Cluett Elizabeth R, Burns Ethel
School of Health Sciences , University of Southampton, Nightingale Building (67), Highfield, Southampton, Hants, UK, SO17 1BJ.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Apr 15(2):CD000111. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000111.pub3.
Enthusiasts 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.
To assess the evidence from randomised controlled trials about immersion in water during labour and waterbirth on maternal, fetal, neonatal and caregiver outcomes.
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (October 2008).
Randomised controlled trials comparing any bath tub/pool with no immersion during labour and/or birth.
We assessed trial eligibility and quality and extracted data independently. One review author entered data and another checked for accuracy.
This 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' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence 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.
支持者认为水中分娩能使产妇更放松,减少镇痛需求,并促进助产护理模式。怀疑者则指出存在新生儿吸入羊水及产妇/新生儿感染的可能性。
评估随机对照试验中关于分娩期间水中浸泡及水中分娩对产妇、胎儿、新生儿和护理人员结局影响的证据。
我们检索了Cochrane妊娠与分娩组试验注册库(2008年10月)。
比较任何浴缸/水池与分娩和/或分娩期间不浸泡的随机对照试验。
我们独立评估试验的合格性和质量并提取数据。一位综述作者录入数据,另一位检查准确性。
本综述纳入11项试验(3146名女性);8项与第一产程相关,1项与第一和第二产程相关,1项与第一产程早期与晚期浸泡相关,另一项与第二产程相关。我们未发现评估不同浴缸/水池或第三产程管理的试验。第一产程的结果显示,与对照组相比,分配到水中浸泡的女性硬膜外/脊髓/宫颈旁镇痛/麻醉率显著降低(478/1254对529/1245;比值比(OR)0.82,95%置信区间(CI)0.70至0.98,6项试验)。助产阴道分娩(OR 0.84,95% CI 0.66至1.06,7项试验)、剖宫产(OR 1.23,95% CI 0.86至1.75,8项试验)、会阴创伤或产妇感染方面无差异。出生后5分钟阿氏评分低于7分(OR 1.59,95% CI 0.63至4.01,5项试验)、新生儿入住新生儿病房(OR 1.06,95% CI 0.70至1.62,3项试验)或新生儿感染率(OR 2.01,95% CI 0.50至8.07,5项试验)方面也无差异。一些比较缺乏数据,无法得出有力结论。需要进一步研究。
有证据表明第一产程水中浸泡可减少硬膜外/脊髓镇痛的使用。由于干预和结局的变异性,关于第一和第二产程与水使用相关的其他结局信息有限。没有证据表明水中分娩或水中分娩会增加对胎儿/新生儿或女性的不良影响。分娩和分娩期间使用水中浸泡现在已成为女性广泛可用的护理选择,这威胁到大型多中心随机对照试验的可行性。