Abstract
Background Continuous labour support is widely acknowledged for potentially enhancing maternal and neonatal outcomes and smoothing the labour process. However, existing literature lacks a comprehensive analysis of the optimal characteristics of labour companions, particularly in comparing the effects of trained versus untrained and familiar versus unfamiliar labour companions across diverse geographical regions and pre and post-millennial. This meta-analysis addresses these research gaps by providing insights into the most influential aspects of continuous labour support.
Methodology A thorough search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, Research4Life, and Cochrane Library was conducted. Study selection utilised the semi-automated tool Rayyan. The Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB2) tool and funnel plots gauged the risk of bias. Statistical analysis employed RevMan 5.4, using Mantel-Haenszel statistics and random effects models to calculate risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses were performed for different characteristics, including familiarity, training, temporal associations, and geographical locations. The study was registered in INPLASY. (Registration number: INPLASY202410003)
Results Thirty-five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from 5,346 studies. The meta-analysis highlighted significant positive effects of continuous labour support across various outcomes. There was a substantial improvement in the 5-minute APGAR score < 7, with an effect size of 1.52 (95% CI 1.05, 2.20). Familiar labour companions showed a higher effect size in reducing tocophobia, 1.73 (95% CI 1.49, 2.42), compared to unfamiliar companions, 1.34 (95% CI 1.14, 1.58). Differences were noted between trained and untrained companions, favouring untrained companions in reducing tocophobia and the cesarean section rate. Studies conducted after 2000 had a more significant impact on decreasing labour duration. Geographical variations indicated more pronounced effects in Asia and Africa than in Europe.
Discussion and Conclusion The meta-analysis underscores the benefits of labour companionship, particularly in facilitating the parturient experience of spontaneous labour. The impact is more pronounced in specific subgroups, such as familiar companions, untrained companions, recent studies, and studies conducted in Asia and Africa. The study recommends integrating labour companionship into obstetric care pending further research, standardisation, and awareness initiatives to enhance maternal and neonatal outcomes. Challenges such as study heterogeneity, insufficient data on companion training, and temporal outcome variations are acknowledged.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
N/A
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
