Literature DB >> 23281901

Characteristics, interventions, and outcomes of women who used a birthing pool: a prospective observational study.

Ethel E Burns1, Mary G Boulton, Elizabeth Cluett, Victoria R Cornelius, Lesley A Smith.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Birthing pools are integrated into maternity care in the United Kingdom and are a popular care option for women in midwifery-led units and at home. The objective of this study was to describe and compare maternal characteristics, intrapartum events, interventions, and maternal and neonatal outcomes by planned place of birth for women who used a birthing pool.
METHODS: A total of 8,924 women at low risk of childbirth complications were recruited from care settings in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Descriptive analysis was performed.
RESULTS: Overall, 7,915 (88.9%) women had a spontaneous birth (5,192, 58.3% water births), of whom 4,953 (55.5%) were nulliparas. Fewer nulliparas whose planned place of birth was the community (freestanding midwifery unit or home) had labor augmentation by artificial membrane rupture (149, 11.3% [95% CI: 9.6-13.1]), compared with an alongside midwifery unit (271, 22.7% [95% CI: 20.3-25.2]), or obstetric unit (639, 26.3% [95% CI: 24.5-28.1]). Results were similar for epidural analgesia and episiotomy. More community nulliparas had spontaneous birth (1,172, 88.9% [95% CI: 87.1-90.6]), compared with birth in an alongside midwifery unit (942, 79% [95% CI: 76.6-81.3]) and obstetric unit (1,923, 79.2% [95% CI: 77.5-80.8]); and fewer required hospital transfer (265, 20% [95% CI: 17-22.2]) compared with those in an alongside midwifery unit (370, 31% [95% CI: 28.3-33.7]). Results for multiparas and newborns were similar across care settings. Twenty babies had an umbilical cord snap, 18 (90%) of which occurred during water birth.
CONCLUSIONS: Birthing pool use was associated with a high frequency of spontaneous birth, particularly among nulliparas. Findings revealed differences in midwifery practice between obstetric units, alongside midwifery units, and the community, which may affect outcomes, particularly for nulliparas. No evidence was found for a difference across care settings in interventions or outcomes in multiparas or in outcomes for newborns. During water birth, it is important to prevent undue traction on the cord as the baby is guided to the surface.
© 2012, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation © 2012, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23281901     DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2012.00548.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Birth        ISSN: 0730-7659            Impact factor:   3.689


  14 in total

1.  Birth, bath, and beyond: the science and safety of water immersion during labor and birth.

Authors:  Barbara Harper
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2014

2.  Predictors of obstetric anal sphincter injury during waterbirth: a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Ethel Burns; Laura Price; Jane Carpenter; Lesley Smith
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-12-07       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Maternal and neonatal outcomes following waterbirth: a cohort study of 17 530 waterbirths and 17 530 propensity score-matched land births.

Authors:  M L Bovbjerg; M Cheyney; A B Caughey
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 7.331

4.  Quality of care provided in two Scottish rural community maternity units: a retrospective case review.

Authors:  Sara Denham; Tracy Humphrey; Ruth Taylor
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Getting into the water: a prospective observational study of water immersion for labour and birth at a New Zealand District Health Board.

Authors:  Robyn M Maude; Mikyung Kim
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 3.007

Review 6.  Freestanding Midwife-Led Units: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Grażyna Bączek; Urszula Tataj-Puzyna; Dorota Sys; Barbara Baranowska
Journal:  Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res       Date:  2020-04-18

7.  Factors influencing the use of birth pools in the United Kingdom: Perspectives of women, midwives and medical staff.

Authors:  Sarah Milosevic; Sue Channon; Billie Hunter; Mary Nolan; Jacqueline Hughes; Christian Barlow; Rebecca Milton; Julia Sanders
Journal:  Midwifery       Date:  2019-10-05       Impact factor: 2.372

Review 8.  Immersion in water during labour and birth.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Cluett; Ethel Burns; Anna Cuthbert
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-05-16

9.  Immersion in water for pain relief and the risk of intrapartum transfer among low risk nulliparous women: secondary analysis of the Birthplace national prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Mirjam Lukasse; Rachel Rowe; John Townend; Marian Knight; Jennifer Hollowell
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-02-06       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  Labouring women who used a birthing pool in obstetric units in Italy: prospective observational study.

Authors:  Jane Henderson; Ethel E Burns; Anna L Regalia; Giovanna Casarico; Mary G Boulton; Lesley A Smith
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 3.007

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.