Research: SMITH and COLLEAGUES,

Listed in Issue 213

Abstract

SMITH and COLLEAGUES, Centre for Complementary Medicine Research, University of Western Sydney, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC, New South Wales, Australia, 2751 reviewed the effects of aromatherapy for pain management in labour on maternal and perinatal morbidity. 

Background

Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour; this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined currently available evidence supporting the use of aromatherapy for pain management in labour.

Methodology

Search Strategy: The authors searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2010), The Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field's Trials Register (October 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to 31 October 2010), CINAHL (1980 to 31 October 2010), the Australian and New Zealand Trials Registry (31 October 2010), Chinese Clinical Trial Register (31 October 2010), Current Controlled Trials (31 October 2010), ClinicalTrials.gov (31 October 2010), ISRCTN Register (31 October 2010), National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) (31 October 2010) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (31 October 2010). Selection Criteria: Randomized controlled trials comparing aromatherapy with placebo, no treatment or other non-pharmacological forms of pain management in labour. Data Collection And Analysis: Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The authors contacted study authors for additional information.

Results

The authors included two trials (535 women) in the review. The trials found no difference between groups for the primary outcomes of pain intensity, assisted vaginal birth (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48 to 2.28, one trial, 513 women; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.06 to 11.70, one trial, 22 women), and caesarean section (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.94, one trial, 513 women; RR 2.54, 95% CI 0.11 to 56.25, one trial, 22 women); there were more babies admitted to neonatal intensive care in the control group of one trial (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.42, one trial, 513 women) but this difference did not reach statistical significance. The trials found no differences between groups for the secondary outcomes of use of pharmacological pain relief (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.32, one trial, 513 women; RR 2.50, 95% CI 0.31 to 20.45, one trial, 22 women), spontaneous vaginal delivery (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06, one trial, 513 women; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.28, one trial, 22 women) or length of labour and augmentation (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.45, one trial, 513 women). The risk of bias was low in the trials.

Conclusion

There is a lack of studies evaluating the role of aromatherapy for pain management in labour. Further research is needed before recommendations can be made for clinical practice.

References

Smith CA, Collins CT and Crowther CA. Aromatherapy for pain management in labour. [Review] Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. (7):CD009215. 2011.

Munro Hall Clinic 2019

IJCA 2018 New Skyscraper

Scientific and Medical Network 2

Berlin to London Bike Ride

Walk on the Wide Side Trek Kenya 2020

Big Heart Bike Ride South Africa 2020

top of the page