Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 1 Pain intensity.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 1 Pain intensity.

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 2 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 2 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour.

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 3 Use of pharmacological analgesia.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 3 Use of pharmacological analgesia.

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 4 Caesarean section.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 4 Caesarean section.

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 5 Assisted vaginal birth.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 5 Assisted vaginal birth.

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 6 Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 6 Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes.

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 7 Spontaneous vaginal delivery.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 7 Spontaneous vaginal delivery.

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 8 Augmentation with oxytocin.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 8 Augmentation with oxytocin.

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 9 Relaxation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Acupuncture versus control, Outcome 9 Relaxation.

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 1 Pain intensity.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 1 Pain intensity.

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 2 Satisfaction with childbirth.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 2 Satisfaction with childbirth.

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 3 Use of pharmacological analgesia.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 3 Use of pharmacological analgesia.

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 4 Caesarean section.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 4 Caesarean section.

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 5 Assisted vaginal birth.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 5 Assisted vaginal birth.

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 6 Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 6 Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes.

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 7 Augmentation with oxytocin.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 7 Augmentation with oxytocin.

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 8 Length of labour.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 8 Length of labour.

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 9 Anxiety.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Acupressure versus control, Outcome 9 Anxiety.

Comparison 1. Acupuncture versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Pain intensity Show forest plot

4

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 Placebo control

2

240

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.04 [‐0.22, 0.30]

1.2 Standard care

1

90

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.14 [‐0.55, 0.28]

1.3 No treatment

1

163

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [‐1.33, ‐0.67]

2 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Placebo control

1

150

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.38 [1.78, 3.19]

2.2 Standard care

1

90

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.95, 1.22]

3 Use of pharmacological analgesia Show forest plot

5

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 Placebo control

1

208

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.58, 0.88]

3.2 Standard care

3

704

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.68 [0.56, 0.83]

3.3 Water injection

1

128

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.84 [0.54, 1.30]

4 Caesarean section Show forest plot

7

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

4.1 Placebo control

3

448

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.39 [0.62, 3.10]

4.2 Standard care

2

506

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.86 [0.47, 1.60]

4.3 No treatment

1

163

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.76 [0.35, 1.63]

4.4 Water injection

1

128

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.33 [0.37, 4.73]

5 Assisted vaginal birth Show forest plot

6

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

5.1 Placebo control

1

208

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.64 [0.27, 1.50]

5.2 Standard care

3

704

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.67 [0.46, 0.98]

5.3 No treatment

1

163

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.49 [0.18, 1.38]

5.4 Water injection

1

128

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.60 [0.47, 5.39]

6 Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes Show forest plot

4

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

6.1 Placebo control

1

208

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.32 [0.01, 7.79]

6.2 Standard care

3

706

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.60 [0.12, 2.99]

7 Spontaneous vaginal delivery Show forest plot

3

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

7.1 Placebo control

2

358

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.87, 1.14]

7.2 Standard care

1

90

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.89, 1.08]

8 Augmentation with oxytocin Show forest plot

5

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

8.1 Placebo control

2

358

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.15, 2.52]

8.2 Standard care

2

506

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.72, 1.08]

8.3 Water injection

1

128

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.16 [0.85, 1.58]

9 Relaxation Show forest plot

3

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

9.1 placebo control

1

90

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.27 [‐0.72, 0.17]

9.2 Standard care

1

90

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.51 [‐0.93, ‐0.09]

9.3 Water injection

1

128

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.20, 0.91]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Acupuncture versus control
Comparison 2. Acupressure versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Pain intensity Show forest plot

3

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 Placebo control

1

120

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.55 [‐0.92, ‐0.19]

1.2 Combined control

2

322

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.42 [‐0.65, ‐0.18]

2 Satisfaction with childbirth Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Combined control

1

211

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.80 [‐2.29, 11.89]

3 Use of pharmacological analgesia Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 Placebo control

1

75

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.54 [0.20, 1.43]

3.2 Combined control

1

212

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.94 [0.71, 1.25]

4 Caesarean section Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

4.1 Placebo control

1

120

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.24 [0.11, 0.54]

4.2 Combined control

1

212

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.22, 1.04]

5 Assisted vaginal birth Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

5.1 Combined control

1

212

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.81 [0.39, 1.67]

6 Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes Show forest plot

1

120

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6.1 Placebo control

1

120

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Augmentation with oxytocin Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

7.1 Placebo control

1

120

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.66 [0.46, 0.94]

7.2 Combined control

1

212

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.01 [0.77, 1.31]

8 Length of labour Show forest plot

2

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

8.1 Placebo control

2

195

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.06 [‐1.74, ‐0.38]

9 Anxiety Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

9.1 Placebo control

1

75

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.40 [‐2.51, ‐0.29]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 2. Acupressure versus control