Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19370552›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009

Immersion in water in labour and birth.

Elizabeth R Cluett, Ethel Burns

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05175599 (Hospital Waterbirth), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
12.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05175599 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Hospital Waterbirth: A Pilot Randomized Control Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorWake Forest University Health SciencesRan2022 to 2023Enrolled186ConditionsPregnancy RelatedArmsWater Birth
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 187 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Parenteral opioids for maternal pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Epidural versus non-epidural or no analgesia for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Immersion in water during labour and birth.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Relaxation techniques for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  5. Massage, reflexology and other manual methods for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Hypnosis for pain management during labour and childbirth.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  8. Maternal positions and mobility during first stage labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  9. Inhaled analgesia for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  10. Non-opioid drugs for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  11. Local anaesthetic nerve block for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  12. Pain management for women in labour: an overview of systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Immersion in water in labour and birth.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009
    Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Waterbirth: current knowledge and medico-legal issues.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2022
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth R CluettSchool of Health Sciences , University of Southampton, Nightingale Building (67), Highfield, Southampton, Hants, UK, SO17 1BJ. e.cluett@soton.ac.uk
Ethel Burns
Oxford Brookes University · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

Department of Health 10/4001/02Department of Health SRP/10/4000/02Department of Health SRP/10/4001/02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnthusiasts suggest that labouring in water and waterbirth increase maternal relaxation, reduce analgesia requirements and promote a midwifery model of care. Sceptics cite the possibility of neonatal water inhalation and maternal/neonatal infection.

objectivesTo assess the evidence from randomised controlled trials about immersion in water during labour and waterbirth on maternal, fetal, neonatal and caregiver outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (October 2008). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing any bath tub/pool with no immersion during labour and/or birth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed trial eligibility and quality and extracted data independently. One review author entered data and another checked for accuracy. MAIN

resultsThis review includes 11 trials (3146 women); eight related to the first stage of labour, one to the first and second stages, one to early versus late immersion in the first stage of labour, and another to the second stage. We identified no trials evaluating different baths/pools, or the management of third stage of labour.Results for the first stage of labour showed there was a significant reduction in the epidural/spinal/paracervical analgesia/anaesthesia rate amongst women allocated to water immersion compared to controls (478/1254 versus 529/1245; odds ratio (OR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 0.98, six trials). There was no difference in assisted vaginal deliveries (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.06, seven trials), caesarean sections (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.75, eight trials), perineal trauma or maternal infection. There were no differences for Apgar score less than seven at five minutes (OR 1.59, 95% CI 0.63 to 4.01, five trials), neonatal unit admissions (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.62, three trials), or neonatal infection rates (OR 2.01, 95% CI 0.50 to 8.07, five trials).A lack of data for some comparisons prevented robust conclusions. Further research is needed. AUTHORS'

conclusionsEvidence suggests that water immersion during the first stage of labour reduces the use of epidural/spinal analgesia. There is limited information for other outcomes related to water use during the first and second stages of labour, due to intervention and outcome variability. There is no evidence of increased adverse effects to the fetus/neonate or woman from labouring in water or waterbirth. The fact that use of water immersion in labour and birth is now a widely available care option for women threatens the feasibility of a large, multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Indexed as

ImmersionLabor Stage, FirstLabor Stage, SecondWaterAnalgesia, ObstetricalFemaleHumansNatural ChildbirthPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicWater

Identifiers

PMID19370552
PMCPMC3982045
OpenAlexW4211079343

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.