A comparative study between the pioneer cohort of waterbirths and conventional vaginal deliveries in an obstetrician-led unit in Singapore

Lim, Karen; Tong, Pearl; Chong, Yap Seng

doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2016.04.012

Cited by 23 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to prior research, 2,[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]21,22 there was no difference in the type or severity of perineal lacerations. Additionally, although the increase in maternal satisfaction previously Abbreviations: IV, intravenous; NE, not estimable.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 85%

“…28 Other studies have demonstrated no significant difference in neonatal infection rates, 11,12,29 Apgar scores, 11,[14][15][16][17][18][19]21,22,29,30 or neonatal intensive care unit admission rates. 11,12,[17][18][19]30 Water immersion for labor and birth is endorsed by professional midwifery organizations based on current available evidence of benefits and risks. 3,9 Conversely, in 2014, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) released a joint statement in which they recommended that waterbirth not be offered outside the scope of research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Outcomes of Waterbirth in a US Hospital‐Based Midwifery Practice: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Water Immersion During Labor and Birth

Neiman

Austin

Tan

et al. 2019

J Midwife Womens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Although the safety of water immersion during labor is largely supported by evidence from research, the risks to women and neonates during waterbirth are not well established. The purpose of this study was to generate evidence regarding maternal and neonatal outcomes related to water immersion in labor and during birth. Methods A retrospective cohort study included a convenience sample of women receiving prenatal care at a nurse‐midwifery practice. Participants were categorized into 3 groups: 1) waterbirth, 2) water labor, or 3) neither. Participant characteristics, maternal outcomes, and newborn outcomes were collected at time of birth and health record abstraction. At the 6‐week postpartum visit, another maternal outcome, satisfaction with birth, was measured using the Care in Obstetrics: Measure for Testing Satisfaction (COMFORTS) scale. Analysis included effect size, descriptive statistics (sample characteristics), and maternal and neonatal group differences (analysis of variance and chi‐square) with a significance level of P < .05. Results Women in the waterbirth (n = 58), water labor (n = 61), and neither (n = 111) groups were primarily white, married, and college educated and did not differ by age or education. Women in the waterbirth group were more likely to be multiparous. Nulliparous women who had a waterbirth had a significantly shorter second stage of labor than nulliparous women who did not have a waterbirth (P = .03). The most commonly cited reasons for discontinuation of hydrotherapy were maternal choice (42.6%) and need for pain medication (29.5%). Significantly more women in the waterbirth group experienced a postpartum hemorrhage, compared with water labor or neither (n = 5, n = 3, n = 1, respectively; P = .045); there was no difference in related clinical measures. Neonatal outcomes were not significantly different. Maternal satisfaction was high across all groups. Discussion The results of this study suggest that waterbirth, attended by qualified intrapartum care providers in hospital settings in the United States, is a reasonable option for low‐risk women and their neonates.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 85%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of Waterbirth in a US Hospital‐Based Midwifery Practice: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Water Immersion During Labor and Birth

Neiman

Austin

Tan

et al. 2019

J Midwife Womens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies, describe different routines, with women delivering placenta in water (30,86) and women leaving the tub before delivering the placenta (60,87). A difficulty in estimating blood loss is another reason for leaving the tub.…”

Section: The Third Stage Of Labor In Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing the waters — A cross-sectional survey of views about waterbirth among Swedish health professionals

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In both groups, there were no third-or fourth-degree lacerations, but the women from the control group underwent more episiotomies, 63.6% versus 0.85% (p<0.01). 27 A question that should be discussed is the perineal laceration classification. There are plenty of individual variations on anatomic structures of the perineal-vulvar region, such as subcutaneous and muscular tissue depth, tonality, and the presence of local bleeding, which can complicate the diagnosis.…”

Section: Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perineal outcomes and its associated variables of water births versus non-water births: a cross-sectional study

Camargo

Varela

Ferreira

et al. 2019

Rev. Bras. Saude Mater. Infant.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: to describe the perineal outcomes of women who had delivered in water and out of water. Methods: a cross-sectional and quantitative study developed in a public hospital in Setúbal, Portugal. The population was of women who participated in the "Water Birth Project" in the period from 2011 to 2014, which gave birth in water and out of water. 104 women were selected according to established inclusion criteria. The groups were compared according to the following variables: demographics, obstetric information, delivery care and perineal outcomes. The data were analyzed in the Stata(r) software, with descriptive and bivariate statistics (chi-square and Fisher's test). Results: the medical records of 73 women who gave birth in water and 31 women who gave birth out of water were studied. Water deliveries were significantly associated with fewer perineal lacerations, lower rates of episiotomy, and shorter delivery time. Conclusions: the results of the study suggest that childbirth in water has a protective effect against severe third or fourth degree perineal tears, during fetal expulsion in water.

show abstract

A comparative study between the pioneer cohort of waterbirths and conventional vaginal deliveries in an obstetrician-led unit in Singapore

Abstract: Waterbirth at our centre does not appear to be associated with an increased incidence of adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes. The results of this study supported waterbirth as a birthing option to groups of low-risk women in an obstetrician-led setting with good midwifery support.

Cited by 23 publications

References 14 publications

Outcomes of Waterbirth in a US Hospital‐Based Midwifery Practice: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Water Immersion During Labor and Birth

Outcomes of Waterbirth in a US Hospital‐Based Midwifery Practice: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Water Immersion During Labor and Birth

Testing the waters — A cross-sectional survey of views about waterbirth among Swedish health professionals

Perineal outcomes and its associated variables of water births versus non-water births: a cross-sectional study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About