北京市海淀区孕妇学校利用情况及与剖宫产率的关联性研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-3110.2017.05.016

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (594 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的探讨孕妇学校利用情况及与剖宫产率的关系。方法对接受产后保健的无妊娠合并症及并发症的1 126名城乡初产妇进行产后42 d的问卷调查。结果收到有效问卷1 123份,观察组(参加孕妇学校讲座者)共604例(53.78%),其中,175例(28.97%)参加过“分娩相关知识”的培训;对照组(未参加孕妇学校讲座者)共519例(46.22%)。观察组中选择阴道分娩的孕妇占82.45%(498例),而对照组中74.95%(389例)的孕妇选择阴道分娩,两组差异有统计学意义(χ²=9.456,P=0.002);观察组262例剖宫产中社会因素剖宫产占107例(40.84%),对照组233例剖宫产中社会因素占117例(50.21%)。两组差异有统计学意义(χ²=4.375,P=0.036)。结论对孕妇及家属实施健康教育,可有效降低社会因素剖宫产率。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	杨欣
	邹晓璇
	宋波

关键词 ：孕妇学校, 健康教育, 剖宫产, 社会因素, 剖宫产

Abstract：Objective To explore the using situation of pregnant women schools and its relationship with cesarean section rate. Methods A questionnaire survey was conducted among 1,126 urban and rural primiparae received postpartum care and without pregnancy complications at 42 days after delivery. Results Totally, 1,123 effective questionnaires were retrieved. The observation group had 604 (53.78%) cases with participating in pregnant women schools, of which 175 (28.97%) took part in the training classes of delivery-related knowledge. The control group had 519 (46.22%) cases without participating in pregnant women schools. There were 82.45% (498/604) cases with vaginal delivery in the observation group and 74.95% (389/519) in the control group, the difference between the two groups showed statistically significant (χ²=9.456, P=0.002). Pregnant women with cesarean section due to social factors in the observation group accounted for 40.84% (107/262), while those in the control group for 50.21% (117/233), showing a statistically significant difference (χ²=4.375, P=0.036). Conclusion Implementing health education among pregnant women and their family members can effectively reduce the cesarean section rate owing to social factors.

Key words： pregnant women school health education cesarean delivery social factor, cesarean section

收稿日期: 2016-10-29

R719.8

基金资助:首都医科大学发展基金(2007-3162);北京市海淀区科委项目(K2008066)

作者简介: 杨欣(1980-),女,四川南充市人,硕士,主治医师,主要从事妇女、儿童保健研究工作。

引用本文:

杨欣, 邹晓璇, 宋波. 北京市海淀区孕妇学校利用情况及与剖宫产率的关联性研究[J]. 实用预防医学, 2017, 24(5): 570-572. YANG Xin, ZOU Xiao-xuan, SONG Bo. Using situation of pregnant women schools and its correlation with cesarean section rate in Haidian District, Beijing. , 2017, 24(5): 570-572.

链接本文:

https://www.syyfyx.com/CN/10.3969/j.issn.1006-3110.2017.05.016 或 https://www.syyfyx.com/CN/Y2017/V24/I5/570

[1] 侯磊,李光辉,邹丽颖,等.全国剖宫产率及剖宫产指征构成比调查的多中心研究[J].中华妇产科杂志,2014,49(10):728-735.
[2] Lumbiganon P,Laopaiboon M,Gülmezoglu AM,et al. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia:the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-2008[J]. Lancet,2010,375(1):490-499.
[3] 张为远.促进阴道分娩,降低剖宫产率产科面临的严峻挑战[J].中华妇产科杂志,2014,49(10):725-727.
[4] 王新兰.2009-2011年初产妇社会因素剖宫产原因及影响因素[J].中国妇幼保健,2015,30(4):549-551.
[5] 张倩平,陶玉玲,陈卫红,等.江西省孕妇分娩方式及分娩意愿调查[J].中国妇幼保健,2016,31(2):357-359.
[6] Souza JP,Gulmezoglu AM,Lumbiganon P,et al.Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse short －term maternal outcomes:the 2004-2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health[J].BMC Med,2010,8(1):71.
[7] Mylonas I, Friese K.Indications for and risks of elective cesarean section[J].Deutsches Arzteblatt Int,2015,112(29-30):489-495.
[8] Wilmink FA, Hukkelhoven CWPM, Lunshof S,et al.Neonatal outcome following elective cesarean section beyond 37 weeks of gestation: a 7-year retrospective analysis of a national registry[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol,2010,202(1):1-8.
[9] 孙国强,杨慧,张欢,等.孕妇学校开展“分娩方式的选择”的知识宣教对剖宫产率的影响[J].中国妇幼保健,2013,28(31):5114-5117.
[10] 张丽玲,帅卫,范晓娜,等.参加孕妇学校对初产妇分娩方式和产褥期行为的影响[J].现代临床护理,2014,7(1):21-23.
[11] 丁国红,刘又红.产前健康教育干预对孕妇分娩方式及产后泌乳的影响[J].中国妇幼保健,2011,26(29):4505-4506.
[12] 董瑞,左海燕,崔宇洁,等.孕妇学校健康教育需求及教育效果调查[J].中国妇幼保健,2011,26(7):975-976.
[13] 徐群芳,丁晓芬,沈建芬.孕产妇围产期保健状况调查和健康教育效果分析[J].实用预防医学,2014,21(11):1357-1359.