胎头吸引助产和产钳助产在阴道助产中的应用效果比较

Comparison of the application effect of vacuum extractor and forceps midwifery

目的比较胎头吸引助产和产钳助产在阴道助产中的应用效果。方法108例行阴道助产的产妇,根据助产方式的不同分为胎头吸引助产组和产钳助产组,各54例。对比两组产妇分娩情况及新生儿情况。结果胎头吸引助产组软产道裂伤率25.93%低于产钳助产组的53.70%,出血量(282.77±10.25)ml少于产钳助产组的(294.07±15.32)ml,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组助产成功率对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。胎头吸引助产组新生儿头皮血肿率29.63%高于产钳助产组的11.11%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组新生儿颅内血肿、颅内出血、窒息、颜面损伤、头皮损伤率对比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论在阴道助产中,胎头吸引助产及产钳助产各具优势,在助产方式的选择上应根据产妇及胎儿的实际情况进行权衡,更有效保障母婴安全。

Objective To compare the application effect of vacuum extractor and forceps midwifery.Methods A total of 108 women who underwent vaginal midwifery were divided into vacuum extractor group and forceps midwifery group,with 54 cases in each group.The maternal delivery and neonatal status were compared between the two groups.Results The laceration rate of the soft birth canal 25.93%in the vacuum extractor group was lower than 53.70%in the forceps midwifery group,and the amount of bleeding(282.77±10.25)ml was less than(294.07±15.32)ml in the forceps midwifery group.All the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in the success rate of midwifery between the two groups(P>0.05).The neonatal scalp hematoma rate 29.63%in the vacuum extractor group was higher than 11.11%in the forceps midwifery group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in the rates of intracranial hematoma,intracranial hemorrhage,asphyxia,facial injury and scalp injury between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion In vaginal midwifery,the vacuum extractor and forceps midwifery has its own advantage.In the choice of midwifery mode,it should be weighed according to the actual situation of maternal and fetus to more effectively ensure the safety of mother and baby.