Aplicación de termoterapia en el periné durante el parto para reducir las lesiones que precisan sutura posparto / Application of perineum heat therapy during partum to reduce injuries that require post-partum stitches

OBJETIVO: Evaluar la eficacia de la termoterapia, húmeda o seca, en el periné durante el parto para reducir las lesiones que precisan sutura posparto y valorar su seguridad en relación a la adaptación del recién nacido a la vida extrauterina. MÉTODO: Ensayo clínico multicéntrico, abierto, dirigido desde la Escuela de Enfermería de la Universidad de Barcelona y realizado durante los años 2009-2010 en 5 hospitales catalanes. La muestra fue de 198 gestantes a las que se aplicó el protocolo para la asistencia natural al parto normal. Se realizó una asignación aleatoria a los 3 grupos de estudio: grupo control (GC), calor húmedo (GCH) o calor seco (GCS). Durante el expulsivo se realizó en todos los grupos el cuidado habitual del periné y en los grupos de intervención se aplicó, además, GCH o GCS en el periné. Posteriormente se valoró el estado del periné posparto y el test de Apgar en el neonato. Se realizaron pruebas de contraste estadístico utilizando un intervalo de confianza del 95% y análisis estadístico con PASW 17. RESULTADOS: Perinés sin sutura: GCH 71% (47) versus GC 56% (37), OR: 1.803 (IC:95%:0,881-3,687); GCS 62% (41) versus GC 56% (37), OR:1.285 (IC:95%:0,641-2,577); GCH 71% (47) versus GCS 62% (41), OR:1.402 (IC:95%:0,680-2,890). Medias test de Apgar 5', GCH: 9,91; GCS: 9,98; GC: 9,98. p = 0,431. CONCLUSIONES: La aplicación de termoterapia en el periné no redujo la sutura perineal durante el parto. Se obtuvieron mejores resultados perineales con la termoterapia húmeda. La termoterapia no modificó los resultados neonatales medidos mediante test de Apgar

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effectiveness of heat, moist or dry to the perineum during delivery in order to reduce injuries requiring perineal suturing after birth, and to assess its safety in relation to the adaptation of the newborn to extrauterine life. METHOD: An open multicentre clinical trial directed from the School of Nursing at the University of Barcelona was carried out between 2009 and 2010 in 5 Catalan Hospitals. The sample consisted of 198 pregnant women subjected to the natural protocol for normal delivery assistance. The pregnant women were randomized to three study groups: moist heat (MHG), dry heat (DHG), and control (CG). Usual care of the perineum was performed during labour in all groups and MHG or GCS was also applied in the perineum in the intervention groups. The Apgar score in the newborn and perineum postpartum was then assessed. Statistical tests were performed using a 95% confidence interval. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS version 17. RESULTS: Perinea that required no suturing: MHG 71% (47) versus CG 56% (37), OR: 1.803; (95% CI: 0.881-3.687); DHG 62% (41) versus CG 56% (37), OR:1.285 (95% CI: 0.641-2.577); MHG 71% (47) versus DHG 62% (41), OR:1.402 (95% CI: 0.680-2.890). Mean: Apgar score 5', MHG: 9.91; DHG: 9.98, CG: 9.98. p = 0.431. CONCLUSIONS: The application of heat therapy to the perineum during labour did not significantly reduce perineal suturing after birth. However, better perineal results were observed with moist heat. Heat therapy does not alter neonatal outcomes measured by Apgar score

[Application of perineum heat therapy during partum to reduce injuries that require post-partum stitches]. / Aplicación de termoterapia en el periné durante el parto para reducir las lesiones que precisan sutura posparto.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effectiveness of heat, moist or dry to the perineum during delivery in order to reduce injuries requiring perineal suturing after birth, and to assess its safety in relation to the adaptation of the newborn to extrauterine life. METHOD: An open multicentre clinical trial directed from the School of Nursing at the University of Barcelona was carried out between 2009 and 2010 in 5 Catalan Hospitals. The sample consisted of 198 pregnant women subjected to the natural protocol for normal delivery assistance. The pregnant women were randomized to three study groups: moist heat (MHG), dry heat (DHG), and control (CG). Usual care of the perineum was performed during labour in all groups and MHG or GCS was also applied in the perineum in the intervention groups. The Apgar score in the newborn and perineum postpartum was then assessed. Statistical tests were performed using a 95% confidence interval. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS version 17. RESULTS: Perinea that required no suturing: MHG 71% (47) versus CG 56% (37), OR: 1.803; (95% CI: 0.881-3.687); DHG 62% (41) versus CG 56% (37), OR:1.285 (95% CI: 0.641-2.577); MHG 71% (47) versus DHG 62% (41), OR:1.402 (95% CI: 0.680-2.890). MEAN: Apgar score 5', MHG: 9.91; DHG: 9.98, CG: 9.98. p=0.431. CONCLUSIONS: The application of heat therapy to the perineum during labour did not significantly reduce perineal suturing after birth. However, better perineal results were observed with moist heat. Heat therapy does not alter neonatal outcomes measured by Apgar score.