Barriers to the use of hydrotherapy in labor

Understanding the barriers and facilitators related to birthing pool use from organisational and multi-professional perspectives: a mixed-methods systematic review

AIMS

To identify and synthesize the evidence regarding the facilitators and barriers relating to birthing pool use from organizational and multi-professional perspectives.

DESIGN

A systematic integrated mixed methods review was conducted.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, EMCARE, PROQUEST and Web of Science databases were searched in April 2021, March 2022 and April 2024. We cross-referenced with Google Scholar and undertook reference list searches.

REVIEW METHODS

Data were extracted from studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Barriers and facilitators to birthing pool use were mapped and integrated into descriptive statements further synthesized to develop overarching themes.

RESULTS

Thirty seven articles (29 studies) were included-quantitative (12), qualitative (8), mixed methods (7), and audits (2), from 12 countries. These included the views of 9,082 multi-professionals (midwives, nurses, obstetricians, neonatologists, students, physicians, maternity support workers, doulas and childbirth educators). Additionally, 285 institutional policies or guidelines were included over 9 papers and 1 economic evaluation. Five themes were generated: The paradox of prescriptiveness, The experienced but elusive practitioner, Advocacy and tensions, Trust or Trepidation and It's your choice, but only if it is a choice. These revealed when personal, contextual, and infrastructural factors were aligned and directed towards the support of birth pool use, birthing pool use was a genuine option. Conversely, the more barriers that women and midwives experienced, the less likely it was a viable option, reducing choice and access to safe analgesia.

CONCLUSION

The findings demonstrated a paradoxical reality of water immersion with each of the five themes detailing how the "swing" within these factors directly affected whether birthing pool use was facilitated or inhibited.

Quantitative cardiac autonomic outcomes of hydrotherapy in women during the first stage of labor

Introduction

Most hydrotherapy studies during childbirth report findings related to pain using a widespread set of subjective measures. In this study, ECG biomarkers as quantitative cardiac autonomic outcomes were used to assess the effects of warm shower hydrotherapy on laboring women during the first stage of labor.

Methods

This was a prospective single-blind cohort study on stage I delivering women. Their cardiac autonomic function was assessed using heart rate variability (HRV) measures during a deep breathing test using point-of-care testing comprised of an HRV scanner system with wireless ECG enabling real-time data analysis and visualization. Labor pain and anxiety were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VASP) and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). A total of 105 pregnant women in the first stage of labor who received warm shower hydrotherapy, intravenous analgesia (scopolamine + sodium dipyrone), or spinal anesthetic (bupivacaine + morphine) were enrolled.

Results

In women during the first stage of labor, parasympathetic modulation reflected through RMSSD (root mean square of successive RR interval differences) was significantly reduced by hydrotherapy and intravenous analgesia (before vs. after mean rank diff. 35.73 and 65.93, respectively, p < 0.05). Overall HRV (SDNN, standard deviation of RR intervals) was significantly decreased only by intravenous analgesia (before vs. after mean rank diff. 65.43, p < 0.001). Mean heart rate was significantly increased by intravenous analgesia, while spinal anesthesia reduced it, and hydrotherapy did not alter it (before vs. after mean rank diff. -49.35*, 70.38*, -24.20 ^NS , respectively, *p < 0.05, ^NS not significant).

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that warm shower therapy may impact the sympathovagal balance via parasympathetic withdrawal in women during the initial stage of labor. The findings of this study provide quantitative support for using warm shower hydrotherapy during labor via point-of-care testing. The dependability of hydrotherapy as a non-pharmacological treatment is linked to the completion of more clinical research demonstrating quantitative evidence via outcome biomarkers to support indications on stress and birth progress.

The barriers to offering non-pharmacological pain management as an initial option for laboring women: A review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Many women use pharmacological or non-pharmacological pain management (NPPM) during childbirth, however, evidence shows the usage rates of pharmacological pain management are increasing. The shift towards a biomedical approach to birth care opposes the enduring midwifery philosophy of trusting the woman and her body. Identifying midwives’ beliefs and attitudes towards perceived and actual barriers to offering NPPM as an initial option will provide insight into the factors that affect this.

METHODS

This review of the literature sought to understand midwives’ beliefs and attitudes towards the barriers to offering NPPM as an initial option for laboring women. Peer-reviewed journals were searched for primary research that met the inclusion criteria and explored midwives’ beliefs and attitudes towards the barriers to offering NPPM as an initial option for laboring women. Included studies were evaluated for quality according to the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists.

RESULTS

Thirteen qualitative studies met the inclusion criteria and four main themes of barriers to midwives offering NPPM emerged: health system-related, health facility-related, health practitioner-related, and health consumer-related barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

The review of the literature highlighted there are barriers that prevent or delay the initial utilization of non-pharmacological methods of pain management in labor by midwives. These findings can be used as a platform to inform further research into this topic.

Iranian midwives' attitudes and beliefs toward physiological childbirth: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The significant role of midwives in providing labor and delivery care underscores the necessity of the identification of attitudes and beliefs of these groups of maternity care providers toward physiological childbirth. The purpose of the current study was to describe midwives' attitudes and beliefs toward physiological childbirth and identify its related factors.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was carried out on 200 midwives working in the labor and delivery wards of selected hospitals in an urban area of Tehran, Iran, through the continuous sampling method from May to July 2018. The data were collected using a two-part demographic characteristic form and Midwives' Attitudes and Beliefs Questionnaire-Revised toward physiological childbirth. Data analysis was performed in SPSS software (version 25). The significance level was set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

The mean score of midwives' attitudes and beliefs toward physiological childbirth were 119.90 with a standard deviation of 9.30. Moreover, of the different domains of Midwives' Attitudes and Beliefs Questionnaire-Revised, the women's experience of birth (78.53) and the medical model conflict (51.05) obtained the highest and lowest scores, respectively. According to the multiple linear regression model analysis, the total mean score of midwives' attitudes and beliefs toward physiological childbirth was significantly correlated with the level of education and interest in the profession (P < 0.05). Midwives with a master degree obtained higher scores (4.32) in terms of attitudes and beliefs toward physiologic childbirth, compared to those with an associate or bachelor degree. Also, there were 0.09 increases in the attitude and belief score of midwives per one score increase in their interest in the profession. It can be concluded that these two variables explained 16% of the variation in the scores of midwives' attitudes and beliefs to physiological childbirth.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed that midwives with higher levels of education and more interest in their profession had more positive attitudes and beliefs toward physiological childbirth. Therefore, it is necessary to motivate midwives to obtain higher levels of education and increase their interest in the profession to promote physiological childbirth.

Factors influencing the use of birth pools in the United Kingdom: Perspectives of women, midwives and medical staff

Objective

To identify factors influencing the use of birth pools.

Design

Online discussion groups and semi-structured interviews, analysed thematically.

Setting

United Kingdom.

Participants

85 women and 21 midwives took part in online discussion groups; 14 medical staff participated in interviews.

Findings

Factors influencing the use of birth pools were grouped into three overarching categories: resources, unit culture and guidelines, and staff endorsement. Resources encompassed pool availability, efficiency of pool use and availability of waterproof cardiotocograph equipment. Unit culture and guidelines related to eligibility criteria for pool use, medicalisation of birth and differences between midwifery-led and obstetric-led care. Staff endorsement encompassed attitudes towards pool use.

Key conclusions

Accessibility of birth pools was often limited by eligibility criteria. While midwifery-led units were generally supportive of pool use, obstetric-led units were described as an over-medicalised environment in which pool use was restricted and relied on maternal request.

Implications for practice

Midwives can improve women's access to birth pools by providing information antenatally and proactively offering this as an option in labour. Maternity units should work to implement evidence-based guidelines on pool use, increase pool availability (even where there appears to be low demand), and enhance awareness amongst medical staff of the benefits of water immersion.

Practitioner accreditation for the practice of water immersion during labour and birth: Results from a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Water immersion for labour and birth is an option that is increasingly favoured by women. Australian water immersion policies and guidelines commonly specify that practitioners, such as midwives, must undertake further education and training to become accredited.

METHOD

A three-phase mixed methods approach was used. Phase one used critical discourse analysis to determine who or what informs policies and guidelines related to water immersion for labour and/or birth. Phase two examined policy and guideline informants' experiences of the development of policies/guidelines, whilst phase three surveyed Australian midwives' views and experiences of water immersion and their use of and/or involvement in the development of policies and guidelines.

FINDINGS

Practitioner accreditation for the facilitation of water immersion was a common finding across all phases of the study. An examination of policies and guidelines found that practitioners, namely midwives, were required to meet additional training requirements to facilitate water immersion. Participants of phases two and three identified and discussed accreditation as a significant challenge to the option of water immersion, particularly where there were inconsistencies across documents and in the interpretation of their content.

CONCLUSION

The need for practitioners to be accredited to facilitate water immersion was identified as a major barrier to availability and therefore, women's ability to access the option. Given these findings, the need for accreditation should be challenged.

Culture, bathing and hydrotherapy in labor: An exploratory descriptive pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Though bathing (hydrotherapy) is widely used during labor to decrease anxiety and pain and to promote relaxation, the influence of cultural beliefs about bathing by parturients is virtually unknown. This pilot study explored pregnant women's experiences of bathing, bathing in labor, and cultural beliefs about bathing.

DESIGN

An exploratory, descriptive design.

SETTING

Low risk obstetrical clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

Healthy Hispanic, Black, White, American-Indian and Asian women (N = 41) at >37 weeks gestation.

METHODS

During a routine prenatal visit women responded to a brief openended questionnaire on the use of bathing. Data was captured using a modified ethnographic method involving observation and note taking with thematic analysis and quantification of percent response rates.

FINDINGS

Forty-six percent (N = 41) of women used bathing for purposes other than hygiene but only 4.9% (N = 41) of these women bathed during a previous labor. The women described bathing as relaxing, easing, calming, and efficacious for relief of menstrual cramps and labor contractions. Ten percent of women reported cultural beliefs about bathing.

CONCLUSIONS

Women who bathe, report relief of anxiety, menstrual and labor pain and promotion of mental and physical relaxation. The findings do not support the view that bathing is associated with identifiable cultural beliefs; rather, they suggest that bathing is a self-care measure used by women. This practice is likely transmitted from generation to generation by female elders through the oral tradition. Assumptions that race or ethnicity precludes the use of bathing may be faulty. Cautionary instructions should be given to pregnant women who are <37 completed weeks of gestation, to avoid bathing for relief of cramping or contractions and to seek immediate health care evaluation. Study of culturally intact groups may uncover additional themes related to bathing in labor and as a self-care measure for dysmenorrhea.

Australian midwives views and experiences of practice and politics related to water immersion for labour and birth: A web based survey

BACKGROUND

There is little published research that has examined practitioners' views and experiences of pain relieving measures commonly used during labour and birth, particularly for non-pharmacological measures such as water immersion. Furthermore, there is minimal published research examining the process of policy and guideline development, that is, the translation of published research to usable practice guidance.

AIMS

The aims of phase three of a larger study were to explore midwives knowledge, experiences and support for the option of water immersion for labour and birth in practice and their involvement, if any, in development of policy and guidelines pertaining to the option.

METHODS

Phase three of a three phased mixed methods study included a web based survey of 234 Australian midwives who had facilitated and/or been involved in the development of policies and/or guidelines relating to the practice of water immersion.

FINDINGS

Midwives who participated in this study were supportive of both water immersion for labour and birth reiterating documented benefits of reduced pain, maternal relaxation and a positive birth experience. The most significant concerns were maternal collapse, the difficulty of estimating blood loss and postpartum haemorrhage whilst barriers included lack of accredited staff, lifting equipment and negative attitudes. Midwives indicated that policy/guideline documents limited their ability to facilitate water immersion and did not always to support women's informed choice.

CONCLUSION

Midwives who participated in this study supported the practice of water immersion reiterating the benefits documented in the literature and minimal risk to the woman and baby.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of South Australia approved the research.

Retrospective Cohort Study of Hydrotherapy in Labor

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of hydrotherapy for pain management in labor.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Hospital labor and delivery unit in the Northwestern United States, 2006 through 2013.

PARTICIPANTS

Women in a nurse-midwifery-managed practice who were eligible to use hydrotherapy during labor.

METHODS

Descriptive statistics were used to report the proportion of participants who initiated and discontinued hydrotherapy and duration of hydrotherapy use. Logistic regression was used to provide adjusted odds ratios for characteristics associated with hydrotherapy use.

RESULTS

Of the 327 participants included, 268 (82%) initiated hydrotherapy. Of those, 80 (29.9%) were removed from the water because they met medical exclusion criteria, and 24 (9%) progressed to pharmacologic pain management. The mean duration of tub use was 156.3 minutes (standard deviation = 122.7). Induction of labor was associated with declining the offer of hydrotherapy, and nulliparity was associated with medical removal from hydrotherapy.

CONCLUSION

In a hospital that promoted hydrotherapy for pain management in labor, most women who were eligible initiated hydrotherapy. Hospital staff can estimate demand for hydrotherapy by being aware that hydrotherapy use is associated with nulliparity.

Testing the Effectiveness of Therapeutic Showering in Labor

: Therapeutic showering is a holistic nursing intervention that is often available and supports physiologic labor. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of therapeutic showering with usual care during active labor. Research questions were as follows: Are there significant differences between women who showered 30 minutes during active labor and those who received usual labor care in anxiety, tension, relaxation, pain, discomfort, and coping? Is there a difference in use of obstetric interventions between groups? A convenience sample of healthy low-risk women in active labor was recruited (N = 32). A pretest posttest control group repeated-measures design was used. Participants were randomized to treatment group (n = 17), who showered for 30 minutes, or to control group (n = 14) who received usual labor care. Women evaluated pain, discomfort, anxiety, tension, coping, and relaxation at enrollment, again 15 minutes after entering the shower or receiving usual care, then again 30 minutes after entering the shower or receiving usual care. Chart reviews after delivery recorded obstetric interventions. The showering group had statistically significant decreases in pain, discomfort, anxiety and tension, and significant increase in relaxation. There were no differences in use of obstetric interventions. Therapeutic showering was effective in reducing pain, discomfort, anxiety, and tension while improving relaxation and supporting labor in this sample.

Factors Affecting Midwives’ Decision to Offer Complementary and Alternative Medicine/Nonpharmacological Pain Relief Methods for Labor and Birth

PURPOSE:This study examines how characteristics of birth settings influence midwives’ decision to offer complementary and alternate nonpharmacological pain relief in labor and childbirth.

METHOD:This is a nonexperimental design. A convenience sample of midwives (N= 520), members of the American College of Nurse-Midwives (ACNM), were surveyed using a 51-item Likert-type scale questionnaire. Midwives were assigned to 1 of 3 primary birth settings (hospital, birthing center, home birth) for data analysis to identify if certain characteristics (policies/protocols, use of technology, providers’ knowledge and beliefs, and midwives’ relationship with collaborating obstetricians) in the birth setting influence a midwife’s decision to offer nonpharmacological pain relief methods in labor and birth.

RESULTS:Findings indicate that knowledge and beliefs of health care providers most influenced midwives’ decisions. Although factors of the birth environment influence midwives’ decisions to offer nonpharmacological pain management in labor, they do not prevent midwives from using most of the nonpharmacological pain relief methods during labor and birth.

CONCLUSIONS:It would appear that the midwives’ philosophy of care more than the characteristics of the birth setting influence midwives’ decisions to offer nonpharmacological pain relief methods. Educating health care providers about nonpharmacological pain relief methods would further maximize midwives’ ability to use these strategies.

A Nurse's Guide to Supporting Physiologic Birth

Physiologic birth promotes the practice of normal labor and birth, in which a woman's innate power is supported and unnecessary interventions are avoided. Nurses are in a unique position to support physiologic birth because they attend almost all births. Several resources are available to assist nurses in promoting physiologic birth, including BirthTOOLS.org, a new online resource developed by the American College of Nurse-Midwives in collaboration with other organizations. By using resources such as BirthTOOLS.org and others, nurses can become familiar with the evidence surrounding physiologic birth and can contribute to improved patient safety and quality of care by supporting physiologic birth. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nwh.2015.12.009.

Sink or Swim: Water Immersion for Labor and Birth in a Tertiary Maternity Unit in Australia

PURPOSE: This study aimed to describe and compare the attitudes and practices of midwives and obstetric doctors in a tertiary setting regarding water immersion for labor and birth and to identify strategies for improving bath usage in the facility.

DESIGN: A questionnaire consisting of 47 multiple choice and 2 open-ended questions was distributed to midwives and obstetric doctors providing labor care in the facility.

FINDINGS: Obstetric doctors were unsupportive. Birth suite midwives, despite assigning value to it, rarely facilitated water immersion. Only continuity midwives routinely facilitated water immersion. The main identified strategies for increasing bath usage in labor were staff training and support, antenatal education, and increased access to continuity of care.

CONCLUSION: Providing bath access and supporting guidelines is not sufficient to increase water immersion for labor and birth in a tertiary setting. Additional strategies are needed to incorporate this practice into standard care in the birth suite.

Therapeutic Showering in Labor

While showering is thought to be an effective coping strategy during labor, research on this comfort measure is lacking. The purpose of this study was to measure effectiveness of therapeutic showering on pain, coping, tension, anxiety, relaxation, and fatigue in labor. A quasi-experimental pretest-posttest single group design was conducted in a community hospital. Participants were women who had singleton, uncomplicated pregnancies and were in active labor at term ( N = 24). After completing pretest measures, participants took a 30 min shower where they were encouraged to be seated but could choose positions of comfort. There were significant reductions in tension and anxiety and increased relaxation and coping. Showering may be a safe and effective comfort measure for healthy, laboring women who are experiencing tension or anxiety, or having difficulty relaxing or coping with labor. Further research is needed to test the maternal and neonatal outcomes of this nonpharmacologic comfort measure.

Struggling to Get Into the Pool Room? A Critical Discourse Analysis of Labor Ward Midwives’ Experiences of Water Birth

RESEARCH AIM: The aim of this article is to share the findings from an ongoing action research study aimed at identifying inequalities in the availability of water birth on one hospital labor ward. Efforts to encourage labor ward midwives to take action and influence the delivery of normal birth care in the maternity concerned are addressed in the larger study.

METHODS: Unit midwives who regularly worked on labor wards were invited to take part in focus groups and face-to-face interviews over an 8-month period. Critical discourse analysis was used to identify actual midwifery practices, the social ordering of the water birth discourse, obstacles to water birth, dominant group interests, and solutions to the identified obstacles (Fairclough, 2001).

RESULTS: The author conducted a total of five unstructured interviews (35–60 minutes) with labor ward matrons, a consultant midwife, labor ward manager and clinical practice facilitator, and three focus groups (40–60 minutes; 11 midwives) with clinical midwives. Institutional practices focused on the delivery of standardized midwifery care for low-risk women and, therefore, did not promote or encourage water birth practice. The small number of requests and the low water birth rate were used as evidence by some midwives that childbearing women no longer wanted this type of care. The key obstacles to water birth in this setting were coordinators’ priorities, midwives’ negative attitudes, high workloads, and lack of institutional support for this type of care.

CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that hospital water birth practice is dependent not only on the availability of equipment and midwifery knowledge, but also on the philosophy of care adopted by the organization (Stark & Miller, 2009). Interventions to improve the practice and availability of water birth are more likely to succeed if supported by midwifery managers, championed by coordinators, and led by labor ward practitioners.