Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford.
Birth. 2012 Sep;39(3):192-202. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2012.00548.x. Epub 2012 Jul 3.
Birthing pools are integrated into maternity care in the United Kingdom and are a popular care option for women in midwifery-led units and at home. The objective of this study was to describe and compare maternal characteristics, intrapartum events, interventions, and maternal and neonatal outcomes by planned place of birth for women who used a birthing pool.
A total of 8,924 women at low risk of childbirth complications were recruited from care settings in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Descriptive analysis was performed.
Overall, 7,915 (88.9%) women had a spontaneous birth (5,192, 58.3% water births), of whom 4,953 (55.5%) were nulliparas. Fewer nulliparas whose planned place of birth was the community (freestanding midwifery unit or home) had labor augmentation by artificial membrane rupture (149, 11.3% [95% CI: 9.6-13.1]), compared with an alongside midwifery unit (271, 22.7% [95% CI: 20.3-25.2]), or obstetric unit (639, 26.3% [95% CI: 24.5-28.1]). Results were similar for epidural analgesia and episiotomy. More community nulliparas had spontaneous birth (1,172, 88.9% [95% CI: 87.1-90.6]), compared with birth in an alongside midwifery unit (942, 79% [95% CI: 76.6-81.3]) and obstetric unit (1,923, 79.2% [95% CI: 77.5-80.8]); and fewer required hospital transfer (265, 20% [95% CI: 17-22.2]) compared with those in an alongside midwifery unit (370, 31% [95% CI: 28.3-33.7]). Results for multiparas and newborns were similar across care settings. Twenty babies had an umbilical cord snap, 18 (90%) of which occurred during water birth.
Birthing pool use was associated with a high frequency of spontaneous birth, particularly among nulliparas. Findings revealed differences in midwifery practice between obstetric units, alongside midwifery units, and the community, which may affect outcomes, particularly for nulliparas. No evidence was found for a difference across care settings in interventions or outcomes in multiparas or in outcomes for newborns. During water birth, it is important to prevent undue traction on the cord as the baby is guided to the surface.
分娩池已纳入英国的产妇护理中,并且是助产士主导单位和家庭中女性受欢迎的护理选择。本研究的目的是描述和比较按计划分娩地点的产妇特征、产程事件、干预措施以及母婴结局。
共有 8924 名低生育并发症风险的妇女从英格兰、苏格兰和北爱尔兰的护理环境中招募。进行描述性分析。
总体而言,7915 名(88.9%)妇女自然分娩(5192 名,58.3%水中分娩),其中 4953 名(55.5%)为初产妇。与在助产士主导单位(独立助产士单位或家庭)的初产妇相比,计划在社区(独立助产士单位或家庭)分娩的初产妇,产程中人工破膜促产(149 名,11.3%[95%置信区间:9.6-13.1])、助产士主导单位(271 名,22.7%[95%置信区间:20.3-25.2])或产科单位(639 名,26.3%[95%置信区间:24.5-28.1])的人数更少。硬膜外镇痛和会阴切开术的结果相似。更多社区初产妇自然分娩(1172 名,88.9%[95%置信区间:87.1-90.6]),而助产士主导单位(942 名,79%[95%置信区间:76.6-81.3])和产科单位(1923 名,79.2%[95%置信区间:77.5-80.8])的比例较低;需要医院转院的人数也较少(265 名,20%[95%置信区间:17-22.2]),而助产士主导单位(370 名,31%[95%置信区间:28.3-33.7])的人数较多。不同护理环境下的多产妇和新生儿的结果相似。有 20 名婴儿脐带脱垂,其中 18 名(90%)发生在水中分娩期间。
使用分娩池与自然分娩的高频率相关,尤其是在初产妇中。研究结果显示,产科单位、助产士主导单位和社区之间的助产实践存在差异,这可能会影响母婴结局,特别是对初产妇的影响。没有证据表明多产妇或新生儿的干预措施或结局或初产妇的结局在不同的护理环境中有差异。在水中分娩时,当婴儿被引导到水面时,重要的是要防止脐带过度牵引。