Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women intending to use immersion in water for labour and birth in Western Australia (2015–2016): A retrospective audit of clinical outcomes

Background: Research supports water immersion for labour if women are healthy, with no obstetric or medical risk factors. Aims: To evaluate the obstetric and neonatal outcomes of women intending to use immersion in water for labour or birth. Methods: Retrospective audit of clinical outcomes for wome...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lewis, Lucy, Hauck, Yvonne, Butt, Janice, Hornbuckle, J.
Format: Journal Article
Published: Blackwell Publishing 2018
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/65779
_version_ 1848761202340003840
author Lewis, Lucy
Hauck, Yvonne
Butt, Janice
Hornbuckle, J.
author_facet Lewis, Lucy
Hauck, Yvonne
Butt, Janice
Hornbuckle, J.
author_sort Lewis, Lucy
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Background: Research supports water immersion for labour if women are healthy, with no obstetric or medical risk factors. Aims: To evaluate the obstetric and neonatal outcomes of women intending to use immersion in water for labour or birth. Methods: Retrospective audit of clinical outcomes for women intending to labour or birth in water conducted between July 2015 and June 2016, at a tertiary maternity hospital in Western Australia. Obstetric and neonatal data were collected from medical records. Multivariable logistic regression was utilised to investigate women who laboured in water stratified by those who birthed in water. Results: A total of 502 women intended to labour or birth in water; 199 (40%) did not and 303 (60%) did. The majority of women using water immersion (179 of 303; 59%) birthed in water. Multiparous women were more likely than primparous to birth in water (73% vs 46%; P < 0.001). Women who birthed in water were at increased odds of: a first stage labour =240 min (odds ratio (OR) 2.56, 95% CI 1.34–4.87, P = 0.004); a second stage =60 min (OR 3.53, 95% CI 1.82–6.84, P < 0.000); a third stage labour of 11–30 min (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.23–3.78, P = 0.008); and having an intact perineum (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.70–5.64, P < 0.000). Conclusion: Not all women who set out to labour and birth in water achieve their aim. There is a need for high-quality collaborative research into this option of labour and birth, so women can make an informed choice around this birth option.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T10:27:55Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-65779
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T10:27:55Z
publishDate 2018
publisher Blackwell Publishing
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-657792018-02-19T08:06:18Z Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women intending to use immersion in water for labour and birth in Western Australia (2015–2016): A retrospective audit of clinical outcomes Lewis, Lucy Hauck, Yvonne Butt, Janice Hornbuckle, J. Background: Research supports water immersion for labour if women are healthy, with no obstetric or medical risk factors. Aims: To evaluate the obstetric and neonatal outcomes of women intending to use immersion in water for labour or birth. Methods: Retrospective audit of clinical outcomes for women intending to labour or birth in water conducted between July 2015 and June 2016, at a tertiary maternity hospital in Western Australia. Obstetric and neonatal data were collected from medical records. Multivariable logistic regression was utilised to investigate women who laboured in water stratified by those who birthed in water. Results: A total of 502 women intended to labour or birth in water; 199 (40%) did not and 303 (60%) did. The majority of women using water immersion (179 of 303; 59%) birthed in water. Multiparous women were more likely than primparous to birth in water (73% vs 46%; P < 0.001). Women who birthed in water were at increased odds of: a first stage labour =240 min (odds ratio (OR) 2.56, 95% CI 1.34–4.87, P = 0.004); a second stage =60 min (OR 3.53, 95% CI 1.82–6.84, P < 0.000); a third stage labour of 11–30 min (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.23–3.78, P = 0.008); and having an intact perineum (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.70–5.64, P < 0.000). Conclusion: Not all women who set out to labour and birth in water achieve their aim. There is a need for high-quality collaborative research into this option of labour and birth, so women can make an informed choice around this birth option. 2018 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/65779 10.1111/ajo.12758 Blackwell Publishing restricted
spellingShingle Lewis, Lucy
Hauck, Yvonne
Butt, Janice
Hornbuckle, J.
Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women intending to use immersion in water for labour and birth in Western Australia (2015–2016): A retrospective audit of clinical outcomes
title Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women intending to use immersion in water for labour and birth in Western Australia (2015–2016): A retrospective audit of clinical outcomes
title_full Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women intending to use immersion in water for labour and birth in Western Australia (2015–2016): A retrospective audit of clinical outcomes
title_fullStr Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women intending to use immersion in water for labour and birth in Western Australia (2015–2016): A retrospective audit of clinical outcomes
title_full_unstemmed Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women intending to use immersion in water for labour and birth in Western Australia (2015–2016): A retrospective audit of clinical outcomes
title_short Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women intending to use immersion in water for labour and birth in Western Australia (2015–2016): A retrospective audit of clinical outcomes
title_sort obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women intending to use immersion in water for labour and birth in western australia (2015–2016): a retrospective audit of clinical outcomes
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/65779