Can labor support based on Kolcaba’s Theory reduce the negative consequences of fear of childbirth? A pilot study

ABSTRACT

Background

The fear of childbirth (FOC) causes negativities such as increased an need for analgesia and interventions related to labour, prolonged labor, and childbirth dissatisfaction. It has been shown that birth support can be an effective strategy for reducing these negative outcomes. Also, labour support based on a nursing theory can help improve care outcomes.

Aim

This study aimed to examine the effects of nursing care structured according to Kolcaba’s theory on duration, pain, and comfort of childbirth.

Methods

This pilot study was a randomised controlled study. Before the participants were randomized, their FOC levels were determined using the Wijma Delivery Expectancy/Experience Scale A (WDEQ-A). Ninety women who had a FOC (WDEQ-A >66) were randomised into groups. The study was completed with 46 women (21 intervention, 25 control). The intervention group received the labour support based on Kolcaba’s Theory of Comfort. The control group received standard care at birth.The data were collected using the Wijma Delivery Expectancy/Experience Scale A and the Comfort Behavior Checklist during pregnancy and labour. They were analysed using non-parametric tests.

Results

The women in the intervention group had shorter latent and active phases (p = 0.002), lower pain scores (p = 0.000), and higher levels of birth comfort (p = 0.002).

Relevance for the Clinical Practice

Labor support structured according to Kolcaba’s Theory of Comfort contributes to increased comfort and decreases childbirth pain. This study can guide healthcare professionals who provide labour support on how to plan, provide, and assess care for woman who are giving birth.

KEYWORDS:

• childbirth pain
• fear of childbirth
• intrapartum care
• labour support
• nursing theory
• nursing care

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the women participating in the study for giving their valuable time to complete the surveys and The Scientific Research Project Coordination Unit of Akdeniz University for financial support.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Author contributions

Study design: AU and HBY; data collection and analysis: AU and HBY; manuscript preparation: AU and HBY.

Ethical statement

Approval was obtained from the institutions where the study was conducted were taken and the Ethics committee approval was obtained with the decision dated 9 May 2016 and having the protocol number of 183 of the Akdeniz University Clinical Researches Assessment Commission in order to conduct the research.

Additional information

Funding

This work supported by The Scientific Research Project Coordination Unit of Akdeniz University. Project Number: TDK-2017-2416. The Scientific Research Project Coordination Unit provided only financial support. There was not any support role of the sponsor in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication.