Biomechanical comparison of squatting and "optimal" supine birth positions. (22nd May 2020)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Biomechanical comparison of squatting and "optimal" supine birth positions. (22nd May 2020)
- Main Title:
- Biomechanical comparison of squatting and "optimal" supine birth positions
- Authors:
- Desseauve, David
Fradet, Laetitia
Gachon, Bertand
Cherni, Yosra
Lacouture, Patrick
Pierre, Fabrice - Abstract:
- Abstract: In obstetric science, it is unknown whether the inherent biomechanical features of the squatting position can be achieved and/or transposed to the supine birth position. In this study Biomechanical features of the squatting position were compared with 2 hyperflexed supine positions for giving birth. Thirteen pregnant women past the 32 weeks of gestational age not in labor were assessed first in the squatting position with the feet flat on the floor, then in the hyperflexed supine position, and finally in the optimal supine position "crushing" the hand of the caregiver onto the bed. For each position, the flexion of the spine associated with the plane of the external conjugate ( ANGce ) and the pelvis, hip flexion, and abduction were quantified using an optoelectronic motion capture system. A non-invasive strain-gauge-based measuring system was used to track the lumbar curve. An optimal position was defined with a flat lumbar spine and a pelvic inlet plane perpendicular to the lumbar spine ( ANGce = 0° ± 5° ) . For the 13 participants, hip flexion, hip abduction, and the lumbar curve did not differ significantly for the three positions (squatting position, hyperflexed supine position, and OS) in the post-hoc analyses. The optimal supine position induced an ANGce closer to the perpendicular plane than the squatting position (p = 0.002). In the squatting position or in hyperflexed supine position positions, none of the subjects fulfilled the two conditions consideredAbstract: In obstetric science, it is unknown whether the inherent biomechanical features of the squatting position can be achieved and/or transposed to the supine birth position. In this study Biomechanical features of the squatting position were compared with 2 hyperflexed supine positions for giving birth. Thirteen pregnant women past the 32 weeks of gestational age not in labor were assessed first in the squatting position with the feet flat on the floor, then in the hyperflexed supine position, and finally in the optimal supine position "crushing" the hand of the caregiver onto the bed. For each position, the flexion of the spine associated with the plane of the external conjugate ( ANGce ) and the pelvis, hip flexion, and abduction were quantified using an optoelectronic motion capture system. A non-invasive strain-gauge-based measuring system was used to track the lumbar curve. An optimal position was defined with a flat lumbar spine and a pelvic inlet plane perpendicular to the lumbar spine ( ANGce = 0° ± 5° ) . For the 13 participants, hip flexion, hip abduction, and the lumbar curve did not differ significantly for the three positions (squatting position, hyperflexed supine position, and OS) in the post-hoc analyses. The optimal supine position induced an ANGce closer to the perpendicular plane than the squatting position (p = 0.002). In the squatting position or in hyperflexed supine position positions, none of the subjects fulfilled the two conditions considered necessary to reach the optimal position. The squatting position was not significantly different from the supine hyperflexed supine position with or without voluntary lordosis correction. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Journal of biomechanics. Volume 105(2020)
- Journal:
- Journal of biomechanics
- Issue:
- Volume 105(2020)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 105, Issue 2020 (2020)
- Year:
- 2020
- Volume:
- 105
- Issue:
- 2020
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2020-0105-2020-0000
- Page Start:
- Page End:
- Publication Date:
- 2020-05-22
- Subjects:
- Biomechanics -- Optimal birth position -- Squatting birth position -- Supine position
Animal mechanics -- Periodicals
Biomechanics -- Periodicals
Biomechanics -- Periodicals
Mécanique animale -- Périodiques
Biomécanique -- Périodiques
Electronic journals
571.4305 - Journal URLs:
- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00219290 ↗
http://www.clinicalkey.com/dura/browse/journalIssue/00219290 ↗
http://www.clinicalkey.com.au/dura/browse/journalIssue/00219290 ↗
http://www.elsevier.com/journals ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2020.109783 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 0021-9290
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 4953.600000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 13540.xml