COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE BENEFITS AND DIFFICULTIES OF OBSTETRIC PSYCHOPROPHYLAXIS, IN PREGNANT WOMEN OF THE HEALTH CENTERS OF CUMANDÁ AND CERECITA - ECUADOR

Authors

  • Obsta Vicky Narea Morales MSc Teachers of The Career of Obstetrics of The Faculty of Medical Sciences of The University of Guayaquil-Ecuador
  • Dr. Jorge Daher Nader PhD Teachers of The Career of Obstetrics of The Faculty of Medical Sciences of The University of Guayaquil-Ecuador
  • Obsta. Katherine Rodríguez Teachers of The Career of Obstetrics of The Faculty of Medical Sciences of The University of Guayaquil-Ecuador
  • Obsta. Cynthia Carolina Armijo Baño Teachers of The Career of Obstetrics of The Faculty of Medical Sciences of The University of Guayaquil-Ecuador
  • Obsta Gabriel Jiménez Teachers of The Career of Obstetrics of The Faculty of Medical Sciences of The University of Guayaquil-Ecuador

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v8.i3.2020.160

Keywords:

Obstetric Psychoprophylaxis, Labor, Benefits

Abstract [English]

The woman who is in a state of gestation tends to create fears implanted by rumors of society about labor, the main fear is the pain caused by labor. Only through a comprehensive, adequate, timely preparation will favorable results be achieved; by obstetric psychoprophylaxis. The research was carried out in two Health Centers in different regions of Ecuador. The Cerecita health center is located in the Cerecita enclosure, Guayaquil canton, Guayas province and the Cumandá health center which is located in the Cumandá canton within the Chimborazo province. This research work corresponds to a descriptive, analytical, non-experimental, cross-sectional study, with a correlational design. The sample consists of 198 pregnant women from the health centers of Cerecita (94) and Cumandá (104) Ecuador, nulliparous and multiparous who attended sessions of Obstetric Psychoprophylaxis that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results obtained were: in the age range in which the pregnant women were from the study carried out was between 14 and 19 years with a total of 95 patients, the attitude to practice psychoprophylaxis (PPO) with 102 patients performed Between 3 and 4 sessions, in the hours of labor the largest number with a total of 98 pregnant women were between 5 to 7 hours in this period, while 100 had a low pain threshold. Of the study group 159 pregnant women were eutocic births, the pregnant women of the Cumandá health center presented difficulties in attending the obstetric psychoprophylaxis sessions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aguilar Cordero, M., Vieite Ravelo, M., Padilla Lopez, C., Mur Villar, N., Gomez García, C., & Rizo Baeza, M. (2012). Perinatal results at the time of delivery of women who received the prenatal stimulation program, Hospital. Hospital Nutrition, 2102-2108.

National Constituent Assembly of Ecuador. (2008). Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador. Obtained from www.oas.org

Atencia Jara, Y., & Carhuapoma Pineda, M. (2018). UNASAM Institutional Repository. Obtained from www.repositorio.unasam.edu.pe

Campos de Aldana, M. (2010). Pain management during labor during pregnancy in a health center. Take care of yourself: Research magazine, 43. Obtained from Care: Research magazine.

Carhuapoma Hilario, A. (2017). Universidad Nacional Huancavelica. Obtenido de

www.repositorio.unh.edu.pe

García Paredes, V. (2017). Digital Institutional Repository. Obtained from

www.repositorio.unapiquitos.edu.pe.

Gomez Medina, E. (2016). Factors associated with the end of the educational sessions of obstetric psychoprophylaxis in teenage pregnant women. Obtained from the National University of San Marcos: www.cybertesis.unmsm.edu.pe

Martínez Galeano, J. (2012). Impact of the Maternal Education Program on the Mother and the Newborn. Retrieved from www.-hera.ugr.es.adrastea.ugr.es.

Méndez García Salas, M. (August 2015). Psychoprophylaxis and Complications in Labor (Thesis). Obtained from www.recursosbiblio.url.edu.g

Ministry of Public Health. (2014). Technical standards of Obstetric Psychoprophylaxis and perinatal stimulation. Recovered 2018

Ministry of Public Health. (08 of 2016). Clinical practice guide to cesarean delivery care. Retrieved on 12 of 2018

NAREA. (2017). Benefits and difficulties of obstetric psychoprophylaxis in pregnant women of the cerecita health center, Guayas -Ecuador. Cidepro.

RAMBAY (May 2019). Comparative analysis of the benefits and difficulties of Obstetric Psychoprophylaxis between the Cerecita and Cumanda health centers 2019. Guayaquil, Ecuador.

Ramírez Mattos, J. (2017). San Pedro University. Obtained from

www.repositorio.usanpedro.edu.pe

Reyes, A. (2014). Factors associated with attrition of the educational sessions of obstetric psychoprophylaxis in primigests attended at the Maternal Perinatal Institute. Recovered 2018

Rivera Orellana, K. (2016). Causes for dropping out of the Obstetric Psychoprophylaxis program in pregnant women at the Rezola de Cañete Hospital. Obtained from the University of San Martin de Porres: www.repositorioacademico.usmp.edu.pe.

Rubio Peralta, F. (2018). Norbert Wiener University. Obtained from Emergency Obstetric Psychoprophylaxis in labor of primigesta without prenatal control:

www.repositorio.uwiener.edu.pe

Saavedra Espinoza, W., & Yauris Ocrospoma, C. (July-December 2017). Norbet Wiener University. Obtained from a comparative study of maternal and perinatal benefits during the labor of patients who attended and did not attend the PPO program of the Hipólito Unanue National Hospital: www.repositorio.uwiener.edu.pe

Seguí, V. E. (Septiembre de 2013). Universidad Nacional de la Plata. Obtenido de

www.sedici.unlp.edu.ar.

Yábar Peña, M. (June 2014). Scielo Peru. Obtained from http://www.scielo.org.pe

Downloads

Published

2020-03-31

How to Cite

Morales, V. N., Nader, J. D., Rodríguez, K., Baño, C., & Jiménez, G. (2020). COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE BENEFITS AND DIFFICULTIES OF OBSTETRIC PSYCHOPROPHYLAXIS, IN PREGNANT WOMEN OF THE HEALTH CENTERS OF CUMANDÁ AND CERECITA - ECUADOR. International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH, 8(3), 297–303. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v8.i3.2020.160

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2