Comparison of Natural Delivery Indexes in Two Ways of Labor in Water and Routine Delivery

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 Resident, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: One of the main problems of women during childbirth is fear of labor pain; so far, different ways to reduce it have been recommended. The aim of this study was to compare normal labor indexes in two methods of delivery of labor in water and routine delivery.Methods: In a prospective cohort study, 180 pregnant women were enrolled. The first group (n = 90) from the beginning of the active phase of labor, entered the water of 37°C, and the second group (90 women) gave birth in the usual manner on dry basis. The two groups were evaluated for pain severity, satisfaction, and complications during and after delivery.Findings: The mean of labor pain severity in the two groups of delivery in water and dry was 7.12 ± 1.42 and 7.87 ± 1.33, respectively, and the severity of pain in the group of water was lower (P = 0.001). Moreover, the delivery group in water had higher satisfaction, so that in the delivery group in water, 9.6% were completely satisfied and 45.2% were satisfied, and in the routine delivery group, 1.2% were completely satisfied and 30.6% satisfied (P = 0.007).Conclusion: Natural delivery in water has been accompanied by a reduction in lower birth rates and more satisfaction of the patients. On the other hand, delivery in water has no effect on the increase of postpartum complications. Moreover, delivery in water, in addition to reducing the delivery, has many other advantages, including lower power loss of pelvic floor muscles.

Keywords

References

  1. Boehmler KA. Water Immersion during Childbirth [Online]. [cited 2018]; Available from: URL: http://www.firstbabymall.com/expecting/childbirth/waterbirth2.htm
  2. Brown C. Therapeutic effects of bathing during labor. J Nurse Midwifery 1982; 27(1): 13-6.
  3. Benfield RD, Herman J, Katz VL, Wilson SP, Davis JM. Hydrotherapy in labor. Res Nurs Health 2001; 24(1): 57-67.
  4. Sjogren B. Childbirth: Expectations, choices, and trends. Lancet 2000; 356(Suppl): s12.
  5. Lederman RP, Lederman E, Work BA, Jr., McCann DS. The relationship of maternal anxiety, plasma catecholamines, and plasma cortisol to progress in labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1978; 132(5): 495-500.
  6. Lederman RP, Lederman E, Work B, Jr., McCann DS. Anxiety and epinephrine in multiparous women in labor: relationship to duration of labor and fetal heart rate pattern. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 153(8): 870-7.
  7. Danforth DN, Scott JR. Danforth's obstetrics and gynecology. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins; 1999. p. 243.
  8. James DK, Steer PJ, Weiner CP, Gonik B. High risk pregnancy: Management options. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 1999. p. 1103.
  9. Saisto T, Halmesmaki E. Fear of childbirth: a neglected dilemma. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003; 82(3): 201-8.
  10. Alimohammadian M, Shariat M, Mahmoudi M, Ramezanzadeh F. The effect of the request of pregnant women on elective cesarean section. Payesh 2003; 2(2): 133-9. [In Persian].
  11. Boheiraei A, Ramezanzadeh F. Fear of pain due to labor: Cause of 70 percent of selection cesarean. Family Health Journal 2004; 6(1): 30. [In Persian].
  12. Lenstrup C, Schantz A, Berget A, Feder E, Roseno H, Hertel J. Warm tub bath during delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1987; 66(8): 709-12.
  13. Cammu H, Clasen K, Van WL, Derde MP. 'To bathe or not to bathe' during the first stage of labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1994; 73(6): 468-72.
  14. Lowe NK. The nature of labor pain. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186(5 Suppl Nature): S16-S24.
  15. Myles MF, Bennett VR, Brown LK. Myles textbook for midwives. 13th ed. London, UK: Churchill Livingstone; 1999. p. 460-3.
  16. Cluett ER, Pickering RM, Getliffe K, St George Saunders NJ. Randomised controlled trial of labouring in water compared with standard of augmentation for management of dystocia in first stage of labour. BMJ 2004; 328(7435): 314.
  17. Shahpourian, F, Kiani K, Sedighian H, Hosseini, F. Effect of water birth on labor pain during active phase of labor. Razi J Med Sci 2008; 14(57): 101-11. [In Persian].
  18. Geissbuhler V, Eberhard J. Experience with water births: A prospective longitudinal study of 9 years with almost 4,000 water births. Gynakol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch 2003; 43(1): 12-8. [In German].
  19. Schrocksnadel H, Kunczicky V, Meier J, Brezinka C, Oberaigner W. Water birth: Experience at a university clinic and a district hospital in Austria. Gynakol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch 2003; 43(1): 7-11. [In German].
  20. Bodner K, Bodner-Adler B, Wierrani F, Mayerhofer K, Fousek C, Niedermayr A, et al. Effects of water birth on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2002; 114(10-11): 391-5.
  21. Chehrei A. Sampling and sample size calculation in medical research. Tehran, Iran: Pezhvak-e Elm-e Arya; 2016. [In Persian].
  22. Simkin PP, O'hara M. Nonpharmacologic relief of pain during labor: Systematic reviews of five methods. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186(5 Suppl Nature): S131-S159.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 36, Issue 491 - Serial Number 491
July and August 2018
Pages 917-923

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 29 April 2018
  • Revise Date: 01 November 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics