School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of South Australia, City East Campus, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia Campus, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Women Birth. 2019 Jun;32(3):246-254. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2018.08.169. Epub 2018 Sep 21.
Water immersion for labour and birth is consistently challenged as a practice lacking support from high quality evidence. Despite this, the option is available to Australian women. Practitioners are guided by policies and guidelines however, given the research paucity, questions surround the way in which water immersion policies and guidelines are informed.
The aims of the study were to determine how water immersion policies and/or guidelines are informed and to what extent the policy/guideline facilitates the option of water immersion for labour and birth with respect to women's choice and autonomy.
Phase two of a three phase mixed methods study used critical, post structural interpretive interactionism to examine the process of development and implementation of water immersion policies and guidelines from informant's experience. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 Australian participants.
Participants highlighted that the lack of randomised controlled trials had resulted in other forms of evidence being drawn upon to inform water immersion policies and guidelines. This was influenced in part by individual interpretations of evidence with medical views taking precedence. This sometimes resulted in policy and guideline documents that were restrictive with this impacting on women's ability to access the option.
Perceived limitations of research and the subsequent translation of this perceived paucity of evidence into policies and guidelines, has impacted on women's ability to exercise choice and autonomy with respect to water immersion and indeed, on the professional autonomy of practitioners who wish to facilitate it.
水浸分娩一直受到质疑,因为它缺乏高质量证据的支持。尽管如此,澳大利亚女性仍有此选择。从业者遵循政策和指南,但鉴于研究匮乏,围绕水浸政策和指南制定的方式存在疑问。
本研究旨在确定水浸政策和/或指南的信息来源,以及政策/指南在多大程度上促进了妇女在分娩时选择和自主进行水浸的选择。
这是一项三阶段混合方法研究的第二阶段,使用批判性、后结构解释性互动主义来从知情人的经验中检查水浸政策和指南的制定和实施过程。对 12 名澳大利亚参与者进行了半结构化访谈。
参与者强调,缺乏随机对照试验导致其他形式的证据被用来为水浸政策和指南提供信息。这在一定程度上受到对证据的个人解释的影响,其中医学观点占主导地位。这有时会导致政策和指南文件具有限制性,从而影响妇女获得该选择的能力。
对研究的局限性的看法,以及随后将这种对证据匮乏的看法转化为政策和指南,影响了妇女在水浸方面行使选择和自主权的能力,也影响了希望促进这一选择的从业者的专业自主权。