Advertisement

Pharmacy World & Science

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 206–211 | Cite as

Post natal use of analgesics: comparisons between conventional postnatal wards and a maternity hotel

  • Hedvig NordengEmail author
  • Anne Eskild
  • Britt-Ingjerd Nesheim
Research Article
  • 67 Downloads

Abstract

Aim To investigate factors related to analgesic use after delivery, and especially whether rates of analgesic use were different in a midwife-managed maternity hotel as compared to conventional postnatal wards. Setting One maternity hotel and two conventional postnatal wards at Ullevål University Hospital in Oslo, Norway. Method Data were obtained from hospital records for 804 women with vaginal deliveries. Main outcome measure Postnatal analgesic use. Results Overall, approximately half the women used analgesics after vaginal delivery in both conventional postnatal wards and maternity hotel. The factors that were significantly associated with use of analgesics postnatally in multivariate analysis were multiparity, having a non-Western ethnicity, smoking in pregnancy, younger age, instrumental delivery, analgesic use during labour, maternal complications post partum, and duration of postnatal stay 4 days or more. Conclusion The use of analgesics is determined by socio-demographic and obstetric factors rather than the organisation of the ward.

Keywords

Analgesics Drug utilisation Maternity care Maternity hotel Norway Organisation postnatal ward 

Notes

Acknowledgment

We would like to thank the staff at Ullevål University Hospital for recording of data.

Funding

We would like to thank The Norwegian Women’s Public Health Association for funding the study.

Conflict of interest statement

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Collaborative Group on Drug Use in Pregnancy (CGDUP). Medication during pregnancy: an intercontinental cooperative study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1992;39:185–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Passmore CM, McElnay JC, D’Arcy PF. Drugs taken my mothers in the puerperium: inpatients survey in Northern Ireland. BMJ. 1984;289:1593–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Matheson I. Drugs for the mother and infant in the maternity ward. A study of 5 Norwegian university hospitals (in Norwegian with English abstract). Medikamenter til mor og barn i barselavdelinger. En kartlegging ved fem norske sykehus. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1989;109:2118–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Treacy V, McDonald D. Drug utilization in antenatal and postnatal wards. Ir Med J. 1982;74:159–60.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Doering PL, Stewart RB. The extent and character of drug consumption during pregnancy. JAMA. 1978;239:843–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    MacVicar J, Dobbie G, Owen-Johnstone L, Jagger C, Hopkins M, Kennedy J. Simulated home delivery in hospital: a randomised controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993;100:316–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hundley VA, Cruickshank FM, Lang GD, et al. Midwife managed delivery unit: a randomised controlled comparison with consultant led care. BMJ. 1994;309:1400–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Waldenstrom U, Nilsson CA. A randomized controlled study of birth center care versus standard maternity care: effects on women’s health. Birth. 1997;24:17–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Byrne JP, Crowther CA, Moss JR. A randomised controlled trial comparing birthing centre care with delivery suite care in Adelaide, Australia. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol. 2000;40:268–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hodnett ED. Home-like versus conventional institutional settings for birth (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1. Chichester, UK: Wiley; 2004.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hosmer DW, Lemenshow S. Applied logistic regression. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 2000. pp. 147–56. ISBN:0-471-35632-8.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative. In: World Health Organization/UNICEF. Protecting, promoting and supporting breast-feeding: the special role of maternity services. Geneva: WHO; 1989. ISBN: 92-4-156130-0.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Callister LC, Khalaf I, Semenic S, Kartchner R, Vehvilainen-Julkunen K. The pain of childbirth: perceptions of culturally diverse women. Pain Manag Nurs. 2003;4:145–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Corbett CA, Callister LC. Nursing support during labor. Clin Nurs Res. 2000;9:70–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hodnett ED. Pain and women’s satisfaction with the experience of childbirth: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186:S160–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Buitendijk S, Bracken MB. Medication in early pregnancy: prevalence of use and relationship to maternal characteristics. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991;165:33–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bonassi S, Magnani M, Calvi A, Repetto E, Puglisi P, Pantarotto F, et al. Factors related to drug consumption during pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1994;73:535–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Larivaara P, Hartikainen AL, Rantakallio P. Use of psychotropic drugs and pregnancy outcome. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:1309–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hedvig Nordeng
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Anne Eskild
    • 2
    • 3
  • Britt-Ingjerd Nesheim
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Pharmacy, School of PharmacyUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  2. 2.Department of Psychosomatics and Health Behavior, Division of Mental HealthNorwegian Institute of Public HealthOsloNorway
  3. 3.Department of Gynecology and ObstetricsAkershus University Hospital and University of OsloOsloNorway
  4. 4.Department of ObstetricsUllevål University HospitalOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations