Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33228569›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020

Factors influencing water immersion during labour: qualitative case studies of six maternity units in the United Kingdom.

Sarah Milosevic, Susan Channon, Jacqueline Hughes, Billie Hunter, Mary Nolan, Rebecca Milton, Julia Sanders

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sarah MilosevicCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, Wales, CF14 4YS. MilosevicS@cardiff.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1973-8286
Susan ChannonCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, Wales, CF14 4YS.
Jacqueline HughesCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, Wales, CF14 4YS.
Billie HunterSchool of Healthcare Sciences, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Eastgate House, 35-43 Newport Road, Cardiff, Wales, CF24 0AB.
Mary NolanCollege of Health, Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Worcester, Henwick Grove, Worcester, England, WR2 6AJ.
Rebecca MiltonCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff, Wales, CF14 4YS.
Julia SandersSchool of Healthcare Sciences, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Heath Park Campus, Cardiff, Wales, CF14 4XN.

Funding

Health Technology Assessment Programme 16/149/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWater immersion during labour can provide benefits including reduced need for regional analgesia and a shorter labour. However, in the United Kingdom a minority of women use a pool for labour or birth, with pool use particularly uncommon in obstetric-led settings. Maternity unit culture has been identified as an important influence on pool use, but this and other possible factors have not been explored in-depth. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify factors influencing pool use through qualitative case studies of three obstetric units and three midwifery units in the UK.

methodsCase study units with a range of waterbirth rates and representing geographically diverse locations were selected. Data collection methods comprised semi-structured interviews, collation of service documentation and public-facing information, and observations of the unit environment. There were 111 interview participants, purposively sampled to include midwives, postnatal women, obstetricians, neonatologists, midwifery support workers and doulas. A framework approach was used to analyse all case study data.

resultsObstetric unit culture was a key factor restricting pool use. We found substantial differences between obstetric and midwifery units in terms of equipment and resources, staff attitudes and confidence, senior staff support and women's awareness of water immersion. Generic factors influencing use of pools across all units included limited access to waterbirth training, sociodemographic differences in desire for pool use and issues using waterproof fetal monitoring equipment.

conclusionsCase study findings provide new insights into the influence of maternity unit culture on waterbirth rates. Access to pool use could be improved through midwives based in obstetric units having more experience of waterbirth, providing obstetricians and neonatologists with information on the practicalities of pool use and improving accessibility of antenatal information. In terms of resources, recommendations include increasing pool provision, ensuring birth room allocation maximises the use of unit resources, and providing pool room environments that are acceptable to midwives.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelImmersionLabor, ObstetricNatural ChildbirthBirthing CentersFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMidwiferyPregnancyPrenatal CareQualitative ResearchUnited KingdomCase studiesMidwiferyObstetricsQualitative researchWater birth

Identifiers

PMID33228569
PMCPMC7682119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.