The Impact of Parity on Course of Labor in a Contemporary Population
dc.contributor.author | Vahratian, Anjel | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Hoffman, Matthew K. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Troendle, James F. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Zhang, Jun | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2010-06-01T20:43:35Z | |
dc.date.available | 2010-06-01T20:43:35Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2006-03 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Vahratian, Anjel; Hoffman, Matthew K.; Troendle, James F.; Zhang, Jun (2006). "The Impact of Parity on Course of Labor in a Contemporary Population." Birth 33(1): 12-17. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/73829> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0730-7659 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1523-536X | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/73829 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=16499527&dopt=citation | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Few studies have examined in depth the labor progression of multiparas to determine if there is any additional impact of being parous beyond the first birth. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of parity on labor progression in contemporary obstetric practice . Methods: Our sample consisted of all low-risk women who delivered a term, live-born infant from January 2002 to March 2004 at a single institution in Delaware, United States ( n = 5,589). The median duration of labor by each centimeter of cervical dilation was computed for parity = 0 ( n = 2,645); parity = 1 ( n = 1,839); parity = 2 ( n = 750); and parity = 3 + ( n = 355) . Results: Multiparas had a significantly faster labor progression from 4 to 10 cm (293, 300, and 313 min, respectively, for parity = 1, parity = 2, and parity = 3 +), compared with nulliparas (383 min for parity = 0), as well as a shorter second stage of labor. However, no significant differences were found in duration of the active phase or the second stage of labor among multiparas . Conclusions: Additional childbearing appears to have no effect of on the progression of labor among multiparous subgroups. The difference in duration of the active phase between nulliparas and multiparas is substantially smaller in a contemporary population. (BIRTH 33:1 March 2006) | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 102377 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 3109 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.publisher | Blackwell Publishing Inc | en_US |
dc.rights | Blackwell Publishing, Inc. 2006 | en_US |
dc.title | The Impact of Parity on Course of Labor in a Contemporary Population | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Obstetrics and Gynecology | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Anjel Vahratian, James Troendle, and Jun Zhang are in the Division of Epidemiology, Statistics, and Prevention Research, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland; and Matthew Hoffman is in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, Delaware, USA. Dr. Vahratian is now affiliated with the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 16499527 | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73829/1/j.0730-7659.2006.00069.x.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1111/j.0730-7659.2006.00069.x | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Birth | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Friedman EA. The graphic analysis of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1954; 68: 1568 – 1575. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Friedman EA. Primigravid labor: A graphicostatistical analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1955; 6: 567 – 589. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Friedman EA. Labor in multiparas: A graphicostatistical analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1956; 8: 691 – 703. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bergsjo P, Bakketeig L, Eikhom SN. Duration of labour with spontaneous onset. Acta Obstet Gynecol Sc and 1979; 58: 129 – 134. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Friedman EA. Labor: Clinical Evaluation & Management. 2nd ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1978. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Friedman EA, Kroll BH. Computer analysis of labor progression. III. Pattern variations by parity. J Reprod Med 1971; 6: 179 – 183. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kilpatrick SJ, Laros Jr RK. Characteristics of normal labor. Obstet Gynecol 1989; 74: 85 – 87. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Peisner DB, Rosen MG. Latent phase of labor in normal patients: A reassessment. Obstet Gynecol 1985; 66: 644 – 648. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Albers LL, for the CNM Data Group 1996. The duration of labor in healthy women. J Perinatol 1999; 19: 114 – 119. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Gurewitsch ED, Diament P, Fong J, et al. The labor curve of the grand multipara: Does progress of labor continue to improve with additional childbearing? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186: 1331 – 1338. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Gurewitsch ED, Johnson E, Allen RH, et al. The descent curve of the grand multiparous woman. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189: 1036 – 1041. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Arulkumaran S, Gibb DMF, Lun KC, et al. The effect of parity on uterine activity in labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1984; 91: 843 – 848. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Juntunen K, Kirkinen P. Partogram of a grand multipara: Different descent slope compared with an ordinary parturient. J Perinat Med 1994; 22: 213 – 218. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, et al. Births: Final data for 2002. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2003; 52 (10): 1 – 27. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Klein JP, Moeschberger ML. Survival Analysis: Techniques for Censored and Truncated Data. Berlin: Springer, 1997. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Allison PD. Survival Analysis Using the SAS System: A Practical Guide: SAS Institute Inc., 1995. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | 17. SAS Institute Inc. SAS Online Doc, Version 8, Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 1999. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Nesheim B. Duration of labor: An analysis of influencing factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1988; 67: 121 – 124. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Friedman EA. The labor curve. Clin Perinatol 1981; 8: 15 – 25. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Albers LL, Schiff M, Gorwoda JG. The length of active labor in normal pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 87: 355 – 359. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Hedley AA, Ogden CL, Johnson CL, et al. Prevalence of overweight and obesity among US children, adolescents, and adults, 1999–2002. JAMA 2004; 291: 2847 – 2850. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Vahratian A, Zhang J, Troendle JF, Savitz DA, Siega-Riz AM. Maternal pre-pregnancy overweight and obesity and the pattern of labor progression in term nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 104: 943 – 951. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Gunderson E, Abrams B. Epidemiology of gestational weight gain and body weight changes after pregnancy. Epidemiol Rev 1999; 21: 261 – 275. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lederman SA. The effect of pregnancy weight gain on later obesity. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 82: 148 – 155. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Rosenberg L, Palmer JR, Wise LA, et al. A prospective study of the effect of childbearing on weight gain in African-American women. Obes Res 2003; 11: 1526 – 1535. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Siega-Riz AM, Evenson KR, Dole N. Pregnancy-related weight gain—a link to obesity? Nutr Rev 2004; 62: S105 – S111. | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.