery, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. 2. Social Determinants of Health Research Centre, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. 3. Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women's Reproductive Health Research Center, School of Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. 5. Student Research Committee, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. 6. Department of Midwifery, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. kamalifardm@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since mothers are more inclined toward non-pharmacological labor pain management methods, this study aimed to compare the effect of interferential electrical stimulation (IES) and Swedish massage (SM) on labor pain and childbirth experience (primary outcomes) and childbirth satisfaction, duration of active phase and side effects (secondary outcomes) in primiparous women. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was performed on 90 primiparous women. Participants were randomly assigned into three groups through the block randomization method. The SM group received two massage techniques of effleurage and petrissage, on T10-L1 and S2-S4 at cervical dilatation of 4 and 8-10 cm. The IES group received electrical stimulation in a similar way to SM group, with a base frequency of 4000 Hz and a pulse frequency of 80-120 Hz by a physiotherapist. Control group received only routine care. RESULTS: The mean pain was significantly lower in the SM group (adjusted mean difference (AMD) - 0.86; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) - 1.60 to - 0.11) and the IES group (AMD - 0.95; 95% CI - 1.70 to - 0.21) compared to the control group. The mean score of childbirth experience was significantly higher in the SM (MD 5.63; 95% CI 2.15-9.11) and IES (MD 3.66; 95% CI 0.18-7.14) group compared to the control group. The mean childbirth satisfaction in the SM (p = 0.003) and IES (p = 0.046) groups was significantly higher than the control group; and duration of the active phase of labor was significantly lower (p < 0.001) than the control group. No serious side effects were occurred in none of the groups. CONCLUSION: SM and IES are safe methods that can significantly reduce pain and duration of active phase and improve the experience and satisfaction of childbirth.
BACKGROUND: Since mothers are more inclined toward non-pharmacological labor pain management methods, this study aimed to compare the effect of interferential electrical stimulation (IES) and Swedish massage (SM) on labor pain and childbirth experience (primary outcomes) and childbirth satisfaction, duration of active phase and side effects (secondary outcomes) in primiparous women. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was performed on 90 primiparous women. Participants were randomly assigned into three groups through the block randomization method. The SM group received two massage techniques of effleurage and petrissage, on T10-L1 and S2-S4 at cervical dilatation of 4 and 8-10 cm. The IES group received electrical stimulation in a similar way to SM group, with a base frequency of 4000 Hz and a pulse frequency of 80-120 Hz by a physiotherapist. Control group received only routine care. RESULTS: The mean pain was significantly lower in the SM group (adjusted mean difference (AMD) - 0.86; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) - 1.60 to - 0.11) and the IES group (AMD - 0.95; 95% CI - 1.70 to - 0.21) compared to the control group. The mean score of childbirth experience was significantly higher in the SM (MD 5.63; 95% CI 2.15-9.11) and IES (MD 3.66; 95% CI 0.18-7.14) group compared to the control group. The mean childbirth satisfaction in the SM (p = 0.003) and IES (p = 0.046) groups was significantly higher than the control group; and duration of the active phase of labor was significantly lower (p < 0.001) than the control group. No serious side effects were occurred in none of the groups. CONCLUSION: SM and IES are safe methods that can significantly reduce pain and duration of active phase and improve the experience and satisfaction of childbirth.