The Waterbirth Project: São Bernardo Hospital experience

Effects of Water Immersion Versus Epidural as Analgesic Methods during Labor among Low-Risk Women: A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Adequate pain relief during childbirth is a very important issue for women and healthcare providers. This study investigates the effects on maternal and neonatal outcomes of two analgesic methods during labor: water immersion and epidural analgesia.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational cohort study at a first-level hospital, in Spain, from 2009 to 2019, 1134 women, low-risk singleton and at term pregnancy, were selected. Among them, 567 women used water immersion; 567 women used epidural analgesia for pain control. Maternal outcomes included mode of birth and perineum condition. Neonatal outcomes included 5 min Apgar score, umbilical cord arterial pH, and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit admissions. Chi-square tests and Mann-Whitney U tests, together with their effect sizes (Cramer's V, odds ratio, and Cohen's d) were used to test the main hypotheses.

RESULTS

Spontaneous vaginal birth was almost 17 times more likely in the water immersion group (OR = 16.866 [6.540, 43.480], p < 0.001), whereas the odds of having a cesarean birth were almost 40 times higher in the epidural group (OR = 39.346 [3.610, 429.120], p < 0.001). The odds of having an intact perineum were more than two times higher for the water immersion group (OR = 2.606 [1.290, 5.250], p = 0.007), whereas having an episiotomy was more than eight times more likely for the epidural group (OR = 8.307 [2.800, 24.610], p < 0.001). Newborns in the water immersion group showed a better 5 min Apgar score and umbilical cord arterial pH and lower rates in admissions at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.

CONCLUSIONS

Women choosing water immersion as an analgesic method were no more likely to experience adverse outcomes and presented better results than women choosing epidural analgesia.

Comparative Analysis of Therapeutic Showers and Bathtubs for Pain Management and Labor Outcomes-A Retrospective Cohort Study

Hydrotherapy, including the use of therapeutic showers and bathtubs, has been studied for its potential benefits in labor pain management. Previous research has indicated that hydrotherapy can alleviate pain, but comparative studies between therapeutic showers and bathtubs are scarce. Objective: This study aims to compare the effects of therapeutic showers and bathtubs on pain perception, labor duration, use of epidural analgesia, and maternal and neonatal outcomes during labor. Methods: A total of 124 pregnant women were included in this study. Participants were divided into two groups: those who used a therapeutic shower and those who used a bathtub during labor. Pain levels were measured using a visual analog scale (VAS). Labor duration, use of epidural analgesia, types of delivery, maternal outcomes (postpartum hemorrhage, perineal status, maternal hypotension, fever, and breastfeeding), and neonatal outcomes (APGAR scores, fetal heart rate, complications, and neonatal unit admissions) were recorded and analyzed. Results: Both the therapeutic shower and the bathtub effectively reduced pain perception, with the bathtub showing a greater reduction in VAS scores. The therapeutic shower group experienced a significantly shorter labor duration compared to the bathtub group. The majority of participants in both groups did not require epidural analgesia, with no significant differences between the groups. There were no significant differences in the types of delivery. Maternal outcomes indicated a lower incidence of perineal tears and episiotomies in the therapeutic shower group. Neonatal outcomes, including APGAR scores and fetal heart rate, were similar between the groups, with no significant differences in complications or neonatal unit admissions. Conclusions: Both therapeutic showers and bathtubs are effective for pain relief during labor, with the bathtub showing a higher reduction in pain intensity. The therapeutic shower is associated with a shorter labor duration and a lower incidence of perineal tears and episiotomies. Both methods are safe for neonatal well-being, making hydrotherapy a viable non-pharmacological option for pain management in labor. However, the therapeutic shower may offer additional benefits in terms of labor duration and maternal outcomes.

Hydrotherapy in Pain Management in Pregnant Women: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Background: the benefits of water are significant during the birth process. Improved maternal experience of labor, less use of epidurals, better pain management, shorter labor, and a greater sense of control are observed during the birth process. Objective: This report aims to determine the benefits of hydrotherapy in clinical childbirth approaches and its applicability in pain control. Methods: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials selected from various databases with no publication date limits was conducted, comparing groups that did not use hydrotherapy with groups that did during labor. Results: Seven articles met the inclusion criteria, with five articles using hot water immersion and two using hot water shower as hydrotherapy treatments. This study identified 840 participants, with the intervention groups including 417 term pregnant women and the control groups including 423 pregnant women. The effect size of hydrotherapy on pain was calculated using the visual analog scale in five articles and analgesic use in the other two articles. Hydrotherapy significantly reduced pain during labor with a mean difference of -0.97 (95% CI: -1.91 to -0.03; I2 = 97.32%, p < 0.001). The duration of the first stage of labor was not significantly affected, with a mean difference of -0.17 h (95% CI: -0.55 to 0.21; I2 = 56.75%, p = 0.059). Additionally, hydrotherapy did not significantly impact the newborns' Apgar scores at 5 min, with a mean difference of 0.18 (95% CI: -0.48 to 0.85; I2 = 2.15%, p = 0.939). Conclusions: Hydrotherapy is beneficial for pain control in the first stage of labor and does not increase its duration or negatively affect the Apgar score of newborns.

Effects of Hydrotherapy on the Management of Childbirth and Its Outcomes-A Retrospective Cohort Study

The use of hydrotherapy during childbirth has gained relevance due to the demand for natural childbirth and greater respect for the woman's choice. Studies have shown benefits such as less use of epidural analgesia, increased ability to cope with pain, shorter labor, and a better overall birth experience.

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this study was to generate further evidence on maternal and birth outcomes associated with the use of hydrotherapy during labor, specifically aiming to describe the effects of water immersion during all stages of labor (first, second, and third) on women.

METHODOLOGY

A retrospective cohort study was carried out on a random sample of women who gave birth at the Costa del Sol Hospital between January 2010 and December 2020. The calculated sample size was 377 women and the data were extracted from their partograms. After data extraction, two groups were formed: one group used hydrotherapy during childbirth (n = 124), while the other group included women who did not use hydrotherapy during the childbirth process (n = 253).

RESULTS

The results highlight significant differences in pain perception, analgesia use, types of labor, and delivery times between the two groups. Women who did not use hydrotherapy reported higher pain perception, with a median (IQR) of 8 (7-9) on a numerical scale, compared to a median (IQR) of 6 (5-7) for the hydrotherapy group. Furthermore, the group without hydrotherapy required epidural analgesia in 40% of cases, while in the hydrotherapy group, it was only necessary in 20%. In terms of the type of delivery, the hydrotherapy group had more spontaneous vaginal deliveries compared to the non-hydrotherapy group, which had more operative vaginal deliveries. The overall duration of labor was longer in the hydrotherapy group, especially in women who arrived at the hospital late in labor.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrotherapy is associated with a longer time to delivery. Women with a higher pain tolerance tend to opt for hydrotherapy instead of epidural analgesia.

Systematic Reviews and Synthesis without Meta-Analysis on Hydrotherapy for Pain Control in Labor

BACKGROUND

Although there is scientific evidence regarding the use of water immersion during labor, this evidence is primarily focused on the first stage of labor. There is limited scientific evidence on water immersion during the second stage of labor.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to conduct a comprehensive systematic review and synthesis of contemporary evidence related to water birth, with a specific focus on the second stage of labor.

METHODS

A systematic review of the scientific literature published between January 2018 and October 2023 was carried out. A synthesis of the results was conducted following the Synthesis without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were utilized as information sources. The search strategy was designed using the keywords "immersion" and "parturition", along with their relevant synonyms. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies employing randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, and quantitative and qualitative approaches focusing on pregnant women undergoing water immersion at any stage of the labor process.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were selected: two systematic reviews (one quantitative and one qualitative), five cohort studies, one case-control study, one cross-sectional observational study, and two qualitative studies. A thorough assessment of the methodology was performed using several specific tools: the Cochrane RoB 2 (Risk of Bias 2) tool for systematic reviews, JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research for qualitative studies, STROBE for observational descriptive studies, and CASPe for qualitative studies. The results provided fundamental insights that will contribute to conceptual standardization regarding the effects of water birth on maternal and fetal health. Additionally, a synthesis of the results was performed concerning types of delivery, analgesia use, pain perception, and maternal satisfaction with the water birth experience.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we conclude that the results regarding delivery types, labor durations, and analgesia use found in the literature, along with statistically significant maternal/fetal effects, are crucial for making recommendations regarding the use of water during labor in any of its stages if the woman desires it safely.

Safety and Effect of the Use of Hydrotherapy during Labour: A Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Hydrotherapy is a technique used for pain management during labour, but its safety for both the mother and foetus remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

The main aim of this study is to determine whether the use of hydrotherapy in the first stage of labour is safe for both the mother and newborn.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted to collect data from the partogram, maternal and neonatal history.

RESULTS

A total of 377 women who gave birth at the Costa del Sol Hospital in Malaga between January 2010 and December 2020 were randomly selected. They were divided into a control group (253 women) and an intervention group (124 women) that used hydrotherapy in the first stage of labour. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of age, history of previous miscarriages, type of delivery, or newborn weight. The results showed that most women who opted for hydrotherapy were nulliparous, and the use of hydrotherapy during labour was safe for both the mother and foetus. There were no significant differences in the variables of maternal arterial hypotension, postpartum haemorrhage, postpartum maternal fever, foetal complications, neonatal admission, 1 and 5 min Apgar scores, umbilical arterial or venous pH, or foetal cardiotocographic recording. However, there was a significant difference (p = 0.005) in the rate of breastfeeding among mothers who opted for hydrotherapy (96% vs. 85.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of hydrotherapy during the first stage of labour is safe and is associated with increased breastfeeding rates compared to conventional delivery.

Factors Associated With Normal Physiologic Birth for Women Who Labor In Water: A Secondary Analysis of A Prospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Research to understand factors associated with normal physiologic birth (unassisted vaginal birth, spontaneous labor onset without epidural analgesia, spinal, or general anesthetic, without episiotomy) is required. Laboring and/or giving birth in water has been shown to be associated with a high proportion of physiologic birth but with little understanding of factors that may influence this outcome. This study explored factors associated with normal physiologic birth for women who labored in water.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of a UK-based prospective observational study of 8064 women at low risk of childbirth complications who labored in water. Consecutive women were recruited from birth settings in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Planned place of birth, maternal characteristics, intrapartum events, and maternal and neonatal outcomes were measured. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression modelling explored factors associated with normal physiologic birth.

RESULTS

In total, 5758 (71.4%) of women who labored in water had a normal physiologic birth. Planned birth in the community (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.58; 95% CI, 2.22-2.99) or at an alongside midwifery unit (aOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.04-1.41) was positively associated with normal physiologic birth compared with planned birth in an obstetric unit. Duration of second stage (aOR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.62-0.70), duration in the pool [aOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.96), and birth weight of the neonate (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65-0.85) were negatively associated with normal physiologic birth. Parity was not associated with normal physiologic birth in multivariate analyses.

DISCUSSION

Our findings largely reflected wider research, both in and out of water. We found midwifery-led birth settings may increase the likelihood of normal physiologic birth among healthy women who labor in water, irrespective of parity. This association supports growing evidence demonstrating the importance of planned place of birth on reducing intervention rates and adds to research on labor and birth in water.

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

OBJECTIVE

Investigate maternal and neonatal outcomes following waterbirth.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study, with propensity score matching to address confounding.

SETTING

Community births, United States.

SAMPLE

Medical records-based registry data from low-risk births were used to create waterbirth and land birth groups (n = 17 530 each), propensity score-matched on >80 demographic and pregnancy risk covariables.

METHODS

Logistic regression models compared outcomes between the matched waterbirth and land birth groups.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Maternal: immediate postpartum transfer to a hospital, any genital tract trauma, severe (3rd/4th degree) trauma, haemorrhage >1000 mL, diagnosed haemorrhage regardless of estimated blood loss, uterine infection, uterine infection requiring hospitalisation, any hospitalisation in the first 6 weeks. Neonatal: umbilical cord avulsion; immediate neonatal transfer to a hospital; respiratory distress syndrome; any hospitalisation, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, or neonatal infection in the first 6 weeks; and neonatal death.

RESULTS

Waterbirth was associated with improved or no difference in outcomes for most measures, including neonatal death (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-1.0), and maternal or neonatal hospitalisation in the first 6 weeks (aOR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.92 and aOR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-0.99, respectively). Increased morbidity in the waterbirth group was observed for two outcomes only: uterine infection (aOR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05-1.48) (but not hospitalisation for infection) and umbilical cord avulsion (aOR 1.57, 95% CI 1.37-1.82). Our results are concordant with other studies: waterbirth is neither as harmful as some current guidelines suggest, nor as benign as some proponents claim.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

New study demonstrates #waterbirth is neither as harmful as some current guidelines suggest, nor as benign as some proponents claim. @TheUpliftLab @BovbjergMarit @31415926abc @NICHD_NIH.

Sexuality and childbirth: a qualitative analysis of women who had a waterbirth

Waterbirth is associated with a less painful childbirth, enhanced couples' intimacy, and positive feelings toward women's bodies and sexuality. In a qualitative, descriptive case study involving 21 participants, we examined the sexual experiences-during childbirth and postpartum-of women who had a waterbirth in a hospital environment. Women discussed their sexuality in the intrapartum and postpartum period after having a waterbirth in public or private hospitals. Two main themes were developed from the data analysis: 'women's sexual pleasure during waterbirth' and 'sexuality after childbirth'. Experiences included transcendence during waterbirth, a feeling that it represented a unique experience, and couples' more positive feelings about intimacy. The shared representations of women suggest that waterbirth can be a calming, joyful event for couples. During this process, they felt that it was a loving, shared event. In addition, after childbirth women experienced positive feelings toward their bodies and sexuality (including orgasm), as well as closer intimacy with their partners.

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

Abstract 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.