Immersion in water in the first stage of labor: a randomized controlled trial. Water immersion and the effect on labor. Randomised controlled trial of labouring in water compared with standard of augmentation for management of dystocia in first stage of labour. Warm tub bathing during labor: maternal and neonatal effects. Experience of water birth delivery in Iran. 'To bathe or not to bathe' during the first stage of labor. Labor analgesia: a comparative study between combined spinal-epidural anesthesia versus continuous epidural anesthesia. Perineal massage in labour and prevention of perineal trauma: randomised controlled trial.
Current forms of analgesia often have significant side effects for women in labor. Bathing in warm water during labor has been reported to increase a woman's comfort level and cause a reduction in painful contractions. The objective of this trial was to compare immersion in warm water during labor with traditional pain management for a range of clinical and psychological outcomes.
                A prospective randomized controlled trial of 274 pregnant women, who were free from medical and obstetric complications and expecting a singleton pregnancy at term, was conducted at the Women's and Children's Hospital, a maternity tertiary referral center in Adelaide, South Australia. Women in labor were randomized to an experimental group who received immersion in a bath or to a nonbath group who received routine care. Pharmacological pain relief was the primary outcome that was measured, and secondary outcomes included maternal and neonatal clinical outcomes, factors relating to maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity, psychological outcomes, and satisfaction with care.
                The use of pharmacological analgesia was similar for both the experimental and control groups; 85 and 77 percent, respectively, used major analgesia. No statistical differences were observed in the proportion of women requiring induction and augmentation of labor or in rates of perineal trauma, length of labor, mode of delivery, or frequency of cardiotocographic trace abnormalities. Neonatal outcomes (birthweight, Apgar score, nursery care, meconium-stained liquor, cord pH estimations) revealed no statistically significant differences. Infants of bath group women required significantly more resuscitation than routine group women. Routine group women rated their overall experience of childbirth more positively than bath group women. Psychological outcomes, such as satisfaction with care or postnatal distress, were the same for both groups.
                Bathing in labor confers no clear benefits for the laboring woman but may contribute to adverse effects in the neonate. The use of warm water immersion (WI) by women for relaxation during labor is being used around the world; however, there is little available research as to the effects of WI. We conducted this prospective, randomized, and controlled study to determine the safety and effect of WI on the woman in labor. We studied 93 subjects between 36 and 41 weeks' gestation, in active labor, with intact membranes, and without major medical or obstetric complications. Subjects in the WI group utilized a tub in labor along with other pain relief measures such as ambulation, rest, showers, and analgesics. Subjects in the no-WI group could use all available methods of pain relief except WI. Water immersion did not alter the rate of cervical dilation, change the contraction pattern, change the length of labor, or alter the use of analgesia. The rates of chorioamnionitis and endometritis were not altered by WI. Although we did not demonstrate an improvement in progression of labor by WI, there was no evidence of increased maternal, neonatal, or infectious morbidity. To evaluate the impact of labouring in water during first stage of labour on rates of epidural analgesia and operative delivery in nulliparous women with dystocia.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                University teaching hospital in southern England.
                99 nulliparous women with dystocia (cervical dilation rate < 1 cm/hour in active labour) at low risk of complications. Interventions Immersion in water in birth pool or standard augmentation for dystocia (amniotomy and intravenous oxytocin).
                Primary: epidural analgesia and operative delivery rates. Secondary: augmentation rates with amniotomy and oxytocin, length of labour, maternal and neonatal morbidity including infections, maternal pain score, and maternal satisfaction with care.
                Women randomised to immersion in water had a lower rate of epidural analgesia than women allocated to augmentation (47% v 66%, relative risk 0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.49 to 1.01), number needed to treat for benefit (NNT) 5). They showed no difference in rates of operative delivery (49% v 50%, 0.98 (0.65 to 1.47), NNT 98), but significantly fewer received augmentation (71% v 96%, 0.74 (0.59 to 0.88), NNT 4) or any form of obstetric intervention (amniotomy, oxytocin, epidural, or operative delivery) (80% v 98%, 0.81 (0.67 to 0.92), NNT 5). More neonates of women in the water group were admitted to the neonatal unit (6 v 0, P = 0.013), but there was no difference in Apgar score, infection rates, or umbilical cord pH.
                Labouring in water under midwifery care may be an option for slow progress in labour, reducing the need for obstetric intervention, and offering an alternative pain management strategy. To study possible detrimental maternal and neonatal effects of immersion in warm water during labor.
                Prospective randomized controlled bathing during first stage of labor vs no bathing.
                Obstetrical departments at a university hospital and two central hospitals. PRIMARY END-POINT: Referral of newborns to NICU.
                Randomization took place by means of sealed opaque envelopes at each delivery unit. Preconditions for participation in the study were: singleton parturient wishing to bathe, a gestational duration of at least 35 weeks+0 days, a planned vaginal delivery, normal admission test, regular contractions and cervix dilated to at least 3-4 cm. Parturients randomized to the 'no bath' control group were allowed to use a shower. Rupture of the membranes was not a contra-indication to participation. Those excluded from randomization were women with intra-uterine growth retardation, meconium-stained amniotic fluid, or in the event that the tub was occupied by another randomized parturient.
                On average, parturients stayed in the tub for 50-60 min. No significant difference was seen regarding the referral rate to NICU among 612 cases vs 625 controls, OR 0.8; 95% CL 0.2, 3.1. The OR for epidural analgesia was 1.0; 95% CL 0.8, 1.3. Nor was any significant difference seen in the rate of perineal tear grade III-IV (OR 1.3), instrumental delivery (OR 1.1), cesarean section (OR 1.8), or maternal post partum stay on the ward. During the neonatal period, no significant difference was seen in the number of newborns with Apgar <7 at 5 min (4 vs 5), neonatal distress (OR 2.2) or tachypnéa (OR 1.0).
                In the present study no negative effects of bathing during labor could be discerned. The results indicate that expectant mothers wishing to bathe during labor may do so without jeopardizing their own, or their newborns' wellbeing after birth. Having considered the physiologic challenges during pregnancy, scientists have searched for different delivery methods with minimal medical intervention. The use of water immersion by women for relaxing during labor is being used worldwide. We aimed to evaluate the controversies surrounding water birth and to find out the interest of Iranian women in this delivery method.
                In a randomized clinical trial, 106 pregnant women were assigned to control and experimental groups. The experimental group underwent the labor and delivery in standardized warm water pools. The control group gave birth by conventional delivery method at the hospital. A questionnaire was completed during the labor for women in both control and experimental groups including the method of delivery; labor length; use of different drugs such as analgesics, opiates, antispasmodic, and oxytocin; use of episiotomy, and newborn's Apgar score and weight.
                Totally, 53 cases and 53 controls with the mean age of 26.4+/-5.9 and 27.1+/-5.9 years, respectively, completed the study. Women in the control group required oxytocin, antispasmodics, opiates, and analgesics more frequently than those in the experimental group (P<0.001). Meanwhile, the active phase and the third stage of labor were shorter experimental group by 72 and 1.3 minutes, respectively (P<0.004, and P<0.04). All the participants in the experimental group gave birth naturally, whereas only 79.2< of the controls had normal vaginal delivery.
                Our results revealed the advantage of water birth delivery. Those who gave water birth experienced less pain and completed the delivery sooner. Meanwhile, normal vaginal delivery was accomplished more frequently with this group. These all lead to a decreased necessity for medical interventions as well as an increased socioeconomic advantage for the society. Does a warm tub bath relieve labor pain? How is it experienced by the parturient?
                
                prospective randomised trial.
                labor ward of a teaching hospital with a uniform active labor management.
                one hundred and ten nulliparous low risk women, at term, in true spontaneous labor. Fifty-four women had a bath, 56 women served as controls. Mean outcome measures: labor pain (assessed by means of a visual analogue scale) and post partum patients' bathing experience (by means of a self-made questionnaire).
                The study group and the control group were comparable with respect to maternal age, weight, length, duration of gestation, cervical status and labor pain sensation before randomisation. Absolute values of labor pain were not statistically different between the two groups, yet this latter progressed differently: in the bathing group the initial pain sensation (V.A.S.) was 6.8, and this remained stable during the first 25 minutes (V.A.S. = 6.7) and then rose to 8.2 after a mean of 53 minutes. In the control group, labor pain rose progressively from 6.3 to 7.3 after 25 min and to 8.7 after a mean of 52 min (p < 0.01, Student t-test). There was no difference in the use of epidural analgesia. There were no differences in labor duration nor in the frequencies of either operative deliveries or neonatal complications. Eighty percent of the bathers experienced soothing of the pain and all but one reported body relaxation. Ninety percent wanted to bathe again during a next labor.
                Bathing provided no objective pain relief. It had, however, a temporal pain stabilizing effect possibly mediated through the improved ability to relax in between contractions. No side effects were found. It gives great satisfaction to users. Bathing, in conjunction with other forms of analgesia, is recommended. Pain relief during labor is a permanent concern, aiming at the maternal well being, decreasing the stress secondary to pain, and reducing its consequences on the fetus. Several analgesia techniques can be used during labor. The aim of this study was to compare continuous and combined epidural analgesia, both of them using 0.25% bupivacaine with 50% enantiomeric excess and fentanyl.
                Forty pregnant women, in labor, with cervical dilation between 4 and 5 cm, were randomly divided in two groups. Group I received continuous epidural anesthesia. Group II received combined anesthesia. The following parameters were evaluated: anthropometric measurements, gestational age, cervical dilation, length of time between the blockade and absence of pain according to the visual analogic scale, ability to walk, length of time between analgesia and complete cervical dilation, duration of the expulsive phase, maternal hemodynamic parameters, and vitality of the newborn. Possible complications, such as respiratory depression, maternal hypotension, pruritus, nausea, and vomiting were also evaluated. The Student t test was used to compare the means and the Chi-square test was used to compare the number of pregnancies and type of labor.
                There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding the length of time between the beginning of analgesia and complete cervical dilation, as well as regarding the duration of the expulsive phase, incidence of cesarean section related to the analgesia, maternal hemodynamic parameters, and vitality of the newborn.
                Both techniques are effective and safe for labor analgesia, although the combined technique provided fast and immediate pain relief. Clinical studies with a larger number of patients are necessary to evaluate the differences in the incidence of cesarean sections. To determine the effects of perineal massage in the second stage of labour on perineal outcomes.
                Randomised controlled trial. Participants: At 36 weeks' gestation, women expecting normal birth of a singleton were asked to join the study. Women became eligible to be randomised in labour if they progressed to full dilatation of the cervix or 8 cm or more if nulliparous or 5 cm or more if multiparous. 1340 were randomised into the trial.
                Massage and stretching of the perineum during the second stage of labour with a water soluble lubricant.
                Primary outcomes: rates of intact perineum, episiotomies, and first, second, third, and fourth degree tears.
                pain at three and 10 days postpartum and pain, dyspareunia, resumption of sexual intercourse, and urinary and faecal incontinence and urgency three months postpartum.
                Rates of intact perineums, first and second degree tears, and episiotomies were similar in the massage and the control groups. There were fewer third degree tears in the massage group (12 (1.7%) v 23 (3.6%); absolute risk 2.11, relative risk 0.45; 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.93, P<0.04), though the trial was underpowered to measure this rarer outcome. Groups did not differ in any of the secondary outcomes at the three assessment points.
                The practice of perineal massage in labour does not increase the likelihood of an intact perineum or reduce the risk of pain, dyspareunia, or urinary and faecal problems.
Evidence suggests that water immersion during the first stage of labour reduces the use of epidural/spinal analgesia and duration of the first stage of labour. 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. However, the studies are very variable and considerable heterogeneity was detected for some outcomes. Further research is needed.