Conectar
Labour companionship is a recommendation by WHO that health authorities enable women to choose a companion during labour to ensure a safe and dignified labour experience for the birthing woman. However, most healthcare facilities in low- and middle-income countries do not necessarily consider this maternal need, which hampers a positive maternal experience during labour.
This study aims to examine midwives' perception towards the involvement of male partners in labour companionship.
An exploratory phenomenological approach was chosen and semi-structured interviews were used for this study.
The four main themes identified in this study include ‘Understanding of male partners' involvement in labour companionship’, ‘Involvement of midwives in decision-making’, ‘Barriers to male partners' involvement in labour companionship’ and ‘Facilitators of male partners' involvement in labour companionship’.
This study found a lack of understanding among midwives of the significance of male partners' involvement in labour companionship; and the identification of hierarchical and authoritarian leadership as a barrier to midwives' participation in decision-making highlights the need for transformational leadership styles to empower midwives. Overall, the findings of this study can inform maternity care policy as well as resource development, education and professional training in the field of midwifery.
This meta-analysis is intended to evaluate the effect of both robotic and open-cut operations on postoperative complications of stomach carcinoma. From the earliest date until June 2023, a full and systemic search has been carried out on four main databases with keywords extracted from ‘Robot’, ‘Gastr’ and ‘Opene’. The ROBINS-I instrument has been applied to evaluate the risk of bias in nonrandomized controlled trials. In these 11 trials, a total of 16 095 patients had received surgical treatment for stomach cancer and all 11 trials were nonrandomized, controlled trials. Abdominal abscesses were reported in 5 trials, wound infections in 8 trials, haemorrhage in 7 trials, wound dehiscence in 2 trials and total postoperative complications in 4 trials. Meta-analyses revealed no statistically significantly different rates of postoperative abdominal abscesses among patients who had received robotic operations than in those who had received open surgical procedures (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.25, 3.36; p = 0.89). The incidence of bleeding after surgery was not significantly different from that in both groups (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.69, 2.75; p = 0.37). Similarly, there was no significant difference between the two groups (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.52, 1.18; p = 0.24). No significant difference was found between the two groups (OR, 1. 28; 95% CI, 0.75, 2.21; p = 0.36). No significant difference was found between the two groups of patients who had received the robotic operation and those who had received the surgery after the operation (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.78, 1.66; p = 0.49). Generally speaking, this meta-analysis suggests that the use of robotics does not result in a reduction in certain postsurgical complications, including wound infections and abdominal abscesses. Thus, the use of a microinvasive robot for stomach carcinoma operation might not be better than that performed on the surgical site after the operation. This is a valuable guide for the surgeon to select the operative method.
FreshRSS 