Throwing the baby out with the spa water?

Costa, De; M, Caroline

doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb06595.x

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There appears an increasing dichotomy between obstetricians and the women that we care for, with consumer perceptions that the former are keen to 'over medicalise' both labour and birth (11) . The "medicalisation" of birth has diminished women's satisfaction with their experience (24) , and in recent times, there has been a substantial increase in the application of a range of practices to initiate, accelerate, regulate and monitor the physiological process of labour, with the aim of improving outcomes for women and babies (1) . Certainly, caesarean section and induction rates continue to rise (25) without a concomitant reduction in perinatal mortality and morbidity, perhaps because women under hospital care have increasing numbers of medical comorbidities (12) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taking the plunge: Water immersion for labour and birth amongst women with moderate obstetric risk factors: A prospective cohort study

Seed

Kearney

Weaver

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study investigated maternal and fetal outcomes following warm water immersion (WWI) and/or waterbirth compared with land birth for women with moderate obstetric risk factors. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Maternity hospital, Australia, 2019-2020 Population: 1665 participants, some with ‘risk factors’ for adverse perinatal outcomes requiring continuous electronic fetal monitoring (CEFM) during labour. Method: Multivariate logistical regressions were used to determine the odds of neonatal and maternal outcome measures between three groups: waterbirth, WWI and land birth Main outcome measures: Neonatal morbidity and mortality, including neonatal unit admission (NNU). Maternal clinical outcome measures, including mode of birth, perineal injury, postpartum haemorrhage, length of labour and morbidity. Results: NNU admissions for a suspected infectious condition were significantly higher in the land birth group (p=0.035). After accounting for labour duration, epidural use, previous birth mode, and labour onset, no significant difference was detected between land births and WWI/water births in the odds of NNU admission (p=0.200). No babies were admitted to NNU with signs of water inhalation or drowning. Women birthing on land had a higher mean blood loss (p=0.036) and were more likely to be febrile (2% v 0%; p=0.007); Obstetric anal sphincter injury was similar between groups. Pharmacological analgesia use was lower in the WB/WWI group (p<0.001). There was 1 cord avulsion in the waterbirth group (0.41%). Mode of birth was similar between groups (p=0.697). Conclusion: Despite moderate obstetric risk factors such as oxytocin administration and induction of labour; maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar between groups.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%