↓ Skip to main content

A cross-sectional survey of policies guiding second stage labor in urban Japanese hospitals, clinics and midwifery birth centers

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A cross-sectional survey of policies guiding second stage labor in urban Japanese hospitals, clinics and midwifery birth centers
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12884-016-0814-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kaori Baba, Yaeko Kataoka, Kaori Nakayama, Yukari Yaju, Shigeko Horiuchi, Hiromi Eto

Abstract

The Japan Academy of Midwifery developed and disseminated the '2012 Evidence-based Guidelines for Midwifery Care (Guidelines for Midwives)' for low-risk births to achieve a more uniform standard of care during childbirth in Japan. The objective of this study was to cross-sectional survey policy implementation regarding care during the second stage of labor at Japanese hospitals, clinics, and midwifery birth centers, and to compare those policies with the recommendations in Guidelines for Midwives. This study was conducted in the four major urbanized areas (e.g. Tokyo) of the Kanto region of Japan. Respondents were chiefs of the institutions (obstetricians/midwives), nurse administrators (including midwives) of the obstetrical departments, or other nurse/midwives who were well versed in the routine care of the targeted institutions. The Guidelines implementation questionnaire comprised 12 items. Data was collected from October 2010 to July 2011. The overall response was 255 of the 684 institutions (37 %). Of the total responses 46 % were hospitals, 26 % were clinics and 28 % were midwifery birth centers. Few institutions reported perineal massage education for 'almost all cases'. Using 'active birth' were all midwifery birth centers, 56 % hospitals and 32 % clinics. Few institutions used water births. The majority of hospitals (73 %) and clinics (80 %) but a minority (39 %) of midwifery birth centers reported 'not implemented' about applying warm compress to the perineum. Few midwifery birth centers (10 %) and more hospitals (38 %) and clinics (50 %) had a policy for valsalva as routine care. Many hospitals (90 %) and clinics (88 %) and fewer midwifery birth centers (54 %) offered hands-on technique to provide perineal support during birth. A majority of institutions used antiseptic solution for perineal disinfection. Few institutions routinely used episiotomies for multiparas, however routine use for primiparas was slightly more in hospitals (21 %) and clinics (25 %). All respondents used fundal pressure as consistent with guidelines. Not many institutions implemented the hands and knees position for correcting fetal abnormal rotation. This survey has provided new information about the policies instituted in three types of institutions guiding second stage labor in four metropolitan areas of Japan. There existed considerable differences among institutions' practice. There were also many gaps between reported policies and evidence-based Guidelines for Midwives, therefore new strategies are needed in Japan to realign institution's care policies with evidenced based guidelines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 98 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 14%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Lecturer 6 6%
Other 5 5%
Other 21 21%
Unknown 34 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 39 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 17%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Linguistics 1 1%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 34 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 March 2016.
All research outputs
#18,444,553
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#3,476
of 4,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,986
of 298,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#55
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,198 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,864 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.