Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Effect of Intramuscular Hyoscine and Hyoscine-Promethazine on the Duration of Labor in Nulliparous Pregnant Women (Triple-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial)

  • Medicine
  • Published:
SN Comprehensive Clinical Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 21 May 2019

This article has been updated

Abstract

Childbirth consists of a three-stage period beginning with uterine, contractions, and ending in the expulsion of the placenta. The aim of this study was the effect of intramuscular hyoscine and hyoscine-promethazine on the duration of labor in nulliparous pregnant women. This study was a triple-blind clinical trial on 213 nulliparous pregnant women who had referred to Amiralmomenin hospital in Zanjan, Iran. Selection of samples was random and done with using 3, 6(1:1:1) of blocking ratio. This study had three groups. The first group received 20 mg hyoscine (group A), the second group 3 cc sterile water (group B), and the third group 20 mg hyoscine and 25 mg promethazine (group C). Data collection tools included a demographic questionnaire, checklist of data, and partograph chart. The mean of the first stage of labor in hyoscine group was 88.95 ± 51.07 min, hyoscine-promethazine 100.05 ± 65.88 min, and control group 170.37 ± 106.87 min. There was significant correlation between A and C and B and C groups (P < 0.001). The mean of the second stage in group A was 46.37 ± 44.60, group B 32.25 ± 17.74, and control group 55.05 ± 44.44 min and a significant relationship was between B and C groups (P = 0.03). The results showed that hyoscine and hyoscine-promethazine can be used to reduce the duration of labor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 21 May 2019

    The article listed above was initially published with incorrect copyright information. Upon publication of this Correction, the copyright of this article changed to ���The Author(s)���. The original article has been corrected.

  • 21 May 2019

    The article listed above was initially published with incorrect copyright information. Upon publication of this Correction, the copyright of this article changed to ���The Author(s)���. The original article has been corrected.

References

  1. Cunningham F, Leveno K, Bloom S, Spong CY, Dashe JS, Hoffman BL, et al. Williams obstetrics. 24th ed. New York: McGraw Hill Education Medical; 2014.

  2. Zhang J, Troendle J, Mikolajczyk R, Sundaram R, Beaver J, Fraser W. The natural history of the normal first stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(4):705–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rohwer Anke C, Khondowe O, Young T. Antispasmodics for labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009243.pub3.

  4. Cheng YW, Hopkins LM, Caughey AB. How long is too long: does a prolonged second stage of labor in nulliparous women affect maternal and neonatal outcomes? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(3):933–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Li W-h, Zhang H-y, Ling Y, Jin S. Effect of prolonged second stage of labor on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Asian Pac J Trop Med. 2011;4(5):409–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sandström A, Altman M, Cnattingius S, Johansson S, Ahlberg M, Stephansson O. Durations of second stage of labor and pushing, and adverse neonatal outcomes: a population-based cohort study. J Perinatol. 2017;37(3):236–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mayanja R, Chakura A, Mubiru M, Masembe S, Nkonwa I, Njagi J, et al. Association between duration of second stage of labour and perinatal outcomes among mothers admitted in labour at Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, Uganda. ASRJETS. 2016;25(1):112–30.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Myles TD, Santolaya J. Maternal and neonatal outcomes in patients with a prolonged second stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102(1):52–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cohen WR. Influence of the duration of second stage labor on perinatal outcome and puerperal morbidity. Obstet Gynecol. 1977;49(3):266–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rouse DJ, Weiner SJ, Bloom SL, Varner MW, Spong CY, Ramin SM, et al. Second-stage labor duration in nulliparous women: relationship to maternal and perinatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(4):357. e1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Laughon SK, Berghella V, Reddy UM, Sundaram R, Lu Z, Hoffman MK. Neonatal and maternal outcomes with prolonged second stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(1):57–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hunt JC, Menticoglou SM. Perinatal outcome in 1515 cases of prolonged second stage of labour in nulliparous women. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015;37(6):508–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Vahratian A, Zhang J, Troendle JF, Sciscione AC, Hoffman MK. Labor progression and risk of cesarean delivery in electively induced nulliparas. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(4):698–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dehgani R, Tayebi N. Associate effect of IV atropine on the Fridman in the nulliparous women in active phase of labor. FEYZ Kashan. 2008;11(2):12–6.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kausar U, Siddiqui N. To compare the efficacy of drotaverine hydrochloride with hyoscine butylbroumide for increasing the rate of cervical dilatation. IJRCOG. 2017;6(4). https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20171438.

  16. Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Agosti M, Uccella S, Piazza N, Serati M, et al. Use of an antispasmodic (rociverine) to shorten the length of labor: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011;90(12):1371–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Dahal P, Banerjee B, Uprety D, Das B, Thakur A, Agrawal A. Comparative study of efficacy of drotaverine hydrochloride and valethamate bromide with control in first stage of labour. Health Renaissance. 2013;11(1):38–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gupta B, Nellore V, Mittal S. Drotaverine hydrochloride versus hyoscine-N-butylbromide in augmentation of labor. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2008;100(3):244–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Madhu C, Mahavarkar S, Bhave S. A randomised controlled study comparing Drotaverine hydrochloride and Valethamate bromide in the augmentation of labour. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010;282(1):11–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Samuels L, Christie L, Roberts-Gittens B, Fletcher H, Frederick J. The effect of hyoscine butylbromide on the first stage of labour in term pregnancies. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;114(12):1542–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Sharma J, Pundir P, Kumar A, Murthy N. Drotaverine hydrochloride vs. valethamate bromide in acceleration of labor. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2001;74(3):255–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Singh K, Jain P, Goel N, Saxena A. Drotaverine hydrochloride for augmentation of labor. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2004;84(1):17–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Warke H, Chauhan A, Raut V, Ingle K. The efficacy of Camylofin dihydrochloride in acceleration of labour: a randomised double blind trial. Bombay Hosp J. 2003;45(3):420–4.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Yilmaz B, Kart C, Kelekci S, Gokturk U, Sut N, Tarlan N, et al. Meperidine versus valethamate bromide in shortening the duration of active labor. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;107(2):126–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Mayadeo N, Gangadhar A, Das S. Camylofin in the management of prolonged labor: a review of evidence. IJRCOG. 2017;6(3):776–80.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Martindale W, Parfitt K, Britain RPSoG. Martindale: the complete drug reference. 38th ed. London: Pharmaceutical Press; 2014.

  27. Vella L, Francis D, Houlton P, Reynolds F. Comparison of the antiemetics metoclopramide and promethazine in labour. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1985;290(6476):1173–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hall PF. Use of promethazine (Phenergan) in labour. CMAJ. 1987;136(7):690–1.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Znoozi M, Hashemijam MS. A comparative study of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and pethidine - promethazine for pain relief in active phase of labor. Razi of Medical Science J. 2009;15(61–60):93–87.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hobbs FS, Carroll JJ. The use of promethazine (phenergan) as a sedative during labour. Can Med Assoc J. 1958;79(10):822–5.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Makvandi S, Tadayon M, Abbaspour MR, Zaker Hoseini V, Sepandi M. Study on the effect of hyoscine-N-butylbromide suppository on pain and process of labor. Jondi Shapur Medical J. 2011;10(3):335–44.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fardiazar Z, Niknami F, Mashayekhi S, Ghojazadeh M. Hyoscine-N-butylbromide versus atropine as labour accelerant and analgesic: a randomized clinical trial. Pak J Biol Sci. 2013;16(9):443–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Suki Z, Sedighpur N, Ershadi A, Karbaschi MH. Effect mixed promethazine- atropine on the active phase of labor. FEYZ Kashan. 1999;3(2):7–10.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Mortazavi F, Rakhshani M. Effects of atropine, hyoscine, promethazine on the duration phases and progress rate delivery in multiparus women. J Gorgan Univ Med Sci. 2006;14(6):92–4.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Saatsaz S, Hajiahmadi M, Basirat Z, Beheshti Z, Nazari R. Comparative effect atropine-promethazine and pethidine on the active phase of labor. JBUMS. 2009;3(9):39–42.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Irvani M, Bekhradnasab H. Effect of IV hyoscine on the labor process. Shahid Sadughi University of Medical Sciences. 2006;5(13):59–64.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mardi A, Azari M, Nasiri E, Molud S, Manavi M, Azizzade R. Associate effect of IV Atropin and Hyoscin on the phazes of labor in nulliparus women on the Alavi hospital of Ardabil. 8th international congress obstetric and Gynecology Nov; Iran 2013. p. 110–1.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This article is an approved project of the Tabriz University of Medical Sciences (11/03/2015). Finally, we would like to thank the president, personnel, and the staff of the Amiralmomenin Hospital of Khodabandeh.

Funding

This project was funded by the Tabriz University of Medical Sciences Deputy.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Midwifery, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Student Research Center, Tabriz, Iran

    Fahimeh Sehhatie Shafaie & Farzane Shahmohammadi

  2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Health and Nutrition, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Mohammad Asghari Jafarabadi

  3. Amiralmomenin Hospital, Khodabandeh, Zanjan, Iran

    Fateme Khanmohammadi

Authors
  1. Fahimeh Sehhatie Shafaie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Farzane Shahmohammadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammad Asghari Jafarabadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fateme Khanmohammadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fahimeh Sehhatie Shafaie.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Medicine

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shafaie, F.S., Shahmohammadi, F., Jafarabadi, M.A. et al. The Effect of Intramuscular Hyoscine and Hyoscine-Promethazine on the Duration of Labor in Nulliparous Pregnant Women (Triple-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial). SN Compr. Clin. Med. 1, 60–66 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42399-018-0013-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42399-018-0013-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation