Schieben versus Power-Pressen: Studien belegen die Überlegenheit des Schiebens

Stellt man ein spontanes und selbstgesteuertes Schieben dem forcierten und angeleiteten Power-Pressen gegenüber, zeigt sich deutlich, dass beide Methoden unterschiedliche Auswirkungen auf Mutter und Kind haben. Dabei ist das Schieben dem Power-Pressen überlegen.

Literatur

• 1 Heller A. Geburtsvorbereitung Methode Menne-Heller. Stuttgart/New York; 1998
• 2 Schmidt R F, Thews G. Physiologie des Menschen. 18. Aufl. Berlin/Heidelberg/New York; 1977
• 3 Heller A. Schieben – ein natürliches und schonendes Gebärverhalten.  Die Hebamme. 2004;  17 S. 22-31
• 4 Yildrim G, Beji N K. Effects of Pushing Techniques in Birth on Mother and Fetus. A Randomized Study.  Birth. 2008;  35/1 S. 25-30
• 5 Bloom S L et al.. A randomized trial of coached versus uncoached maternal pushing during the second stage of labor.  American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2006;  194 S. 10-13
• 6 Thomson A M. Pushing techniques in the second stage of labour.  Journal of Advanced Nursing. 1993;  18 S. 171-177
• 7 Parnell C et al.. Pushing method in the expulsive phase of labor. A randomized trial.  Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 1993;  72 S. 31-35
• 8 Knauth D G, Haloburdo E P. Effect of Pushing Techniques In Birthing Chair on Length Of Second Stage of Labor.  Nursing Research. 1986;  35/1 S. 49-51
• 9 Barnett M M, Humenick S S. Infant Outcome in Relation to Second Stage Labor Pushing Method.  Birth. 1982;  9/4 S. 221-229
• 10 Debus G , Schuhmacher I Blasenfunktionsstörungen und Lageveränderungen des weiblichen Genitaltraktes. In: Stauber M, Weyerstahl T, (Hrsg). Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe. 2. Aufl. Stuttgart; 2005: S. 318-337
• 11 Schaffer J I, Bloom S L, Casey B M, McIntire D D. A randomized trial of the effects of coached vs uncoached maternal pushing during the second stage of labor on postpartum pelvic floor structure and function.  American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2005;  192 S. 1692-1696
• 12 Beynon C L. The Normal Second Stage of Labour. A Plea for Reform in Its Conduct.  Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1957;  64 S. 815-820
• 13 Thomson A M. Pushing techniques in the second stage of labour.  Journal of Advanced Nursing. 1993;  18 S. 171-177
• 14 Paine L, Tinker D D. The Effect of Maternal Bearing-Down Efforts on Arterial Umbilical Cord pH and Length of the Second Stage of Labor.  Journal of Nurse-Midwifery. 1992;  37/1 S. 61-63
• 15 Parnell C et al.. Pushing method in the expulsive phase of labor. A randomized trial.  Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 1993;  72 S. 31-35
• 16 Yeates D A, Roberts J E. A Comparison of Two Bearing-Down Techniques during the Second Stage of Labor.  Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health. 1984;  29/1 S. 3-11
• 17 Sampselle C M, Hines S. Spontaneous Pushing during Birth. Relationship to Perineal Outcomes.  Journal of Nurse-Midwifery. 1999;  44/1 S. 36-39
• 18 Schaffer J I, Bloom S L, Casey B M, McIntire D D. A randomized trial of the effects of coached vs uncoached maternal pushing during the second stage of labor on postpartum pelvic floor structure and function.  American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2005;  192 S. 1692-1696
• 19 Caldeyro-Barcia R et al.. The Bearing-down Efforts and their Effects on Fetal Heart Rate, Oxygenation and Acid Base Balance.  Journal of Perinatal Medicine. 1981;  9 (S 1) S. 63-67
• 20 Aldrich C J et al.. The effect of maternal pushing on fetal cerebral oxygenation and blood volume during the second stage of labour.  British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1995;  102 S. 448-453
• 21 Simpson K R, James D C. Effects of Immediate versus Delayed Pushing During Second-Stage Labor on Fetal Well-Being. A Randomized Clinical Trial.  Nursing Researc. 2005;  54/3 S. 149-157

Anschrift der Autorin: