2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.hsr.2022.100013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Challenges to interdisciplinary consensus for evidence-based practice with water immersion for labor and birth: A systematic review of scholarly references

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These conveyed strict exclusion criteria for those who could access a birthing pool, but with little to no underpinning evidence and were unduly risk focused, starkly different to those policies/guidelines written for pharmacological pain relief options. These issues were reflected in a systematic review of scholarly references exploring publications authored by multi-professionals that focused on water immersion for childbirth [ 60 ]. For example, authors of obstetric or neonatology water immersion publications were less likely to reference midwives and nurses research in this area, and more, those from the latter were more likely to cite commentaries and case studies, rather than primary research with robust research methodologies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These conveyed strict exclusion criteria for those who could access a birthing pool, but with little to no underpinning evidence and were unduly risk focused, starkly different to those policies/guidelines written for pharmacological pain relief options. These issues were reflected in a systematic review of scholarly references exploring publications authored by multi-professionals that focused on water immersion for childbirth [ 60 ]. For example, authors of obstetric or neonatology water immersion publications were less likely to reference midwives and nurses research in this area, and more, those from the latter were more likely to cite commentaries and case studies, rather than primary research with robust research methodologies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, authors of obstetric or neonatology water immersion publications were less likely to reference midwives and nurses research in this area, and more, those from the latter were more likely to cite commentaries and case studies, rather than primary research with robust research methodologies. Accordingly, the authors found barriers to the diffusion of midwifery or nursing water immersion research into obstetrics or neonatology [ 60 ], which may subsequently limit the composition of evidence that inform water policies/guidelines as we have found in this review.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Considering the current motivation to reduce unnecessary interventions in childbirth, it is very important to better understand the effectiveness and the functions of the water birth process in order to reduce intervention and increase physiological childbirth rate 4. As for the conflicting views regarding the advantages and disadvantages of water birth interventions, the may be due to the lack of publication of interdisciplinary evidence in this regard 5…”
Section: Commentarymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is becoming a popular choice in contemporary obstetrics because it moves the birthing women from a passive role compliant of authority to an active participant in the whole event, giving a sense of achievement and satisfaction. Both the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Nurse-Midwives support water immersion in a healthy term "uncomplicated pregnancies" 3 . The 2018 Cochrane review states moderate-to low-quality evidence concerning water immersion during the first stage of labor on the mode of birth (spontaneous, instrumental and cesarean section) and no evidence for adverse neonatal outcomes 4 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%