不同的临产方式对孕产妇分娩结局的影响——附择期引产与自然临产临床分析

目的：探讨择期引产与自然临产两种不同的临产方式对孕产妇分娩结局的影响。方法：选择本院2006年足月妊娠（孕37～41撕周）分娩的初产妇共162例为研究对象，根据是否临产将其分为择期引产组60例和自然临产组102例，采用回顾性分析，对两组产时经过、分娩方式及产后并发症等进行统计，比较两组间的差异。结果：两组经阴道分娩者产程时间比较，第一产程时间比较，差异无统计学意义，第二产程时间比较。差异有统计学意义：主要并发症产后出血及新生儿窒息比较，差异无统计学意义；分娩方式比较，择期引产者剖宫产率为65．00％。自然临产组剖宫产率为34．31％，两组比较，P〈0．01，差异有统计学意义。两组孕产妇的剖宫产指征均以胎儿窘迫为主，引产组占61．54％，自然组为45．71％，两组比较，P〈0．01，差异有统计学意义。结论：择期引产不增加孕产妇的产后出血及新生儿窒息；择期引产增加剖宫产率，剖宫产指征以胎儿窘迫为主。

Effect of different labor modes on the outcome of delivery——Attached clinical analysis of selection time artificial labor and natural labor

Objective：To discuss the effect of selection time artificial labor and natural labor on the outcome of delivery. Methods：Selected 162 primipara who deliveried in our hospital in 2006, gestational weeks aged from 37 to 41^＋6, divided them into selection time artificial labor group and natural labor group. Retrospectively analyzed their process , delivery style and postnatal complications. Compared the difference between two groups. Results： The time of the first stage of la- bor had no statistical difference between vaginal delivery of two groups, but the time of the second stage of labor had sta- tistical difference. There also was no statistical difference about major complications such as postpartum hemorrhage and neonatal asphyxia between two groups. Uterine-incision delivery rate of selection time artificial labor group was 65.00% and the natural labor group was 34.31%,there was distinctly statistical difference （P〈0.01）. Fetal distress was the mainly indicator of uterine-incision delivery in both groups,artificial labor group was 61.54% and natural labor group was 45.71%, there was distinctly statistical difference between them （P〈0.01）. Conclusion＇Selection time artificial labor can＇t increase the rate of postpartum hemorrhage and neonatal asphyxia, but increase the rate of uterine-incision delivery. Neonatal asphyxia is the mainly indicator of uterine-incision delivery.