Scholarlink

Background <p>WHO introduced the Labour Care Guide (LCG), an evidence-based framework aimed at improving labour monitoring. As compared to the partograph, LCG shifts focus from solely documenting labour parameters to enhancing the overall quality of care through individualized, woman-centered practices.</p> Objectives <p>This study undertakes a comparative evaluation of the conventional partograph and the LCG, focusing on critical indicators including labour duration, mode of delivery, neonatal APGAR scores, and NICU admission rates.</p> Methodology <p>This Prospective Observational study was conducted over a period of 18&#xa0;months at a Tertiary Care Centre in Northern India. The sample size was 440, with 220 being allocated to each of the two groups. In Group A, labour was monitored using conventional partograph whereas in Group B, LCG was used. Comparison of mean or median between the groups was done using independent t test or Mann Whitney test.</p> Results <p>The mean duration of labour and APGAR scores at 1 and 5&#xa0;min were was similar in the two groups with comparable rates of LSCS and instrumental delivery.Statistically significant negative correlation between duration of labour and normal vaginal delivery (r = -0.45) was noted. WHO LCG reduced the average lag time for cervical dilatation at each stage (5&#xa0;cm to 9&#xa0;cm) compared to the Conventional Partograph. The mean maternal satisfaction scores were similar, with Group A reporting 7.8 and Group B 7.9 (p = 0.41).</p> Conclusion <p>WHO LCG shows significantly shorter cervical dilation time without compromising the feto-maternal outcome thereby supporting its incorporation in routine obstetric protocols.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparison of Labour Care Guide and Conventional Partograph to Assess the Impact on Labour Care and Feto-Maternal Outcome

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月27日

查看全文
  • Devyani Misra,
  • Hina Koushar,
  • Shailja Bhamri,
  • Vandana Gautam

摘要

Background

WHO introduced the Labour Care Guide (LCG), an evidence-based framework aimed at improving labour monitoring. As compared to the partograph, LCG shifts focus from solely documenting labour parameters to enhancing the overall quality of care through individualized, woman-centered practices.

Objectives

This study undertakes a comparative evaluation of the conventional partograph and the LCG, focusing on critical indicators including labour duration, mode of delivery, neonatal APGAR scores, and NICU admission rates.

Methodology

This Prospective Observational study was conducted over a period of 18 months at a Tertiary Care Centre in Northern India. The sample size was 440, with 220 being allocated to each of the two groups. In Group A, labour was monitored using conventional partograph whereas in Group B, LCG was used. Comparison of mean or median between the groups was done using independent t test or Mann Whitney test.

Results

The mean duration of labour and APGAR scores at 1 and 5 min were was similar in the two groups with comparable rates of LSCS and instrumental delivery.Statistically significant negative correlation between duration of labour and normal vaginal delivery (r = -0.45) was noted. WHO LCG reduced the average lag time for cervical dilatation at each stage (5 cm to 9 cm) compared to the Conventional Partograph. The mean maternal satisfaction scores were similar, with Group A reporting 7.8 and Group B 7.9 (p = 0.41).

Conclusion

WHO LCG shows significantly shorter cervical dilation time without compromising the feto-maternal outcome thereby supporting its incorporation in routine obstetric protocols.