Effect of Hydration on Spontaneous Labor Outcomes in Nulliparous Pregnant Women: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Three Methods

Rodney K. Edwards; Christine A. Reed; Kathryn S. Villano; Jennifer L. Holmes; Suhong Tong; Jill K. Davies

doi:10.1055/s-0033-1351661

American Journal of Perinatology, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Am J Perinatol 2014; 31(06): 455-462
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1351661

Original Article

Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Effect of Hydration on Spontaneous Labor Outcomes in Nulliparous Pregnant Women: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Three Methods

Authors

Rodney K. Edwards

¹Division of Maternal and Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama, Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama
Christine A. Reed

²Perinatal Clinical Trials Research Center, The Children's Hospital, Aurora, Colorado
Kathryn S. Villano

³Regional Obstetric Consultants, Jacksonville, Florida
Jennifer L. Holmes

⁴Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Intermountain Salt Lake Clinic, Salt Lake City, Utah
Suhong Tong

⁵Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, Colorado
Jill K. Davies

⁶Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effect of mode and amount of fluid hydration during labor.

Study Design The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial of uncomplicated nulliparous women in spontaneous labor at 36 weeks or more gestational age. Women were randomized to receive lactated Ringer solution with 5% dextrose at (1) 125 mL/h intravenously with limited oral intake, (2) 250 mL/h intravenously with limited oral intake, or (3) 25 mL/h intravenously with ad libitum oral intake of clear liquids. Results were analyzed by intent-to-treat analysis.

Results A total of 311 out of 324 women were available for analysis. Groups 1 (n = 105), 2 (n = 105), and 3 (n = 101) above did not differ significantly for mean labor duration (11.6 ± 5.9, 11.4 ± 5.5, and 11.5 ± 5.9 hours, respectively; p = 0.998), proportion of women in labor > 12 hours (all groups 41%; p = 0.998), proportion receiving oxytocin augmentation (59, 60, and 57%, respectively; p = 0.923), or proportion delivered by cesarean (22, 17, and 17%, respectively; p = 0.309). Indications for cesarean were similar between groups. No cases of pulmonary edema, maternal aspiration, or perinatal mortality occurred.

Conclusion Although apparently safe, neither increased intravenous hydration nor oral hydration during labor improves labor performance.

Keywords

labor - labor dystocia - hydration - oral hydration

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Garite TJ, Weeks J, Peters-Phair K, Pattillo C, Brewster WR. A randomized controlled trial of the effect of increased intravenous hydration on the course of labor in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 183 (6) 1544-1548
2 Maughan RJ, Noakes TD. Fluid replacement and exercise stress. A brief review of studies on fluid replacement and some guidelines for the athlete. Sports Med 1991; 12 (1) 16-31
3 Noakes TD. Fluid replacement during exercise. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 1993; 21: 297-330
4 Sommer PA, Norr K, Roberts J. Clinical decision-making regarding intravenous hydration in normal labor in a birth center setting. J Midwifery Womens Health 2000; 45 (2) 114-121
5 Ludka LM, Roberts CC. Eating and drinking in labor. A literature review. J Nurse Midwifery 1993; 38 (4) 199-207
6 O'Reilly SA, Hoyer PJP, Walsh E. Low-risk mothers. Oral intake and emesis in labor. J Nurse Midwifery 1993; 38 (4) 228-235
7 Rooks JP, Weatherby NL, Ernst EK, Stapleton S, Rosen D, Rosenfield A. Outcomes of care in birth centers. The National Birth Center Study. N Engl J Med 1989; 321 (26) 1804-1811
8 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ , et al. Births: final data for 2009. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2011; 60 (1) 1-70
9 MacDorman MF, Menacker F, Declercq E. Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clin Perinatol 2008; 35 (2) 293-307 , v
10 American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics. ACOG Practice Bulletin Number 49, December 2003: Dystocia and augmentation of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102 (6) 1445-1454
11 Gifford DS, Morton SC, Fiske M, Keesey J, Keeler E, Kahn KL. Lack of progress in labor as a reason for cesarean. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 95 (4) 589-595
12 Spong CY, Berghella V, Wenstrom KD, Mercer BM, Saade GR. Preventing the first cesarean delivery: summary of a joint Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Workshop. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120 (5) 1181-1193
13 Eslamian L, Marsoosi V, Pakneeyat Y. Increased intravenous fluid intake and the course of labor in nulliparous women. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2006; 93 (2) 102-105
14 Coco A, Derksen-Schrock A, Coco K, Raff T, Horst M, Hussar E. A randomized trial of increased intravenous hydration in labor when oral fluid is unrestricted. Fam Med 2010; 42 (1) 52-56
15 Kavitha A, Chacko KP, Thomas E , et al. A randomized controlled trial to study the effect of IV hydration on the duration of labor in nulliparous women. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012; 285 (2) 343-346