amy

good luck with the doctorate - clearly a good project from the responses
so far

perhaps you should contact Leah Albers?

I am also just putting finishing touches to an edited book, which Denis
and Soo have both contributed to, and will let the list know when it's
out, as there seems a lot of interest

Chris 


-----Original Message-----
From:	A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health
research. on behalf of Amy Marowitz
Sent:	Tue 13-Feb-07 2:34 PM
To:	[log in to unmask]
Cc:	
Subject:	length of labour



I am very interested in this and hope to do my doctoral project on the
topic, though am still the in early stages of formulating my question.
There is a growing body of evidence refuting Friedman's criteria for
prolonged labor.  A few studies have been done on using the more relaxed
criteria of 4 hours without progress for arrested labor (Friedman
terminology) or the action line (I think this is Philpotts and Castle's
terminology. I am thinking of exploring the following question:  What
criteria do American midwives use to define prolonged labor?  I think
there is huge variety here, and that duration is not the only criteria
used by some (maybe many?) midwives.  I'd be most interested in any
comments from list members.  

Denis, what is your new book?  I'd like to read the chapter on length of
labor!

Amy (doctoral student and midwifery faculty at Frontier School of
Midwifery and Family Nursing)



-----Original Message-----
From: A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health
research. on behalf of Denis Walsh
Sent: Tue 2/13/2007 3:05 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: length of labour
 
Hi Chris,
Here are a few references on this. I have a chapter in my new book
published 
in April on this and think I have accessed most of the papers.
Albers L (1999) The duration of labour in healthy women. Journal of 
Perinatology 19(2):114-9

 Bailit J, Dierker L, Blanchard M, Mercer B (2005) Outcomes of women 
presenting in active versus latent phase of spontaneous labour.
Obstetrics & 
Gynaecology 105:77-79

Cardozo L, Gibb D, Studd J et al (1982) Predictive values of cervimetric

labour patterns in primigravidae. British Journal of Obstetrics & 
Gynaecology 89:33-38

Cesario S (2004) Re-evaluation of Freidman's labour curve: a pilot
study. 
Journal of  Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Neonatal Nursing 33:713-722

Gurewitsch E, Diament P, Fong J et al (2002) The labour curve of the
grand 
multipara: Does progress of labour continue to improve with additional 
childbearing? American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 186:1331-8

Lavender T, Alfirevic Z, Walkinshaw S (2006) Effects of different
partogram 
action lines on birth outcomes: a randomised controlled trial.
Obstetrics & 
Gynaecology, 108(2):295-302

Zhang J, Troendle J, Yancey M (2002) Reassessing the labour curve.
American 
Journal Of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 187:824-8.

Best wishes,
Denis
Dr Denis Walsh
Reader in Normal Birth, University of Central Lancashire
Independent Midwifery Consultant
Home address:
366 Hinckley Rd
Leicester LE3 OUT, UK
Mobile: 07905735777
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris McCourt" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 5:04 PM
Subject: length of labour


dear all

I'm interested to know whether there is any written or research evidence
on whether norms of the length of labour have changed in the recent
past. I'm aware of the impact of Friedmans work on practices in labour
wards, but am wondering whether there is anything to suggest further
trends in what is seen as a 'normal' length of labour (and by
association, whether this could be related, in either direction, to
rising intervention rates)

all ideas on relevant evidence sources, or personal/professional
observations welcome

Chris