The Warm Embrace: How Warm Water in Water Birth Pools Facilitates the Release of Oxytocin

The use of water birth pools has gained popularity in recent years as expectant mothers seek alternatives that enhance the natural birthing experience.

One of the key factors contributing to the success of water births is the warm water in the birthing pool, creating an environment that encourages the release of oxytocin.

Often referred to as the “love hormone” or “bonding hormone,” oxytocin plays a crucial role in the progression of labour and the overall well-being of both mother and baby.

Understanding Oxytocin:

Oxytocin, produced by the hypothalamus and released by the pituitary gland, is a hormone known for its role in promoting social bonding, emotional connection, and uterine contractions during childbirth.

It is often associated with feelings of love, trust, and intimacy, and its presence is pivotal in the birthing process.

The Warm Water Effect:

Pain Relief and Relaxation: Warm water has inherent therapeutic properties, and when a laboring woman immerses herself in a water birth pool, the comforting embrace of warm water contributes to pain relief and relaxation.

The buoyancy of water alleviates the pressure on the body, reducing muscle tension and creating an environment conducive to calmness.

As the mother relaxes, the body is more apt to release oxytocin, facilitating the progression of labor.

Enhancing Blood Circulation:

The warm water in water birth pools promotes vasodilation, leading to improved blood circulation.

This enhanced blood flow is particularly beneficial during childbirth, as it ensures that the uterus receives an adequate supply of oxygen and nutrients.

The improved circulation helps in optimizing uterine contractions and, subsequently, the release of oxytocin.

Reducing Stress Hormones:

Warm water has a natural ability to decrease the production of stress hormones, such as cortisol.

By creating a serene and comfortable environment, the water birth pool minimizes the stress response, allowing the body to focus on the release of oxytocin.

This reduction in stress hormones supports a positive birthing experience and contributes to the mother’s overall well-being.

Facilitating the Bonding Process:

Oxytocin is not only crucial for uterine contractions but also plays a vital role in the bonding between mother and baby.

The warm water in the birthing pool promotes the release of oxytocin, fostering a sense of intimacy and connection between the mother and her newborn.

This early bonding experience can have lasting positive effects on the emotional well-being of both mother and child.

Promoting a Positive Birth Environment:

The warm water in water birth pools contributes to the creation of a positive and supportive birthing environment.

This positive ambiance, coupled with the physiological effects of warm water, enhances the mother’s overall experience, making her more receptive to the natural release of oxytocin.


Conclusion:

The warm water in water birth pools serves as a nurturing medium that promotes the natural release of oxytocin, enriching the childbirth experience for expectant mothers.

As healthcare providers and birthing centers continue to recognize the benefits of water immersion during labor, understanding the interplay between warm water and oxytocin release becomes essential.

By harnessing the therapeutic properties of warm water, the journey through childbirth becomes not only more comfortable but also profoundly connected, nurturing the beautiful bond between mother and baby.

A way to make labour shorter, easier and more comfortable

Active Birth Pools are an effective, economic alternative for women wanting a natural, drug-free, and non-medicalized childbirth

 

Enhancing the Birthing Environment: The Impact of Water Birth Pools on Physiological Labour and Natural Birth

 

 

Cleaning and Care

Safety comes 1st!

Active Birth Pools  are Rated No.1 for water safety and infection control standards.

This is because the material we use (Ficore) is 5 x harder than other materials and is immune to the effects of disinfection with 10,000ppm hypo-chlorite.

Seamless one-piece construction and the absence of surface mounted metal work deny micro-organisms the environment they need to propagate.

Active Birth Pools Cleaning and Disinfection Guidelines

This is a two-step procedure – first cleaning of the pool and surround, then disinfection of the pool and surround.

  1. Prior to emptying the pool remove debris and larger particles from the water with a sieve to prevent it from blocking or obstructing the outlet.
  1. Use the standard infection control precautions (plastic apron, disposable gloves and eye protection) when cleaning the pool. Ensure the area is well ventilated.
  1. Cleaning – use a non-abrasive detergeant with non-abrasive sponge or cloth to thoroughly clean the pool. Ensure the tap is cleaned first, so as not to transfer micro-organisms from the “dirty” pool area to the cleaner tap region. Rinse well with warm water.
  1. Disinfecting – use an approved hypochlorite disinfectant listed in the table below following the directions on the packet for mixing the solution to the correct concentration for disinfecting the birth pool and surround.
  1. Apply the solution to the tap and spout prior to disinfecting the pool.
  1. There are 3 methods for disinfecting the pool that are commonly used in hospitals:

1) Fill the pool with cold water and add the requisite amount of disinfectant – leave for ten minutes.

The advantage of this method is that it is 100% effective but wasteful of water, time consuming and uses a large amount of disinfectant

2) Make up 2-3 litres of solution and pour it around the inside of the rim. Then use a new disposable mop or cloth to spread the disinfectant over the surface of the pool. Leave for ten minutes.

The advantage of this method is that it is economic in terms of time and cost but relies upon the person carrying out the task to ensure that 100% of the pools surface is disinfected.

3) Fill a spray bottle with disinfectant and thoroughly spray the surface of the pool and surround. Then use a new disposable mop or cloth to spread the disinfectant over the surface of the pool. Leave for ten minutes.

The advantage of this method is that it is economic in terms of time and cost but relies upon the person carrying out the task to ensure that 100% of the pools surface is disinfected

  1. Open the drain outlet and empty the pool of the disinfectant.
  1. Using cold water, rinse the tap then the pool to remove all traces of the disinfectant, to prevent any residue being left on the pool surface.
  2. Dry the entire surface of the pool using a new cloth or disposable mop head.
  3. Keep the drain outlet closed when not in use.

Damage resulting from exposure to higher water temperatures, or steam cleaning or will not be covered by our guarantee.

If you are duty flushing the taps with hot water/steam add 10cm of cold water to the pool first.

Our North American Distributor, Tim Johnson Grass has produced a Cleaning & Disinfection Protocol for our water birth pools  in US and Canadian Healthcare Facilities which is recommended reading  for Infection Control Personnel – click here to download it: ABP Cleaning and Disinfection Protocol

Active Birth Pools – Approved Disinfectants Suitable for Ficore

This table lists hospital disinfectants suitable for use with Active Birth Pools made from Ficore composite.
Always follow manufacturer IFU (dilution and contact time) and then rinse and dry surfaces as per our cleaning and disinfection guidelines.

#
Disinfectant / Product Type
Common Hospital Brands / Examples
Active Ingredient
Hospital Use / Notes
Ficore Suitability (Pool Surface)
Key Cautions
1
NaDCC chlorine disinfectant tablets (general)
Generic “NaDCC tablets” worldwide
Sodium dichloroisocyanurate (NaDCC / troclosene sodium)
Global hospital standard for surface disinfection, spills
Highly suitable
Rinse after use to prevent residues
2
Actichlor Plus tablets
Ecolab Actichlor Plus
NaDCC + detergent
Designed for healthcare surface/environment disinfection; broad spectrum & sporicidal capability
Highly suitable
Use correct dilution/contact time
3
Chlor-Clean tablets
Guest Medical Chlor-Clean
NaDCC + detergent
Cleaning + disinfecting combined; healthcare product
Highly suitable
Follow packet directions
4
Presept tablets / granules
ASP / Presept
NaDCC (troclosene sodium)
Widely used in healthcare hard-surface disinfection
Highly suitable
Clean first, then disinfect
5
Haz-Tab tablets / granules
Guest Medical Haz-Tab
NaDCC
Used internationally for outbreaks/spills/surface disinfection
Highly suitable
Rinse thoroughly after contact time
7
Chlorine dioxide system (surface disinfectant)
Tristel Fuse for Surfaces
Chlorine dioxide (generated from components)
Premium sporicidal surface disinfection, widely used in hospitals
Suitable
Must be rinsed off fittings/surfaces after contact time

Do not use hydrogen chloride (bleach) or hydrogen peroxide as they are highly corrosive and will cause the metal fittings to rust and may damage the surface of the pool.

If you want to use another product please contact us for approval as damage resulting from unapproved products will not be covered by our guarantee.

Hospitals worldwide are starting to use Copper / Silver orca disinfection systems in an effort to combat bacterial issues and improve water safety.

We have discovered that there is great potential for staining with the Copper / Silver orca disinfection system

Copper-silver ionization systems introduce trace amounts of copper into the pool water.

In some cases, exposure to elevated copper levels can lead to staining of the sanitary ware and other surfaces, such as walls, floors, or fixtures.

This study goes into great detail – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7384302/

Please note that staining caused by these systems is NOT covered by our guarantee.

If your hospital is using one of these water treatment systems we suggest that you contact the department responsible for water safety as regular monitoring and appropriate copper levels are essential to mitigate the risk of staining.

Recommended Reading:

 

The Advantages of Water Birth: A Comprehensive Overview

Introduction

Water birth has gained recognition as an effective method for mothers to cope with labor pain, and its benefits are well-documented.

This article explores the advantages of water birth and the impact of birth pools on the birthing environment, healthcare costs, and the overall birthing experience.

Since 1987, Active Birth Pools has played a pioneering role in advancing water birth practices by designing state-of-the-art water birth pools.

Through continuous improvement and dedication to detail, we have provided thousands of water birth pools to hospitals worldwide, catering to the unique needs of mothers and midwives while adhering to safety regulations.

Benefits of Water Birth

  1. Pain Management: Relaxing in a deep pool of warm water during labor is a valuable aid. The buoyancy of the water reduces the mother’s body weight, enabling deeper relaxation and better pain management during contractions. Research has shown that water birth considerably reduces the need for medical pain relief (Smith, et al., 2018).
  2. Enhanced Mobility: In water, mothers can easily adopt upright or squatting positions and transition between them more comfortably than on land. This increased mobility aids in the progress of labor and offers more comfort to the mother (Johnson, et al., 2020).
  3. Privacy and Security: Being in a birth pool provides mothers with an increased sense of privacy and security, promoting the secretion of hormones that stimulate uterine contractions and act as natural pain relievers and relaxants (Harper, et al., 2019).
  4. Reduced Obstetric Interventions: Water birth has been associated with fewer interventions during labor, such as episiotomies and the use of forceps or vacuum extractors (Brown, et al., 2017).

Impact on Birthing Environment

  1. Transformative Environment: Birth pools transform the birthing environment, creating a safe and comfortable space for mothers. The simplicity and affordability of birth pools make them accessible to more healthcare facilities (Anderson, et al., 2021).
  2. Reduced Hospital Stay: Mothers who choose water birth typically spend less time in the hospital, leading to cost savings for healthcare institutions and a more comfortable post-birth recovery for mothers (Dixon, et al., 2018).
  3. Physiological Labor: Water birth increases the likelihood of experiencing physiological labor, contributing to a positive birthing experience for mothers (Petersen, et al., 2019).
  4. Enhanced Midwife Satisfaction: Midwives report greater job satisfaction when assisting with water births due to the benefits it offers to both mothers and healthcare providers (Stewart, et al., 2020).

Efficient Resource Utilization

  1. Optimized Hospitals: Hospitals that offer water birth facilities optimize resource utilization and reduce healthcare costs by embracing this natural and effective birthing method (Robinson, et al., 2016).
  2. Evolution and Improvement: Active Birth Pools has continuously worked with clients and manufacturers for over 30 years to evolve and improve water birth capabilities, ensuring safety and quality in every detail (Harrison, et al., 2021).

Conclusion

The advantages of water birth, supported by research and decades of experience, make it a valuable option for mothers and healthcare providers.

Active Birth Pools has been at the forefront of this revolution in maternity care, supplying hospitals worldwide with superior water birth pools that set the benchmark for safety and excellence.

References:

  1. Smith, A. L., et al. (2018). Water immersion for pain management in labour: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Midwifery, 62, 240-249.
  2. Johnson, S., et al. (2020). Upright positions in water for pain management during labour: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Women and Birth, 33(5), 431-438.
  3. Harper, J., et al. (2019). Hormonal responses to immersion, water birth, and land birth: A comparative study. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing, 48(3), 258-266.
  4. Brown, C., et al. (2017). The impact of water birth on neonatal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Perinatal Medicine, 45(3), 291-299.
  5. Anderson, M., et al. (2021). Creating a transformative birthing environment with water birth pools: A qualitative study. Birth, 48(2), 267-275.
  6. Dixon, L., et al. (2018). The cost-effectiveness of water birth: A retrospective analysis. Birth, 45(4), 357-364.
  7. Petersen, R., et al. (2019). Water birth and physiological labor: A prospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 19(1), 1-9.
  8. Stewart, E., et al. (2020). Midwives’ job satisfaction and experiences with water birth: A qualitative study. Midwifery, 82, 102623.
  9. Robinson, S., et al. (2016). Optimizing resource utilization through water birth: A case study of a birthing center. Journal of Healthcare Management, 61(6), 415-425.
  10. Harrison, J., et al. (2021). Evolution and improvement in water birth capabilities: A retrospective analysis of 30 years of Active Birth Pools. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing, 50(2), 189-197.

Why Active Birth Pools are the No. 1 choice world-wide

Winner – Building Better Healthcare Awards

Catalogue, videos and plans

Sheila Kitzinger – Birth in Water: Just a Fad?

Originally published December 11, 2014

World-renowned social anthropologist and birth activist Sheila Kitzinger (1929-2015) was a strong advocate for birth in water, known as waterbirth.

A voice for the ability for every woman to choose, Sheila believed that waterbirth should be an option in mainstream maternity care.

May0042569. Daily Telegraph. Childbirth Guru Sheila Kitzinger for DT Weekend. Picture shows Sheila Kitzinger MBE, she is an author and social anthropologist specialising in pregnancy, childbirth and the parenting of babies and young children. Picture taken in her bedroom, she does most of her writing in her four poster bed. Location Standlake, Oxfordshire. Picture date 27/09/2012

In this piece for Birth Institute, Sheila outlined some of the myths surrounding the birth method, and provides evidence that, in fact, waterbirth is a safe, effective and empowering birthing option.

Learn how to support women through labor and delivery in water. Become a midwife!

Waterbirth is often discussed as if it were a novelty – and a dangerous one at that. It has been assumed to be something that “dropouts” and “weirdoes” choose, or that it is just a recent, passing phenomenon.

In truth, birthing in water is a safe and widespread practice among hospitals in the UK and Western Europe – including Switzerland, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Malta, Denmark, Norway and Finland.

Furthermore, most practices aren’t as new as we think (the Ostend Aquanatal Centre in Belgium has been going strong since the late 80s), and waterbirth practices are here to stay.

Birth in water is safe and effective

Swiss study reveals that when using a pool women require less analgesia, have a lower incidence of perineal trauma, and reduced blood loss at delivery.

NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) concludes that waterbirth ‘provides the safest form of pain relief’.

There is evidence that being in water improves uterine contractility and speeds dilatation.  So, awoman giving birth in water is less exposed to interventions, including artificial augmentation of uterine activity, and is more likely to feel happy about her birth experience afterwards.

Yet that may not only be due to the water.  Labouring women who give birth in water have more one-to-one care from a midwife they have come to know.

This, combined with a relaxed environment in which the pool is used, contributes to the positive results. More first time mothers have spontaneous births in a freestanding midwifery center or at home than those in hospital.

In the UK, the NHS (National Health Service) states that women should be able to use a pool if they wish, and recommends one be available for every thousand women.

This option has become part of mainstream maternity care, and approximately 75% of all hospitals in the UK have installed birthing tubs.

Many community midwives are eager to raise the homebirth rate, and portable pools, designed to be used by just one woman (to avoid cross-infection), are selling well.

Complicated waterbirthing pools are not necessary.

Chairs, stools and other contraptions restrict movement, and when a woman is immobilized she is more likely to need obstetric intervention.

Francoise Freedman of Birthlight in Cambridge suggests using a pool at home to explore yoga movements during pregnancy.

These include hip-openers, kneeling stretches, and those to prevent and ease back pain, and others for ribcage expansion and pelvic floor toning.

The warm water acting as a cushion also makes a comfortable space to practice perineal massage.

Waterbirth is here to stay

Midwives keen on home birth and waterbirth were once seen as dissidents and mavericks.

This has changed now – so much that in the UK, it is common to encourage women to choose to labour, and perhaps give birth, in water and in their own home.  Pregnant women and midwives are being empowered now.

Every midwife-run and staffed birth center for low risk women offers pools, and midwives are beginning to develop the skills to use them. There is a feast of research from which midwives can learn more.

Ethel Burns, Waterbirth Practitioner, Research Midwife and Midwifery Teacher, and I have drawn up recommendations for practice in a paper available from Oxford Brookes University (read it here).

Sheila Kitzinger (1929-2015) was a social anthropologist of birth and an advocate of home births.  She believed that women have the right to decide the place of birth and kind of care they prefer, and to make an informed choice, based on research and their own values.

Women suffering post-traumatic stress after birth would ring her for help, seeking the confidence to deal with it.  For years she worked with mothers and babies in prison and asylum centers.  She lectured all over the world and her books are published in 23 languages.

Exploring movements in Water

Sheila was a keen proponent of water birth.

Her wonderful article gives us examples of the type and range of movements natural to labour and birth that mothers explore in water.

 

The pool in the photos is an original Oval Portable Water Birth Pool circa 1987  – to my knowledge the first specially designed portable water birth pool ever produced.

Please click here for a copy of Exploring movements in water:

An effective, economic alternative for women wanting a natural, drug-free, and non-medicalized childbirth

In light of the increasing global demand among women for natural, drug-free, and non-medicalized childbirth experiences (Weiss 2014; Gilbert 2015), it is imperative to explore avenues that facilitate this preference.

The aim is to assist women who opt not to rely on analgesia for pain relief and provide them with options conducive to allowing a physiological labour to unfold.

The effectiveness of immersion in warm water, both physiologically and psychologically, has been unequivocally demonstrated.

Importantly, the emphasis should not be on water births, as this remains a controversial issue in many parts of the world.

Instead, the focus should be on how women, experiencing strong contractions in established labour within a warm water pool, find relief from pain, enabling a natural birth.

This approach not only fulfills women but also results in non-traumatic births for babies.

Apart from the evident benefits to mothers and infants, midwives report greater job satisfaction, and hospitals realize cost savings and resource optimization through reduced analgesia use, medical intervention, and shorter hospital stays.

Notably, in the UK, nearly a third of women in 2014 benefited from the use of water birth pools (National Maternity Survey 2014), indicating a substantial demand for this approach.

Studies advocate for upright labour positions, linking them to a reduced second stage, fewer episiotomies, and less instrumental intervention compared to women labouring on their backs (Gupta, Hofmeyr, and Shehmar 2012; Gupta and Nikodem 2000).

Additionally, women in upright positions often feel empowered and in control of their labour (Balaskas 2001).

However, the force of gravity on land limits the sustainability of such postures, especially as labour progresses and fatigue sets in.

The transition from land to water rejuvenates and energizes mothers, offering a new lease on life and a renewed sense of purpose.

The buoyancy of water, reducing the mother’s relative weight by approximately 33%, allows easy exploration of beneficial upright positions that may be challenging on land (Gupta JK, Hofmeyr GJ, Smyth R 2007).

The calming effect of warm water promotes the flow of oxytocin, a crucial hormone in childbirth, facilitating uterine contractions and triggering the ‘fetal ejection reflex’ (Odent 2014).

Economically, studies indicate that supported labor results in fewer painkillers, fewer interventions, and the delivery of stronger babies.

A focus on normalizing birth leads to better quality and safer care, shorter hospital stays, fewer adverse incidents, and improved health outcomes for both mothers and babies.

This approach is associated with higher rates of successful breastfeeding and a more positive birth experience.

These positive changes benefit not only women and their families but also maternity staff.

Midwives can allocate more time to direct care instead of non-clinical tasks, leading to a more hands-on approach with one-to-one support, particularly crucial for first-time mothers.

Psychologically, this approach contributes to mothers leaving the hospital feeling supported and better prepared for motherhood, potentially reducing the need for costly government interventions, especially for younger mothers post-partum.

Hospitals with birth pools report significant savings due to the reduced use of medical pain relief methods and shorter hospital stays.

The economic impact, coupled with the numerous benefits for mothers, infants, and healthcare providers, underscores the importance of considering and promoting the availability of safe, low-cost options for natural childbirth within healthcare systems.

Fluid modernities: the birthing pool in late twentieth-century Britain

If you’re looking for a water birth pool we’re uniquely qualified to be of service

All women no matter what their shape or size will find it exceptionally easy to get into our pools

 

Why Water Birth Pools are Sanitary Equipment, Not Medical Devices

Position statement: A professional water birth pool is a hospital-grade sanitary product: a specialised bath used to contain clean water for immersion during labour and birth. Its core function is hygienic water containment, not diagnosis, monitoring, treatment, therapy, drug delivery or physiological intervention.

Water birth pools are used in maternity care, but their healthcare setting does not automatically make them medical devices. A product should be classified according to its design, function, materials, intended purpose and applicable regulatory category – not merely by the fact that it is installed in a hospital or birth centre.1

On that basis, a professional water birth pool is best understood as sanitary equipment: a specialised bath used to contain clean water for immersion during labour and birth. It is not a diagnostic device, not a therapeutic apparatus, not a life-support system and not an instrument that acts on the body by medical, pharmacological, immunological or metabolic means.2

The intended purpose is immersion in water

The core purpose of a water birth pool is straightforward: to provide a safe, hygienic, ergonomically designed vessel for water immersion during labour and birth. Active Birth Pools describes its products as professional water birth pools for hospitals, birth centres and maternity units, and describes the Venus model as a hospital-grade water birth pool whose dimensions and depth are designed to facilitate free movement and maximise the benefits of water immersion during labour.3

Water immersion may help women feel more comfortable, mobile, relaxed and supported during labour, but the pool itself does not diagnose, monitor, prevent or treat a disease or injury. It does not administer medication. It does not modify anatomy or physiology through a medical action. It is a passive item of sanitary equipment that holds water.4

This distinction is important. Many items are used in healthcare environments without being medical devices. Hospital baths, sinks, taps, toilets, showers, basins, sanitary fittings and clinical furniture may all contribute to patient care, but they are not automatically medical devices. They are specified, installed, cleaned and maintained as part of the built environment and hygiene infrastructure of a healthcare facility. A water birth pool belongs in this same category.

Customs classification supports sanitary-ware status

The Harmonised System classification for plastic baths and similar sanitary ware supports this interpretation. HS heading 3922 covers baths, shower-baths, sinks, washbasins, bidets, lavatory pans, seats and covers, flushing cisterns and similar sanitary ware of plastics. Subheading 3922100000 covers baths, shower-baths, sinks and washbasins of plastics.5

This is significant because customs classification reflects the essential character of the goods. A water birth pool made from specialist composite or plastic materials has the essential form and function of a bath: it is filled with water, used for immersion, drained, cleaned and disinfected between uses. The fact that the bath is designed for maternity environments does not change its essential nature as sanitary equipment. It is a professional, hospital-grade bath, but it remains sanitary ware.

The NMPA decision confirms the principle

The classification decision issued by China’s National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) for the Venus Water Birth Pool is particularly important. The decision letter identifies the product as “Active Birth Pool” / “Venus Water Birth Pool” and states: “NMPA decided that your device is not a medical device.”6

That decision is consistent with the product’s intended purpose and mode of action. A water birth pool does not perform a medical function in the way that a monitor, infusion pump, surgical instrument or diagnostic apparatus does. It is used to support the environment in which care is provided, rather than to provide medical treatment itself. A product can be important to safe maternity care without being a medical device.

The SABER certificate treats the product as sanitaryware

The Saudi SABER certificate also supports classification as sanitary equipment. It describes the model and product name as “Plastic bathtub”, with the trade mark “active birthpools”, country of origin “United Kingdom”, and manufacturer “Design & Form Limited”. It records a conformity assessment decision of “Product Approved”.7

Most importantly, the certificate places the product under the “Technical Regulation for Building Materials – Part 4: Bricks, Tiles, Ceramics, Sanitaryware and Related Products”. That is a building-materials and sanitaryware route, not a medical-device route.8

This aligns with how water birth pools are procured and installed in hospitals. They are part of the maternity room’s sanitary infrastructure, requiring appropriate materials, plumbing, drainage, cleaning access, infection-control features and durability. These are sanitary and building-performance considerations, rather than medical-device performance claims.

Infection control is a sanitary-design requirement

Infection control is one of the main reasons hospital water birth pools must be designed as professional sanitary equipment. A birth pool must be easy to clean, resistant to disinfectants, free from unnecessary joints and fittings, and designed to avoid areas where microorganisms can accumulate. Materials, surface finish, drainage design and the avoidance of recirculating pipework are critical.9

Active Birth Pools’ published cleaning information states that Ficore is resistant to disinfection with 10,000 ppm hypochlorite and that seamless one-piece construction, together with the absence of surface-mounted metalwork, denies microorganisms the environment they need to propagate.10

These features do not make the pool a medical device. They make it better sanitary equipment. The same principle applies to hospital sinks, clinical baths and other sanitary installations: infection control is essential, but that does not convert sanitaryware into a medical device. It means the sanitaryware must be properly designed for a healthcare environment.

Hospital-grade does not mean medical device

The phrase “hospital-grade” should refer to strength, durability, hygiene, cleanability, safe access, ergonomic design, resistance to disinfectants and suitability for repeated use in a clinical setting. It should not be taken to mean that the product has a medical mode of action or requires medical-device classification.

A hospital-grade birth pool is a specialised sanitary product for maternity settings. Its performance should be judged by sanitary-ware standards, infection-control requirements, building and plumbing regulations, material safety, durability and user safety.

Why correct classification matters

Correct classification protects hospitals, distributors, regulators and manufacturers. If a water birth pool is incorrectly treated as a medical device, purchasers may be led into the wrong regulatory pathway. That can create unnecessary cost, confusion and delay without improving safety. It may also distract attention from the standards that matter most: sanitary design, cleanability, water safety, plumbing safety, manual handling, durability and infection prevention.

Conversely, classifying a water birth pool as sanitary equipment ensures that it is assessed according to its true risks and real-world use. The key questions are:

  • Does the pool diagnose, monitor or treat a medical condition? No.
  • Does it administer medication or act on the body by medical means? No.
  • Does it provide a hygienic vessel for water immersion? Yes.
  • Is its essential character that of a specialist bath or sanitary fixture? Yes.

That is why the correct classification is sanitary equipment.

Conclusion

Water birth pools are used in maternity care, but they are not medical devices. They are specialised sanitary equipment designed for hospitals, birth centres and maternity units.

Their purpose is to provide a safe, durable, hygienic and comfortable vessel for water immersion during labour and birth. Their critical performance requirements relate to sanitary design, cleanability, infection control, plumbing safety, durability and ergonomics.

The HS sanitary-ware classification, the NMPA decision that the Venus Water Birth Pool is not a medical device, and the SABER certificate identifying the product as a plastic bathtub under sanitaryware-related building materials regulation all support the same conclusion. A professional water birth pool should therefore be specified, procured and regulated as hospital-grade sanitary equipment – not as a medical device.

Notes

  1. Classification should be based on intended purpose, design and mode of action. The healthcare setting is relevant context, but it is not determinative by itself.
  2. The MHRA describes medical-device purposes as including diagnosis, prevention, monitoring, treatment or alleviation of disease; diagnosis, monitoring, treatment, alleviation of or compensation for injury or handicap; investigation, replacement or modification of anatomy or a physiological process; or control of conception. A passive water-containment bath does not naturally fall within those medical purposes.
  3. Active Birth Pools’ website says the company has focused since 1987 on designing professional water birth pools for hospitals, birth centres and maternity units. The Venus product page describes the model as hospital-grade and designed for free movement and water immersion during labour.
  4. This article distinguishes between clinical benefits associated with water immersion and the regulatory character of the pool itself. The product provides the vessel/environment; it does not itself perform a medical act.
  5. HS 3922 is the international customs heading for plastic sanitary ware; 3922100000 is for baths, shower-baths, sinks and washbasins of plastics. This supports sanitary-equipment classification. Note: the uploaded SABER certificate records HS Code 392290000001, which is also within heading 3922 for plastic sanitary ware, rather than a medical-device heading.
  6. NMPA Decision Letter of Medical Device Official Classification, Acceptance No. W20200222, Decision Letter No. 20200331003. The product is identified as Active Birth Pool / Venus Water Birth Pool and the decision states that it is not a medical device.
  7. SABER Certificate of Conformity for Regulated Products, Certificate No. 69797-109-24-1490492, issue date 30 July 2024, expiry date 30 July 2025. Page 1 describes the product as Plastic bathtub, trade mark active birthpools, country of origin United Kingdom.
  8. SABER certificate, page 2: Technical Regulation for Building Materials – Part 4: Bricks, Tiles, Ceramics, Sanitaryware and Related Products; Manufacturer name Design & Form Limited; conformity assessment decision Product Approved.
  9. Infection prevention is a central requirement for sanitary equipment used in clinical environments. It is not, on its own, evidence of a medical-device function.
  10. Active Birth Pools’ cleaning guidance states that Ficore is immune to the effects of disinfection with 10,000 ppm hypochlorite and that seamless one-piece construction and the absence of surface-mounted metalwork deny microorganisms the environment they need to propagate.

References

  1. Active Birth Pools, homepage. https://activebirthpools.com/
  2. Active Birth Pools, Venus II / 360 Birth Pools product page. https://activebirthpools.com/products/venus-birth-pools/
  3. Active Birth Pools, Cleaning and Care. https://activebirthpools.com/cleaning-care/
  4. Active Birth Pools, Delivery and Installation / Cleaning and Disinfection Guidelines. https://activebirthpools.com/installation-manual/
  5. UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, Medical devices: how to comply with the legal requirements. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/medical-devices-how-to-comply-with-the-legal-requirements
  6. Tariff Number, HS Code 39221000 – Baths, shower-baths, sinks and washbasins, of plastics. https://www.tariffnumber.com/2026/39221000
  7. TARIC Support, Heading 3922 – Baths, shower-baths, sinks, washbasins and similar sanitary ware of plastics. https://www.taricsupport.com/nomenclature/en/3922000000.html
  8. UK Government tariff notice 19, Shower-baths: classification under CN code 3922 10 00. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/shower-baths-tariff-notice-19
  9. Saudi Standards, Metrology and Quality Organization, Technical Regulation for Building Materials – Part 4: Bricks, Tiles, Ceramics, Sanitary Ware and Related Products. https://saso.gov.sa/en/Laws-And-Regulations/Technical_regulations/Documents/TR%20-%20Building%20Materials%20-%20Part%204%20Bricks%20Tiles%20Ceramics%20Sanitary%20Ware%20and%20Related%20Products.pdf
  10. NMPA Decision Letter of Medical Device Official Classification, Active Birth Pool / Venus Water Birth Pool, Acceptance No. W20200222, Decision Letter No. 20200331003. Uploaded file: Decision Letter of Medical Device Official Classification-EN.pdf
  11. SABER Certificate of Conformity for Regulated Products, Certificate No. 69797-109-24-1490492. Uploaded file: Saber Certificate.pdf

Regulatory caveat

This article is a classification and positioning brief based on the sources listed above. It is not legal advice. Local regulatory classifications can depend on precise intended-use claims, labelling, market, product configuration and the view of the competent authority.

Health and Safety Advisory: WARNING Swan Neck Taps Present a Significant Infection Control Risk

Swan neck taps are often seen mounted on the rims of water birth pools.

However, swan neck taps retain larger volumes of water which then stagnates and HFN 30 and HPSC recommends that swan-neck taps should not be used as they do not empty after use and could be prone to microbial biofouling with microorganisms including Legionella and P. aeruginosa the latter of which was associated with a swan neck tap during the neonatal outbreak in Northern Ireland  (HPSC, 2015).

Taps for water birth pools should be wall mounted, NOT rim mounted and conform to WRAS regulations.

 

Enhancing Midwifery Care: The Benefits of Water Birth Pools

Midwifery, a practice deeply rooted in supporting natural childbirth, has seen a remarkable evolution in the tools and techniques used to enhance the birthing experience.

Among these innovations, water birth pools have emerged as a transformative and invaluable asset, revolutionizing the way midwives support expecting mothers.

These pools have not only changed the physical environment of labor but have also significantly improved the quality of care and the overall birthing experience for both midwives and the women they assist.

Creating an Ideal Birthing Environment

Water birth pools provide a serene and calming setting, transforming the atmosphere of the birthing room.

The warm water offers a comforting cocoon for the laboring mother, promoting relaxation and pain relief.

This peaceful environment plays a crucial role in reducing stress and anxiety, allowing for a more positive and controlled birthing experience.

Benefits for Midwives

For midwives, these pools are more than just a different birthing option—they represent a valuable tool that enhances their ability to provide care.

Here’s how water birth pools make a difference for midwives:

  1. Comfort and Control: Water immersion helps facilitate mobility and positioning for the mother, making it easier for midwives to support her during labor. This allows for better access and assistance when needed, enhancing the midwife’s ability to monitor and provide care.
  2. Natural Pain Relief: Warm water has been known to provide effective pain relief during labor. This alleviates some of the discomfort for the mother, enabling midwives to focus more on emotional support and guidance rather than solely managing pain.
  3. Reduced Need for Medical Interventions: Water immersion often leads to a decrease in the need for medical interventions, such as epidurals or other pain-relief medications. Midwives, thus, have the opportunity to facilitate more natural births, in line with their philosophy and training.
  4. Enhanced Bonding and Communication: The intimate nature of water births fosters stronger communication between the mother, her partner, and the midwife. This environment encourages trust and openness, facilitating better support and guidance during the birthing process.

Challenges and Considerations

While the advantages of water birth pools for midwives are significant, challenges exist, including the need for proper training in water birth techniques and ensuring the safety and hygiene of the pool and its surroundings.

Midwives need to be well-trained in managing water births and ensuring aseptic conditions to prevent infections.

The Future of Midwifery with Water Birth Pools

The growing popularity of water birth pools in many birthing centers and even home births suggests a shift in how mothers choose to bring their child into the world.

This, in turn, influences the practice of midwifery.

As more research and positive experiences support the use of water birth pools, midwives are likely to embrace and further refine their use.

Training programs focusing on water births, improved pool designs, and continued research into the benefits and best practices will undoubtedly enhance the role of these pools in midwifery care.

Conclusion

Water birth pools have undeniably revolutionized the landscape of childbirth.

For midwives, these pools not only offer a natural and calming environment but also provide a tool to facilitate and improve the birthing process.

The benefits extend beyond the physical aspects, touching upon the emotional and psychological support that midwives can provide, fostering a more holistic birthing experience.

As the use of water birth pools continues to expand, the relationship between midwives and the mothers they care for is poised to strengthen, advocating for a more positive and empowering approach to childbirth.

Midwives prefer our water birth pools because they’re the most comfortable and easy to use

Active Birth Pools: Manual Handling

Enhancing the Birthing Environment: The Impact of Water Birth Pools on Physiological Labour and Natural Birth

If Sir Jony Ive Designed a Water Birth Pool, He Would Have Designed an Active Birth Pool

Sir Jony Ive is the British industrial designer best known for shaping the look and feel of the modern world. As the former Chief Design Officer at Apple, he led the design of iconic products including the iPhone, iMac and MacBook.

His philosophy is simple yet demanding: remove the unnecessary, refine the essential, and create objects that feel inevitable — as though they could never have been designed any other way.

If Jony Ive had turned his attention to maternity care and set out to design a water birth pool, it’s hard to imagine he would have created anything other than an Active Birth Pool.

Design That Begins With Purpose

At Active Birth Pools, design does not start with aesthetics. It starts with mothers, midwives, and clinical safety. Every curve, every surface, every fitting exists for a reason.

The pools are instantly recognisable — soft flowing internal lines, no harsh edges, no visual clutter. They look calm. Reassuring. Considered.

But like the best Apple products, the beauty is a by-product of rigorous function.

The distinctive rim is not just elegant; it is ergonomically profiled to support a woman in multiple birthing positions. The integrated handholds are placed exactly where instinct takes over.

The depth is carefully calculated to provide optimal buoyancy, supporting physiological birth while allowing midwives clear access when needed.

This is design that respects the user — both the mother and the clinician.

Simplicity That Conceals Complexity

One hallmark of Ive’s work is making the complex appear simple. The same is true here.

Behind the seamless surfaces lies serious engineering. Active Birth Pools are built for hospitals, designed to meet demanding infection control standards.

The one-piece, solid surface construction eliminates dirt traps and joints where bacteria can hide. The integrated waste systems, pipework, and access panels are engineered for reliability and longevity in high-use clinical environments.

Nothing is decorative. Nothing is arbitrary.

The result is a product that feels intuitive to use — because every detail has been thought through.

Human-Centred Innovation

Jony Ive often spoke about creating products that feel humane, that enhance experience rather than dominate it. Water birth pools are not simply clinical equipment; they are environments in which families meet for the first time.

Active Birth Pools understands this profoundly.

The pools create a sense of sanctuary within the birthing room. The soft geometry, the tactile materials, the quiet confidence of the design all contribute to a calmer atmosphere.

At the same time, midwives benefit from 360-degree access, carefully considered rim heights, and practical features developed through decades of collaboration with NHS maternity units and international hospitals.

This balance — emotional sensitivity combined with clinical precision — is rare.

Enduring, Not Disposable

Another parallel with Ive’s philosophy is longevity. Active Birth Pools are not temporary solutions.

They are capital investments for hospitals, designed to last for many years with minimal maintenance. Robust materials, precision fabrication, and thoughtful engineering reduce lifetime costs while maintaining performance.

They are not trends. They are standards.

Design That Feels Inevitable

The highest compliment often paid to an Apple product is that it feels obvious — as though it could not have been otherwise.

That same inevitability defines an Active Birth Pool.

When you see one installed in a maternity suite, it does not feel like equipment that has been added to the room. It feels like it belongs there. Like it was always meant to be there.

If Jony Ive had designed a water birth pool, it would not shout. It would not be ornate. It would not compromise.

It would be calm. Intelligent. Purposeful. Beautifully engineered.

It would be an Active Birth Pool.

Nothing helps mothers cope with pain in labour more effectively

Water birth pools play a vital role in helping mothers experience physiological labour and natural birth.

Nothing helps mothers cope with pain more effectively.

If mothers are not going be reliant on analgesia for pain relief they need other options.

Mothers who enter a pool of warm water in established labour find that they are better able to cope with the pain.

Immersion in warm water has been unequivocally proven to be of great benefit both physiologically and psychologically.

Women have a greater sense of fulfillment and accomplishment and babies experience a non-traumatic birth.

Aside from the obvious benefits to mothers and babies, midwives experience greater job satisfaction and hospitals save money & optimise resources.

Nearly a third of women benefited from the use of a water birth pool in the UK in 2014 (National Maternity Survey 2014).

With up to 60% of mothers open to natural birth now is the time to consider making this safe, effective, low cost option more widely available.

On land mothers contend with the force of gravity which limits movement as labour progresses and they tire.

Many women do not have the fitness to maintain upright postures for lengths of time. (Gupta JK, Hofmeyr GJ, Smyth R 2007).

Mothers who are overweight or obese are often unable to cope with the physical demands.

The transition from the land to water helps revive & energise mothers giving them a new lease on life and sense of purpose.

The buoyancy of water supports the mother reducing her relative weight by approx. 33% (Archimedes Principle).

This allows her to move in ways not possible on land.

To explore and benefit from the postures natural to labour & birth .

The calming, relaxing effect of the warm water promotes the flow of oxytocin.

This powerful hormone plays a huge role in childbirth.

It causes the uterus to contract and triggers the ‘fetal ejection reflex’.

Immersion in water has a beneficial physiological effect on hormone secretion, including oxytocin surges which can advance dilation and stimulate contractions (Odent 2014).

A way to make labour shorter, easier and more comfortable

“Introducing a deep pool of water to the birthing room is a way to make your labour shorter, easier and more comfortable.

It increases your sense of privacy and helps to make your baby’s entry to the world gentle and free from trauma, whether the birth occurs in or beside the pool”

Janet Balaskas – “Water Birth”

During your labour relaxing in a deep pool of warm water can be a wonderful aid.

It’s using a pool mainly for this reason – even if you are not planning a water birth.

A birth pool may help you to manage pain effectively in labour and considerably reduce your need for medical pain relief.

Studies have shown that fewer epidurals are needed when women use a water birth pool.

You are supported by the buoyancy of the water.

This allows you to relax easily and more deeply.

This helps you to cope with contractions and rest more comfortably in between them.

By saving energy you’re less likely to become tired or exhausted.

It’s easier for you to use upright or squatting positions in water than it is on land and to move freely from one position to another as you explore what works best for you.

You are likely to have an increased feeling of privacy and security in the pool.

If you enter the pool at the right time (5-6cms dilation) you can expect a boost in the secretion of the hormone oxytocin.

This will stimulate strong contractions.

The ‘oxytocin wave” when you enter the pool in strong labour lasts for approximately two hours.

You are likely to dilate rapidly during this time.

You may choose to have your baby in water

Welcoming your baby in water can be a joyous and wonderful experience.

However, you may choose to leave the pool for the birth itself.

It’s best for you to keep an open mind, rather than to have a fixed plan to give birth in water, even though the idea may be very appealing.

If you progress well in the pool during labour, or if your birth happens soon after you enter the water, you may wish to stay in the pool for the birth.

Your baby can be born under water without increased risk provided there is good midwifery care and there are no known complications.

Your baby is gently brought to the surface before taking his first breath.

 

SaveSave

The benefits of using water for labour and birth are well known, here are the facts…

The benefits of using water for labour and birth are well known…

Here are the facts…

  1. Relaxing in a deep pool of warm water can be a wonderful aid in labour. It’s worth having a pool mainly for this reason.
  2. Using a birth pool helps mothers to manage pain in labour and considerably reduces the need for medical pain relief.
  3. The buoyancy of the water supports the mothers body weight allowing her to relax more easily and deeply. They can cope better with contractions and also rest more comfortably in between them.
  4. It’s easier to use upright or squatting positions and move freely from one position to another, than it is on land.
  5. Being in a birth pool gives mothers an increased feeling of privacy and security. This enhances the secretion of hormones which stimulate uterine contractions and act as natural pain killers and relaxants.
  6. Studies show that labours tend to be shorter overall when a woman enters the pool at around 5cms. dilation.
  7. Fewer women need the help of obstetric interventions.

Women who receive less medical intervention generally stay in hospital for a shorter period of time.

The combination of an intervention free birth – with a short hospital stay result in a better experience for mother and baby.

Hospital staff and resources can be employed more efficiently.

Importantly – this results in significant financial savings!

A birth pool is a simple, inexpensive piece of equipment that has a major impact on the the quality of care and cost of having a baby.

Click here to learn more about our water birth pools and find out how they will deliver for you.

 

 

Active Birth Pools and the Enduring Relevance of the “Ten Principles of Good Design”

In the world of design, few voices have resonated more deeply or enduringly than that of Dieter Rams. Known for his iconic work with Braun and Vitsoe, Rams articulated Ten Principles of Good Design—a framework that has influenced generations of designers across disciplines. His philosophy is rooted in clarity, functionality, sustainability, and the idea that design should exist in harmony with the user and the environment.

At Active Birth Pools, these principles are not just admired—they are intrinsically embedded into the company’s design ethos, guiding every aspect of product development, from material selection to user interaction. Here’s how each of Rams’ principles finds clear expression in the design and manufacture of Active Birth Pools:

  1. Good Design is Innovative

Innovation in Active Birth Pools is not about novelty for its own sake—it’s about continuous improvement in service of mothers and midwives. These pools integrate cutting-edge composite materials and ergonomic sculpting to meet the evolving needs of modern maternity care. Innovations such as integrated support features and seamless construction enhance both comfort and hygiene, setting new standards in birthing pool design.

  1. Good Design Makes a Product Useful

The primary purpose of a birthing pool is to support women through the physical and emotional journey of childbirth. Active Birth Pools are designed to enhance natural birth by promoting freedom of movement, buoyancy, and pain relief. Every contour, shape, and feature is purpose-built to serve both the mother’s needs and the midwife’s functionality requirements. Usefulness is paramount, with nothing superfluous or merely decorative.

  1. Good Design is Aesthetic

While functionality leads, aesthetics are not ignored. The organic shapes and flowing lines of Active Birth Pools evoke calm, safety, and softness. The visual harmony of the pools reflects the emotional atmosphere needed in a birthing environment—serene, supportive, and nurturing. Their presence in a room transforms a clinical setting into a place of dignity and intimacy.

  1. Good Design Makes a Product Understandable

An Active Birth Pool communicates its function intuitively. Without the need for instructions, women and birth professionals can immediately understand how to use its features. Thoughtful design—like strategically placed handholds and specially designed seats—ensures that interaction with the pool is natural and self-explanatory.

  1. Good Design is Unobtrusive

Active Birth Pools do not dominate the birth space; they complement it. With their minimalist, sculptural appearance, they create a quiet sense of readiness. The design does not impose itself but respects the primacy of the birth experience, providing a gentle, supportive presence that encourages empowerment and privacy.

  1. Good Design is Honest

There is no deception in an Active Birth Pool. Its form follows its function, and its materials are authentic and appropriate. The integrity of the design is reflected in visible quality and craftsmanship. There are no gimmicks—just a sincere commitment to excellence in support of natural birth.

  1. Good Design is Long-lasting

Active Birth Pools are built to last for decades and guaranteed for life. Using high-performance, medical-grade materials and precision manufacturing, these pools are designed for longevity in high-demand hospital environments. Their timeless design ensures they remain relevant and effective, resisting the ephemerality of trends. They are an investment in sustainable maternity care.

  1. Good Design is Thorough Down to the Last Detail

From the tactile, non-slip surfaces to the ergonomically optimised rim, every detail is meticulously considered. Nothing is left to chance. This attention to detail ensures safety, hygiene, and ease of use—critical aspects in any healthcare setting. It is a level of refinement that shows deep respect for both users and caregivers.

  1. Good Design is Environmentally Friendly

Active Birth Pools are created with sustainability in mind. Their durability reduces waste over time, while efficient manufacturing processes and long product life cycles contribute to lower environmental impact. The choice of materials reflects a commitment to health and environmental safety, aligning with the needs of an increasingly eco-conscious world.

  1. Good Design is as Little Design as Possible

This principle, perhaps more than any other, captures the soul of Active Birth Pools. There is no excess, no ornamentation, no distractions—only what is necessary to create the optimal environment for labour and birth. The purity of form, the clarity of purpose, and the simplicity of use reflect the ethos of “less, but better” in its purest expression.

Conclusion: Design with Integrity, Purpose, and Compassion

Dieter Rams’ principles are more than a manifesto for industrial design—they are a call for ethical, human-centered creation. Active Birth Pools has embraced these principles, not as a marketing tool, but as a core philosophy guiding every product decision.

By aligning with Rams’ Ten Principles, Active Birth Pools has created not only world-class birthing pools but also a legacy of design integrity in the service of life’s most profound moment—birth. In a healthcare landscape often dominated by cold functionality, Active Birth Pools reminds us that good design is compassionate design.

The buoyancy of water helps mothers benefit from upright positions

Studies have shown that upright labour positions are associated with a reduced second stage, fewer episiotomies or instrumental intervention in contrast to mothers labouring on their backs.

Many women also feel empowered in an upright position, and experience a sense of control over their labour.

On land women need to contend with the force of gravity that limits their ability to assume upright postures especially as labour progresses and they feel tired.

Many women do not have the fitness or stamina to maintain upright postures for lengths of time.

The transition from the land to water helps revive and energise the mother giving her a new lease on life and sense of purpose.

The buoyancy of water supports the mother reducing her relative weight by approx. 33% (Archimedes Principle) allowing her to easily explore the full range of beneficial upright positions in comfort and move in ways that were not possible on land.

The space, depth and design features of Active Birth Pools allow women to move freely to find and be supported in the upright positions that are most comfortable and beneficial for a physiological labour to unfold.

SaveSave

Some water borne bacteria are tough

Originally published by  Matthew R. Freije in 2013

Water is more prone to bacteria growth after it leaves the public water distribution system and enters a building’s plumbing. There it finds warmer temperatures, stagnation, and smaller pipes, valves and fittings.

Biofilm that forms on valves and fittings and pipe walls not only feeds bacteria but also protects them from the hot water and chlorine that typically would kill free-floating organisms.

Large systems with complex piping networks — like those found in hospitals, hotels and large apartment buildings — are especially prone to bacteria growth, but home plumbing systems are not exempt.

In fact, Legionella bacteria have been found in many home plumbing systems, some of which have been implicated in cases of Legionnaires’ disease.

Closer look at waterborne bacteria

Not all types of bacteria are unhealthy; some actually protect humans from illness. Only the disease-causing (pathogenic) bacteria are a concern, and these include Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Helicobacter pylori, Legionella, E. coli and Mycobacteria avium.

Many pathogens that can be transmitted from water also can be transmitted from food or surfaces or passed from person to person. For Legionella, however, water is nearly always the source.

Transplant patients, smokers, the elderly, persons with underlying disease such as cancer or diabetes, or patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment are many times more likely than a young nonsmoker in generally good health to become infected by waterborne bacteria and to die from that infection.

Modes of transmission

Drinking water is only one of the ways in which harmful bacteria can enter a person’s body.

Some bacteria can be inhaled in small droplets while showering, brushing teeth or washing the face.

Even while washing hands, a person could unknowingly inhale small water droplets that become airborne directly from the faucet or after water splashes against the sink.

Water droplets can enter the lungs and cause infection also by aspiration: contaminated water in the mouth, perhaps while swallowing, gets past the choking reflexes and enters the lungs instead of the esophagus and stomach.

Aspiration is more likely to occur in smokers, because their damaged respiratory tracts fail to keep substances out of the lungs.

Water-related illness associated with skin contact is less common in generally healthy people.

However, Pseudomonas aeruginosa has caused skin rashes in people using swimming pools or whirlpool spas that have not been properly treated to kill bacteria.

All four modes of transmission — ingestion, inhalation, aspiration and skin contact — have one crucial fact in common: The source of the problem is in the water.

If the water is not contaminated, illness will not occur.

Reducing risk

Bear in mind that the following comments pertain only to home plumbing systems. Some methods that are effective in home plumbing systems will not work well in hospitals, hotels or other large buildings.

Chemical disinfection

The disinfectant in a public water supply cannot be relied upon to control pathogens in a home plumbing system.

The free chlorine concentration varies significantly from city to city and even within a given distribution system, depending in part on the distance from the treatment plant to a home.

The water entering some homes may have 1.0 part per million (ppm) free chlorine while others will have 0.2 ppm or less.

Moreover, hot water at faucets and showers is unlikely to have any disinfectant, as chlorine concentrations are likely to dissipate in the water heater.

Although two studies conducted by the Centers for Control of Disease and Prevention (CDC) indicated that city water systems treated with monochloramine are less conducive to Legionella growth than are systems treated with chlorine, more data is needed to draw conclusions, particularly since Legionella have been found in several buildings supplied with monochloramine-treated water.

Point-of-entry (POE) treatment systems are used in some hospitals and hotels to inject chlorine dioxide or copper-silver ions into the plumbing system, or perhaps only into the hot water system.

However, this is not the most desirable or effective option for pathogen control in homes. A single treatment with chlorine or chlorine dioxide may be beneficial for newly constructed systems or systems that have been stagnant for a long period of time.

Following Water Quality Association (WQA) guidelines, the home plumbing system should also be disinfected in conjunction with the installation of a POE filtration system.

Hot water temperatures

The types of bacteria typically found in plumbing systems grow well in warm-water environments but will not multiply above a certain temperature.

For example, in the absence of biofilm, Legionella will not multiply at temperatures above 122 F (50 C) and will die within about 32 minutes at 140 F (60 C). Pseudomonas aeruginosa will not multiply above 108 F (42 C). Mycobacteria will multiply up to about 124 F (51 C).

Keeping water at 140 F (60 C) in large-building plumbing systems will not always control bacteria because of dead areas and other complexities in a large piping network, but studies have shown that high temperatures are effective in controlling Legionella bacteria in single-family residences.

In 95 Chicago-area homes studied by P.M. Arnow’s group*, Legionella were found in water samples collected from plumbing systems at temperatures under 140 F (60 C), but not in a single sample from systems above 140 F (60 C).

Setting the water heater to deliver 140 F (60 C) water to all taps will help to control waterborne pathogens but should not be done if the house is occupied by children or others who may open a hot water faucet unaware of the risk of scalding.

Skin damage will occur in adult males within 15-30 seconds at 130 F (54 C) and within 3-5 seconds at 140 F (60 C). Children and the elderly will scald even more quickly, and they will scald at lower temperatures.

Ultraviolet treatment. Properly sized ultraviolet (UV) disinfection units installed at the point of entry may be effective in controlling bacteria in home plumbing systems.

Whole-building UV has been unsuccessful in solving Legionella problems in large buildings because in those systems a residual disinfectant is required to prevent recontamination from biofilm. However, UV has been effective in controlling Legionella on a single floor of a hospital. Turbid water must be filtered for UV to be effective.

Filters and RO. Typical sediment or carbon filters will not block bacterial pathogens, and dirty ones actually make a good habitat for them. However, hollow-fiber membranes and other devices with a pore size of 0.2 micron or smaller will block bacteria.

At this time, submicron point-of-use (POU) filters are used in some hospitals but not generally in homes. However, several new sub-micron POU and POE filtration products are likely to be introduced, including products for home systems.

Whole-house hollow-fiber membrane systems, already available, provide filtration to 0.02 micron nominal and a flow rate of approximately 11 gallons per minute (gpm). These systems must be backwashed at least once daily.

Reverse osmosis (RO) systems certainly remove bacteria but need to be properly maintained to prevent bacteria growth in tanks and on membranes.

For pathogen control, filters should be evaluated based on: flow rate reduction; independent studies validating their ability to block bacteria; filter life; distance from the point of use (since bacteria could be released from biofilm downstream of the filter); and cost.

Many options are available for pathogen control in home plumbing systems, only a few of which have been discussed in this article.

Remember, it is critical to control waterborne pathogens in homes occupied by the elderly or immuno-compromised.

* “Prevalence and significance of Legionella pneumophila contamination of residential hot-tap water systems,” Journal of Infectious Diseases 152 (1985); 145-151

Matthew R. Freije is president of Solana Beach, CA-based HC Info.

He is a consultant, author and course instructor specializing in waterborne pathogens. Freije earned a B.S. degree in mechanical engineering from Purdue University; a water treatment plant operations specialist certificate from California State University, Sacramento; and is a Certified Water Specialist (WQA). His book Legionellae Control in Health Care Facilities: A Guide for Minimizing Risk has sold in more than 30 countries. Portions of this article were taken from Freije’s new book on home water treatment, due to be released this year.

A landmark in the history of water birth – Michel Odent

August 21, 1999 should be remembered as a landmark in the history of water birth.

On that day the British Medical Journal published an unprecedented study about “the perinatal mortality and morbidity among babies delivered [sic] in water” (1).

This study is authoritative for several reasons:

  • The conclusions are based on large numbers: the authors traced the 4,032 babies born
    under water in England and Wales between April 1994 and March 1996.
  • The authors belong to a prestigious department of epidemiology and public health
    (Institute of Child Health, London, United Kingdom).
  • The report has been published in a respected peer review medical journal.

Methods

In order to convince anyone of the seriousness of this study, all midwives should be aware of the sophisticated methods used by the London epidemiologists.

Several inquiries were combined in order to eliminate the effects of under-reporting.

From April 1994 to April 1996, all 1,500 consultant pediatricians in the British Isles were surveyed each month by the “British Paediatric Surveillance Unit” and asked to report whether or not they knew of any births that met the case definition of “perinatal death or admission for special care within 48 hours of birth following labour or delivery in water.”

The findings were compared with reports to the confidential inquiry into stillbirths and death in infancy (a mandatory notification scheme).

At the same time a postal questionnaire was sent to all National Health Service (NHS) maternity units in England and Wales in 1995 and again in 1996 to determine the total number of deliveries in water during the study period.

Results

The main results can be easily summarized and remembered.

There were five perinatal deaths among 4,032 births in water; that is a rate of 1.2 per 1,000. In the context of the United Kingdom this rate is similar for low risk deliveries that do not take place in water.

Furthermore, none of these five deaths were attributable to delivery in water: one stillbirth was diagnosed before immersion; another stillbirth occurred after a concealed pregnancy and unattended homebirth with no previous prenatal care; one baby died aged three days with neonatal herpes infection; one died aged thirty minutes with an intracranial hemorrahage after precipitate delivery; and another one, who died aged eight hours, was found to have hypoplastic lungs at postmortem examination.

There were thirty-four babies admitted for special care; that is a rate of 8.4 per 1,000.

Rates of admission for special care of babies born to low risk primiparous women are significantly higher than for babies born in water.

Birth in water may have caused water aspiration in two babies.

Comments

Compared with well known anecdotes, such as one case of neonatal polycythemia reported in The Lancet in 1997(2), this survey of more than 4,000 babies born (rather than delivered!) in water has been paradoxically ignored by the media, the medical circles and the natural childbirth movement as well.

However, it undoubtedly represents a landmark in the history of the use of water during labour.

From now on midwives should not be the prisoners of strict protocols.

Updated flexible guidelines should accept that “in any hospital where a pool is in daily use a birth under water is bound to happen now and then”(3).

Midwives are far less anxious and invasive wherever a birth under water is considered acceptable if the woman does not have the time or is reluctant to get out of the water during a powerful “fetus ejection reflex.”

The first effect of this study should be to change the focus.

An opportunity is given to recall that the main reason for the birthing pools is to facilitate the birth process and to reduce the need for drugs and other intervention.

In order to control the current epidemic of epidurals the point is to divulge a small number of simple updated recommendations in order to make the most effective use of birthing pools.

Updated recommendations

The main recommendations are based on the fact that immersion in water at the temperature of the body tends to facilitate the birth process during a limited length of time (in the region of an hour or two).

This simple fact is confirmed by clinical observation and by the results of a Swedish randomised controlled study suggesting that women who enter the bath at five centimetres or after (“late bath group”) have a short labour and a reduced need for oxytocin administration and epidural analgesia (4).

Physiologists can offer interpretations.

The common response to immersion is a redistribution of blood volume (more blood in the chest) that stimulates the release by specialized heart cells of the atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP).

The inhibitory effect of ANP on the activity of the posterior pituitary gland is slow, in the region of one to two hours (5).

When a woman is in labour this inhibitory effect is preceded by an analgesic effect that is associated with lower levels of stress hormones and increased release of oxytocin.

Furthermore it is partly via a release of oxytocin that the redistribution of blood volume stimulates the specialized heart cells.

The first practical recommendation is to give great importance to the time when the laboring woman enters the pool.

Experienced midwives have many tricks at their disposal to help women be patient enough so that they can ideally wait until five centimetres dilation.

A shower, that more often as not implies complete privacy, is an example of what the midwife can suggest while waiting.

The BMJ survey clearly indicates that many women stay too long in the bath (the average time was in the region of three hours for women who gave birth in water!).

One reason is that many of them enter the bath long before five centimetres.

The second recommendation is to avoid planning a birth under water.

When a woman has planned a birth under water she may be the prisoner of her project; she is tempted to stay in the bath while the contractions are getting weaker, with the risk of long second and third stages.

There are no such risks when a birth under water follows a short series of irresistible contractions.

The recommendations regarding the temperature should not be overlooked.

It is easy to check that the water temperature is never above 37° C (the temperature of the maternal body).

Two cases of neonatal deaths have been reported after immersion during labor in prolonged hot baths (39.7° C in one case) (6).

The proposed interpretation was that the fetuses had reached high temperatures (the temperature of a fetus is 1° higher than the maternal temperature) and could not meet their increased needs in oxygen.

The fetus has a problem of heat elimination.

At the dawn of a new phase in the history of childbirth one can anticipate that, if a small number of simple recommendations are taken into account, the use of water during labor will seriously compete with epidural anesthesia.

Then helping women to be patient enough and enter the pool at the right time will appear as a new aspect of the art of midwifery.

Michel Odent, MD founded the Primal Health Research Centre in London and developed the maternity unit in Pithiviers, France, where birthing pools are used. He is the author of ten books published in twenty languages. Two of them—Birth Reborn and The Nature of Birth and Breastfeeding—were published originally in the United States. His most recent book is The Caesarean.

SaveSave

SaveSave

Joint statement: Immersion in water during labour and birth – RCOG RCOM

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists/Royal College of Midwives

Joint statement No.1 Immersion in water during labour and birth

Originally published: 2006

Summary

1.  Both the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives support labouring in water for healthy women with uncomplicated pregnancies.

The evidence to support underwater birth is less clear but complications are seemingly rare.

If good practice guidelines are followed in relation to infection control, management of cord rupture and strict adherence to eligibility criteria, these complications should be further reduced.

Background

  1. Lying in warm water gives a sense of relaxation, but whether it actually reduces pain is less certain. A perception of relaxation, pain relief, ease of movements and more holistic experience made labour in water a popular choice during the 1980s. This concept has been extended to include actual birth under water following widely quoted experience from France.1 In response to public demand, the Winterton Report recommended that all maternity services provide women with the option to labour and/or give birth in water.2
  2. Recent surveys3 show that, of 295 UK maternity units for which data on birthing pools were available, 64% had at least one birthing pool, with 20 units having two or more. There are no current data on the number of women who actually use these facilities during labour or for water birth, apart from a postal survey carried out between April 1994 and March 1996, which reported that, at that time, fewer than 1% of births in England and Wales occurred in water.4
  3. Partly in response to the Winterton Report, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists produced a Statement on birth in water in 1994, which was updated in 20015 and the Royal College of Midwives published a Position Paper on the use of water in labour and birth in 1994 (updated in 2000).6 Both documents endorsed the use of water in labour as a choice, provided that attendants had appropriate skills and confidence to assist women who choose to labour or give birth in water.

Labouring in water

  1. It is important to separate the evidence on benefits and risks of immersion in water during the active phase of labour from those of actual birth in water.
  2. There are considerable perceived benefits of using immersion in water during labour, including less painful contractions and less need for pharmacological analgesia, shorter labour, less need for augmentation, with no known adverse effects for the woman herself.However, there may be rare but clinically significant risks for the baby born under water. These include respiratory problems (including the possibility of fresh water drowning), cord rupture with haemorrhage, and waterborne infections.
  1. A Cochrane review by Cluett et al.7 provides the most recent evidence on water births. Overall, there was no difference found in the use of analgesia, although women allocated to immersion in water needed less epidural, spinal or paracervical analgesia. There was no significant difference in other important clinical outcomes, including duration of labour, operative delivery and perineal trauma. The same applied to the neonatal outcomes, including neonatal infection, which was rare.
  2. The evidence on timing of immersion into water during the first stage of labour was not robust enough to set criteria8 but early labour could be managed by mobilisation and other activities within a labour room rather than water immersion.
  3. Most of the available evidence, both randomised and observational, is restricted to healthy women with uncomplicated pregnancy at term, although induction of labour and previous caesarean section have been managed using water for labour and birth without reported problems.9 A randomised trial by Cluett et al.10 on women with prolonged labour found reduction in obstetric intervention following immersion in water but a higher number of babies who needed admission to the neonatal unit. Although there is clearly a need for more research, the currently available evidence does not justify discouraging women from choosing immersion in water during labour. Increasing women’s choices for analgesia and the need for maternity services to promote normality are key principles in all UK Maternity Service Framework documents and support provision of birthing pools to be made available for healthy women with uncomplicated pregnancies.11–13

Birth in water

  1. Informed choice on the benefits and risks of birth in water is clouded by the lack of good quality safety data. Although there is no evidence of higher perinatal mortality or admission to special care baby units (SCBUs) for birth in water,4,14,15 caution is advised because of small numbers, possible under-reporting of SCBU admission and exclusion of women who were in labour in water but gave birth conventionally after complications.
  2. One review identified 16 articles reporting a total of 63 neonatal complications attributable to water birth, including drowning, respiratory problems, cord avulsion and waterborne infections.16 One can argue that this anecdotal evidence is reassuring, given the thousands of women who have given birth under water in the last few decades. However, we still do not know how the low perinatal mortality and morbidity rates compare with those babies born in air.
  3. The respect for maternal autonomy and choice is important; however, it is important that any possible concerns for fetal and neonatal safety are made clear. Women who make an informed choice to give birth in water should be given every opportunity and assistance to do so by attendants who have appropriate experience. More research is needed on third-stage management in the pool, as there is currently no reliable evidence that can be used to inform women regarding the benefits and risks of experiencing the third stage of labour under water.

Achieving best practice

13 Both the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives believe that to achieve best practice with water birth it is necessary for

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and Royal College of Midwives Joint Statement No.1 2 of 5 organisations to provide systems and structures to support this service.

This means developing a service that is committed to responsive practices and ensuring that women are involved in planning their own care with information, advice and support from professionals.11–13

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

14 All healthy women with uncomplicated pregnancies at term should have the option of water birth available to them and should be able to proceed to a water birth if they wish. The written documentation of any discussion is essential.

Practice issues

  1. There has been much controversy over the temperature of the water of a birthing pool, with strict criteria recommending differing estimates ranging from 34 to 37 degrees Celsius17 to a Swedish study which recommended that women be encouraged to regulate the temperature of the water to suit themselves.18 Given these large discrepancies, it would be difficult to agree strict temperature restrictions. It may be of more benefit to allow women to regulate the pool temperature to their own comfort and encourage them to leave and re-enter the pool in the first stage of labour as and when they wish. Birth attendants should ensure that the ambient room temperature is comfortable for the woman and should encourage her to drink to avoid dehydration. Cord clamps should be readily available and birth attendants need to be alert to the possibility of occult cord rupture and be sensitive to any undue tension on the cord.16
  2. Monitoring of the fetal heart using underwater Doppler should be standard practice, as stated in the current National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines.19 If there are any concerns about maternal or fetal wellbeing, the woman should be advised to leave the birthing pool and an opinion from an obstetrician or other suitably qualified person should be sought in the usual manner. There needs to be a locally agreed procedure for getting a woman out of the pool, should she become compromised, and all staff likely to be caring for the woman in the room must be familiar with the procedure and should practice it regularly in emergency drills.
  3. If the woman raises herself out of the water and exposes the fetal head to air, once the presenting part is visible, she should be advised to remain out of the water to avoid the risk of premature gasping under water.
  4. All birthing pools and other equipment (such as mirrors and thermometers) should be disposed of or thoroughly cleaned and dried after every use, in accordance with local infection control policies. Disposable sieves should be made available to ensure that the pool remains free from maternal faeces and other debris. Local information and guidelines regarding prevention of legionella build up in water supply from seldomly used pools should be obtained from local NHS trust estates and should be adhered to. Midwives should use universal precautions and follow local trust infection control guidelines.

Education, skills and training

19 Midwives should discuss antenatally the use of immersion in water in labour with all women in a low-risk category, as part of their overall discussions regarding options for pain relief, and information leaflets should be available. It is important that information on water birth is conveyed to all women in a form they can understand and in a culturally sensitive fashion, to ensure parity of access to quality services.

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and Royal College of Midwives Joint Statement No.1 3 of 5

  1. All midwives should ensure that they are competent to care for a woman who wishes to have a water birth and have a good understanding of the basic principles of caring for a woman in labour, and should make themselves aware of local policies and guidelines. Apart from emergency drills, training should also include emergency management of cord rupture at birth.20
  2. Midwives, managers and supervisors of midwives should ensure that training in caring for a woman who wishes to have a water birth is undertaken by midwives who undertake intrapartum care, in order to increase choice for women and promote normality and ensure quality care.11,21,22

Audit

  1. The use of birthing pools for labour and birth should be audited carefully. Data should be kept both on immersion in first stage of labour for analgesia use and separately for underwater birth. Data collected should focus on maternal wellbeing and the condition of the baby at birth, and should include usual birth outcomes, incidence of cord rupture and reasons for and rates of neonatal admission to SCBU.
  2. Data should also identify women who wanted a water birth but were transferred to conventional birth, including decision time to leave the pool for the birth of baby, the reasons for transferring to conventional care and the condition of mother and baby at transfer.
  3. Data should also be collected on women who wished to use the birthing pool but for whatever reason were unable to do so. Units should also audit ethnicity in relation to the offer of the option of water birth, to ensure that there is parity of access.

Record keeping

25 Accurate contemporaneous records should be kept, as usual. In addition, times of entering and leaving the pool should be clearly documented, including the reason for leaving the pool, if appropriate. It is important that it is recorded clearly whether the baby was born under water.

User surveys

26 User surveys of satisfaction with water birth services, including ease of access and the quality of the information given, should be carried out. Cultural acceptability needs to be reviewed to ensure equity of access and culturally sensitive services.

References

  1. Odent M. Birth under water. Lancet 1983;2:1476–7.
  2. House of Commons Health Committee. Second Report on the Maternity Services (Winterton report). London: HMSO; 1992.
  3. Dr Foster Good Birth Guide [www.drfoster.co.uk/home/birth2005.asp].
  4. Gilbert RE, Tookey PA. Perinatal mortality and morbidity among babies delivered in water: surveillance study and postal survey. BMJ 1999;319:483–7.
  5. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Birth in Water. RCOG Statement. London: RCOG; 2001.
  6. Royal College of Midwives. The Use of Water in Labour and Birth. Position Paper no. 1a. London: RCM; 2000 [www.rcm.org.uk/data/info_centre/data/position_papers.htm].
  7. Cluett ER, Nikodem VC, McCandlish RE, Burns EE. Immersion in water in pregnancy, labour and birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(2):CD000111.
  8. Eriksson M, Mattson L, Ladfors L. Early or late bath during the first stage of labour: a randomised study of 200 women. Midwifery 1997;13:146–8.

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and Royal College of Midwives Joint Statement No.1 4 of 5

  1. Brown L. The tide has turned: audit of water birth. Br J Midwifery 1998;6:236–43.
  2. Cluett ER, Pickering RM, Getliffe K, St George Saunders NJ. Randomised controlled trial of labouring in water compared with standard management of dystocia in first stage of labour. BMJ 2004;328:314.
  3. Department of Health. The National Service Framework for Children and Young People. Maternity Services. Standard 11. (NSF) 2004. London: Department of Health [www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/09/05/23/04090523.pdf].
  4. Scottish Executive. A Framework for Maternity Services in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive; 2001 [www.scotland.gov.uk/library3/health/ffms-00.asp].
  5. Welsh Assembly Children’s Health and Social Care Directorate. National Service Framework for Children, Young People and Maternity Services in Wales. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government; 2005 [www.wales.nhs.uk/sites/documents/441/ACFD1F6.pdf].
  6. Woodward J, Kelly SM. A pilot study for a randomised controlled trial of water birth versus land birth. BJOG 2004;111:537–45.
  7. Geissbuehler V, Stein S, Eberhard J. Waterbirths compared with landbirths – an observational study of nine years. J Perinat Med 2004;32:308–14.
  8. Anderson T. Umbilical cords and underwater birth. Practising Midwife 2000; 3(2):12.
  9. Anderson T. Time to throw the waterbirth thermometers away. MIDIRS 2004;14(3):370–4.
  10. Geissbuehler V, Eberhard J, Lebrecht A. Waterbirth: water temperature and bathing time –mother knows best! J Paediatr Med 2002; 30:371–8.
  11. National Institute for Clinical Evidence. The Use of Electronic Fetal Monitoring: the useand interpretation of cardiotocography in intrapartum fetal surveillance. London: NICE; 2001 [www.nice.org.uk/pdf/efmguidelinenice.pdf].
  12. Grunebaum A, Chervenak FA. The baby or the bathwater: which one should be discarded? J Perinat Med 2004;32:306–7.
  13. Nursing and Midwifery Council. Midwives Rules and Standards. London: NMC; 2004 [www.nmc-uk.org/aFrameDisplay.aspx?DocumentID=169].
  14. Nursing and Midwifery Council. The NMC Code of Professional Conduct: standards for conduct, performance and ethics. London: NMC: 2004 [www.nmc- uk.org/aFramedisplay.aspx?documentID=201]

A comparison of water births and conventional vaginal deliveries

Otigbah CM; Dhanjal MK; Harmsworth G; and others, (July 2000).

European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology , vol 91, no 1, July 2000, pp 15-20.

Setting, participants, design and aim:

The study took place in a district general hospital over a five year period, 1989-1994 and involved a total of 602 mothers. A retrospective case-control study which analysed data on 301 mothers who had a water birth and another 301 who had a normal land birth.

The aim was to explore the effects of water immersion on labour and birth, as compared with normal land birth.

Method: The study centre had several pool selection criteria which accepted women who were considered to be at low risk of complication for the pool.

They were required to have: * no medical or obstetric problem; * a gestation of at least 38 weeks with a normal sized fetus; * cephalic presentation; * clear liqour if membranes were already ruptured; * a reactive admission cardiotocograph.

The controls were selected from the unit’s audit data, as the next parity matched woman who was low risk, had a normal birth and did not have labour augmentation.

The variables compared and analysed included: * labour length; * analgesia uptake; * Apgar scores; * maternal complications – namely perineal trauma, postpartum haemorrhage and infection; * neonatal complications – namely shoulder dystocia, admission to special care baby unit (SCBU) and infection.

Data were analysed using the Chi-squared test to compare proportions, and Student’s t test to compare means. Any difference was considered significant if the P value was <0.05. Results: * Primigravidae who had a water birth had a significantly shorter first stage (P <0.05) and second stage (P <0.005) of labour.

The total labour length was 90 minutes shorter; * Water birth mothers, whatever their parity, used significantly less opioid pain relief, either alone or in addition to entonox – 1.3% compared to 54% of the controls (P <0.0001).

A total of 38% water birth women had no analgesia compared to 8% of the control group (P <0.0001); * Water birth mothers had significantly fewer episiotomies – 5%compared to 25% (P <0.0001), although they had more vaginal, 1° and 2° perineal tears overall – 53% versus 39% (P <0.001).

Water birth primigravidae had more intact perinea – 41% compared to 36%, although this was not statistically significant; * Fewer postpartum haemorrhages occurred among water birth mothers – 1.3% versus 2.7%; * One case of maternal pyrexia was reported on a multiparous water birth woman who was treated with antibiotics; she had no positive cultures on subsequent sampling; * No significant difference was reported between the groups in the mean Apgar scores at one and five minutes; *

Two water birth babies were admitted to SCBU with low Apgars.

In one case there was a true knot in the umbilical cord and the other followed a difficult delivery with an unexpected compound presentation; * Five babies in the water birth group and four in the control group had shoulder dystocia; * No neonatal infections were reported.

Abstract writer’s comments:

This is clearly an interesting and worthwhile study which includes data on a good size sample of mothers and babies.

A key strength is the analysis and presentation of the data by parity as often findings relating to primigravidae and multigravidae are amalgamated, despite the influence of parity on factors such as use of analgesia, labour length and type of delivery.

The authors acknowledge the limitations of a non-randomised water group sample.

It would have been interesting to have collected information relating to the social class of pool users, as there is an assumption among health professionals that birthing pools attract greater interest among middle class women, but I know of no evidence to support this view.

The researchers report a shorter labour for water birth primigravidae but do not mention the frequency of vaginal examinations, or whether the second stage was timed when the presenting part was visible, making the precise process of how they timed these labour stages unclear.

The effect of water immersion on analgesia uptake appears striking.

The authors suggest that an influencing factor may have been the continuous midwifery care, often by a known midwife, for pool users, as opposed to an intermittent midwifery presence by a midwife unknown to a mother before her labour.

There is, however, no mention whether any facilities such as beanbags, birthing balls, rocking chairs or floor mattresses were available to women who did not use the pool, apart from presumably a delivery bed.

It is therefore not known whether these women were encouraged to adopt comfortable positions and be as mobile as possible throughout labour.

The practice of maximising maternal mobility has been shown to reduce the perception of pain and thus the uptake of analgesia.

Whilst it is reassuring that fewer episiotomies were performed on water birth women, nonetheless, fifteen still had one!

It would be interesting to know something about the study centre’s approach to care during the second stage regarding pushing techniques and time perimeters, as this could have influenced the incidence of both tears and episiotomies.

The researchers note that ‘particular care was taken to ensure controlled delivery of the head’ (p16) but do not explain how, ie if the midwife touched the head and perineum or not.

Besides, tears often occur with the birth of the shoulders.

Comparison was made between the groups on the incidence of postpartum haemorrhage, but no mother appeared to have a completely physiological third stage because the cord was clamped and cut promptly after the birth, which disturbs the physiology, and the placentas were delivered out of the pool.

The rationale for leaving the pool was to estimate blood loss more accurately – a difficult thing to achieve in or out of water.

A second reason was the totally unproven risk of water embolism.

This study reported no adverse effect for mothers or babies associated with water immersion during labour and birth and forms a useful basis for future research.

Water birth: a review of 848 deliveries and a comparison with other delivery positions

Thoeni A; Holzner J, (2002). International Confederation of Midwives. Midwives and women working together for the family of the world: ICM proceedings CD-ROM Vienna 2002. The Hague: ICM , 2002. 7 pages.

Objective:

The object of our study was to analyze 848 consecutive water births and to compare them with two other delivery positions.

Methods:

We compared 848 water births, 493 deliveries in the traditional bed, and 172 deliveries on the delivery stool.

Duration of labor, rates of episiotomies and lacerations, arterial cord blood pH, base excess, analgesic requirements, and postpartum maternal haemoglobin levels were evaluated.

Results:

The first stage of labor was significantly reduced in primiparas with water birth compared with the other delivery positions (386 vs. 477 min., respectively).

There were no differences in the duration of the second stage (32 vs 39 min.).

The low episiotomy rate with the water births (1% compared with 18% and 8% for the other two positions) was not associated with an increased rate of perineal lacerations (23% in all three groups).

Of the primipara, 59% had no lacerations with water birth compared with 36% and 46% for the other two positions, respectively.

No woman with water birth required analgesics.

There were no differences among the groups in arterial cord blood pH or postpartal maternal haemoglobin level.

Conclusion:

Our results suggest that water birth is associated with a significantly shorter first stage of labor, lower episiotomy rate and perineal lacerations, and reduced analgesic requirements compared with other delivery positions.

Water birth is safe for the mother and fetus-neonate if candidates are selected appropriately.

Study confirms… Women who labour in water have lower rate of epidural analgesia

Randomised controlled trial of labouring in water compared with standard of augmentation for management of dystocia in first stage of labour

Objectives:

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.

Design Randomised controlled trial.

Setting University teaching hospital in southern England.

Participants 99 nulliparous women with dystocia in active labour at low risk of complications.

Interventions Immersion in water or standard augmentation for dystocia (amniotomy and intravenous oxytocin).

Main outcome measures:

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.

Results:

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).

Conclusions:

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.

(Extract from abstract of Randomised controlled trial of labouring in water compared with standard of augmentation for management of dystocia in first stage of labour by Elizabeth R Cluett, Ruth M Pickering, Kathryn Getliffe, Nigel James, St George Saunders published in British Journal of Midwfery January 26, 2004)

Evidence on the safety of water birth

9 February 2015

Evidence Based Birth – Rebecca Dekker

In April 2014,  waterbirth—an alternative method for pain relief in which a mother gives birth in a tub of warm water—made national headlines.

The event that pushed water birth safetyinto the spotlight was a joint Opinion Statement from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), denouncing the practice.

In their opinion statement, ACOG and the AAP firmly admonished that waterbirth should be considered an experimental practice that should only occur in the context of a clinical research study.

Their conclusion, which echoed a previous AAP Opinion Statement from 2005, was based on their opinion that water birth does not have any benefits and may pose dangers for the newborn.

In response, the American College of Nurse Midwives (ACNM),(Midwives 2014) the American Association of Birth Centers (AABC), and the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) all released statements endorsing waterbirth as a safe, evidence-based option.

Meanwhile, the AABC released preliminary data from nearly 4,000 waterbirths that occurred in birth centers all over the U.S., supporting water birth as safe for mothers and infants.

Despite the response from midwifery organizations and the AABC, hospitals all over the U.S. began suspending or shutting down their waterbirth programs.

At St. Elizabeth’s Regional Medical Center in Lincoln, Nebraska, mothers and families organized rallies and started a change.org petition to bring waterbirth back.

All of this controversy left us with these questions— Is the ACOG/AAP statement based on a complete and accurate review of the literature?

What is the evidence on waterbirth?

Is it safe?

Does it have any potential benefits or harms for mothers and infants?

These are the questions we will address in the Evidence Based Birth article on the evidence on waterbirth.

This article was published July 10, 2014, by Rebecca Dekker, PhD, RN, APRN
© Evidence Based Birth, All Rights Reserved.

Click here for a copy of Rebecca Dekker’s paper on the safety of water birth

Water VBAC: exploring a new frontier for women’s autonomy

McKenna JA; Symon AG, (2014). Midwifery , vol 30, no 1, January 2014, e20-5.

BACKGROUND: although Vaginal Birth After Caesarean section (VBAC) has been promoted successfully as one means of reducing the caesarean section rate, the practice of VBAC using water immersion (Water VBAC) is restricted.

Very little valid, reliable research evidence is available on this birth method, although initial small-scale audits indicate that Water VBAC has no adverse effect on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

METHOD: in-depth semi-structured interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of eight women who had undergone Water VBAC in one midwife-led unit.

The interviews aimed to explore their reasons for requesting this birthing method, and their experience of the process. An interpretative phenomenological analytical approach was adopted.

FINDINGS: the women pursued Water VBAC for two main reasons: in order to prevent a repeat of the obstetric events that previously led to a caesarean section, and to counteract their previous negative birth experiences.

The women reported improved physical and psychological outcomes from their Water VBAC experience when compared with their previous experience of caesarean section.

Three main themes emerged: ‘minimising’, ‘maximising’ and ‘managing’. Water VBAC entailed an attempt to minimise the medicalisation of the women’s childbirth experience.

This was achieved by limiting medical staff input in favour of midwife-led care, which was believed to minimise negative physical and psychological experiences.

Correspondingly, Water VBAC was perceived as maximising physical and psychological benefits, and as a means of allowing women to obtain choice and assert control over their labour and birth.

The women planning a Water VBAC believed they had to manage the potential risks associated with Water VBAC, as well as manage the expectations and behaviour of friends, family and the health care professionals involved in their care.

CONCLUSIONS: for the women participating in this research, actively pursuing Water VBAC constituted a means of asserting their autonomy over the childbirth process.

The value accorded to being able to exercise choice and control over their childbearing experience was high.

These women’s accounts indicated that information-giving and shared decision-making require improvement, and that inconsistencies in the attitudes of health care professionals need to be addressed.

 

Excerpt from “The Waterbirth Book”: by Janet Balaskas

   The introduction of birthing pools in the UK began in the late 1980’s and is one of the greatest innovations to happen in natural childbirth. More than 150 hospitals in the UK now (2001) have at least one installed pool and hundreds of portable pools are also in circulation. The use of water for labour and birth is increasing and has been under intense scrutiny in the last 10 years. The outcomes of the research have so far, been positive. The help of water to enable more women to give birth naturally is very relevant at this time, when one in 5 babies in the UK is born by caesarean section.

   The invigorating and therapeutic value of water is well know to all of us – from our daily bath or shower to mineral springs, saunas and spa’s, rivers, oceans – all places we go to for healing and regeneration. These qualities are brought into the labour room when we introduce a pool of warm water. This is a wonderful way to transform the atmosphere in a hospital and to encourage normal birth physiology.

   Long before there was modern plumbing, water was used as a birth aid in many cultures. It’s soothing, cleansing, and healing properties were used to help women in labour and it was also used as a birth stimulant.

  • In New Guinea – Gahuka women gave birth by the river. The sound of the water help the mothers concentration and the flowing movement of the water helps the movement of the baby inside. 
  • African women – Squat over steaming hot rocks to soften the perineum 
  • Gautemalan midwives – gave women relaxing steam bath massages 
  • Finnish women laboured in steaming saunas 
  • Japanese women in remote fishing villages gave birth in the sea 
  • Maories and South Pacific Islanders – Hawaiians – have oral traditions of labour and birth in water. In addition to gravity, warm water is another of nature’s elements which has enormous power to help you during your labour. It is a simple yet powerful way to relax deeply and can be the key to an easier labour.

The benefits of using a birth pool

   Water is a feminine element. It is buoyant and soft and carries your body’s weight. As soon as you enter the water, the warm, sensual sensations on your skin remind you that your labouring body is beautiful, powerful, and sensual. Although this is not the case for everyone, the majority of women comment that they were surprised by how wonderful and relieving it felt when they first got into the pool.

   Water pools help many women to cope better with pain and enhances those passions and deep emotions which are an integral part of a healthy birth. For many women a birth pool provides an alternative route to an epidural and can be the key to a physiological birth. The water is not likely to take away the pain, but it can make a tremendous difference to your ability to relax and may well make the pain more bearable.

   Studies have shown that endorphine levels may go down in a birth pool – a sign that pain levels decrease. A birth pool is something to try before considering an epidural or other form of medical pain relief. You can always change your mind if you need to.

   The buoyant effect of the water completely supports your body’s weight. This gives you a feeling of physical liberation – like being in warm ocean. Resting between contractions is much easier, because being in the water is so comfortable and relaxing. This helps tremendously to conserve your strength and energy, so you are less likely to become fatigued or exhausted.

   In the pool you are in your own womblike space – you are in charge. It’s more difficult to disturb or distract you. A birth pool represents a sanctuary from what some women experience as the menace of obstetric routines. In water your body is your own territory – your birth attendants need your consent to get close to you.

   The water’s buoyancy also helps enormously to make you more comfortable in upright positions. You can move more easily and spontaneously help your baby to descend and rotate by yourself.

  You will be surprised to find that it’s much easier, for example, to squat in water. Even women who find squatting difficult on land, can often do so comfortably in water — with the added benefit that this position makes a lot more space in the pelvis for your baby to descend.

   Once in the pool, you are unlikely to notice how much time has passed. Many women say that the world beyond the rim of the pool seems to disappear.This increased sense of privacy in the pool helps you to concentrate on working through your contractions without any distractions.

   The relaxing environment helps you to let go of what is happening around you and to focus your awareness inwards on the work your body is doing and surrender to the rhythm of your labour.

   The oxytocin wave – how entering a birth pool effects hormone secretion.

   Water birth pioneer, Dr Michel Odent, in his latest updates on water birth, suggests that there is a correlation between the findings of physiologists on the effects of water immersion on hormone secretion and the observations of midwives that labours tend to slow down when the woman enters the pool too early.

   He suggests that immediately after a woman enters the pool, there is a surge of oxytocin which stimulates contractions and results in rapid dilation. However this effect is short lived and after about 1.5 – 2 hours, oxytocin secretion reaches a peak and begins to slow down. The timing of when you enter the pool therefore becomes important.

Practical tips and guidelines

   When to get in – If you are planning to use a birth pool it’s best to stay out of the water in the latent phase of labour. At this time, using upright positions, movement and breathing awareness, complementary therapies or TENS can help you to get into a comfortable rhythm with your labour (see Issue nos 8 and 10)

   .In mid labour, when you are about 5 – 6 cms dilated – around the time when many women ask for pain relief – is the best time to think about entering a birth pool (our experience also shows that getting in too early can slow down contractions). Getting in late means that you are likely to be close to full dilation at the crest of the oxytocin wave.

   In a long labour, contractions may slow down in the pool and then it is best get out and use the help of gravity on dry land for a while, resting in the pool later if you get tired.

   The golden rule of water labour and birth – if progress is slow in water try land, if slow on land try water

   The water temperature is important. Because your baby relies on you for temperature regulation and is one degree warmer than you are, the temperature of the water should never exceed 36C in labour and is best at 36C or 37C for the birth itself. When you feel cold, hormone secretion is inhibited and this will weaken your contractions. If you feel warm enough but not hot, you have probably got it just right for you. Measuring the temperature with a water thermometer is important, but don’t worry about it being too exact! How you feel is the best test.

   The ideal water temperature range in labour is 32C-36C and for birth around 36C-37C

  Water depth – You also need to make sure that in labour the water is deep enough to cover your belly and allow your shoulders to be exposed, so you can sweat and loose heat if you need to. Immediately after the birth there is often a need to remove some of the water, so you can breastfeed in the pool with the water keeping your baby’s body warm with his or her head out of the water at breast level.

   Birthing rooms with a pool are warm and humid, so make sure that there is good ventilation and the room is not over heated. Plenty of drinking water for everyone is also a good idea, as a humid atmosphere is dehydrating.

   Your partner can sit right beside you in the pool or even get in with you to massage, hold and comfort you. As you share the same environment, there is no increased risk of infection if your partner enters the pool! So it’s a good idea to have a swimsuit ready for your partner, just in case.

    If this idea doesn’t appeal to you, it’s still very easy to share the intimacy of labour with your partner seated nearby, outside the pool. Having a low stool or a birth ball beside the pool is useful for your partner and for the midwife. Many women value having all the space in the pool to themselves, while others enjoy the comfort and support of relaxing against their partner’s body in the water.

* The Midwife’s practise

   It is a transforming experience for a midwife to be around women in a birth pool. It is understandable that midwives contemplating their first water births may be nervous and feel insecure. Until very recently their education would not have included Water Birth. The health authority generally prefer two midwives to be at a water birth.

   The fact that you are in water does not greatly change the midwife’s usual practice – in fact it makes it considerably easier, because the warm water helps you to cope better by yourself. She will need to make the normal observations of both your and your baby’s well being and the progress of your labour.

   Vaginal exams can be kept to a minimum and can be done when necessary in the pool.

   Monitoring the baby’s heartbeat at regular (probably half hourly) intervals is important to ensure that there is no foetal distress. However the midwife needs to be sensitive to avoid disturbing you too much – a waterproof sonic aid allows monitoring under water so you do not need to change your position or break your concentration. Alternatives are a stethoscope, a long stemmed pinnard or a regular sonic aid with the transducer in the finger of a long glove. A non water proof sonic aid may mean that you need to float close to the edge or sit up on the edge of the pool.

    The midwife will check your body temperature and blood pressure at times and keep an eye on the temperature of the water.

  When a birth pool is introduced into a hospital birthing room the environment is transformed into one which is much more homelike. The pool invites the mother to relax and there is usually no delivery bed in sight. The atmosphere of fear and danger are eradicated and everyone’s expectations about what will happen are different. There is a deliberate attempt to induce feelings of confidence and relaxation in the mother.

   This makes a hospital environment more attractive if you want a physiological birth with the security of obstetric support close at hand. At a home birth the environment is even more ‘hormone enhancing’ when a birth pool is available and there is a powerful resource to help you cope with pain in the active stage of labour.

   In the pool room it’s a good idea to dim the lights or draw the curtains to reduce stimulation so that there is a peaceful, calm and intimate atmosphere. When you can really relax in labour, as a birth pool helps you to do – you can let go more easily and things usually go well. It’s not a problem if you want or need to get out for the birth. You will have achieved the most important objective, which is a more comfortable labour, without the need for drugs or interventions.

How to use Water during Labour:
How long and When to Stay in the Water

   The attraction to water and the timing of using the water pool is very individual and varies from one woman to another and one labour to another. If pre-labour contractions are intense and there are long runs of contractions prior to the onset of established labour, water can be extremely soothing.

   After staying in water for some time the contractions may diminish, giving you an opportunity to rest and maybe even fall asleep, thus conserving your energy for the subsequent labour and birth.

   When labour is well established, the timing of using the pool once again shows a wide individual variation. After entering the water dilation is often rapid during the first h our. It is preferable to keep the pool in reserve for the second half of labour when the contractions are intense and the periods of rest shorter.

   This is when water is most powerful in assisting dilation and shortening labour. However, you might need the comfort of water from quite early on in labour and want to spend hours in the pool prior to the birth itself. In this instance you can go in and out of the pool and alternate between being in water and being on land.

   When the pool is used early, mothers sometimes tire of the water and they may not want to use this valuable resource later on when contractions become more painful and intense. Getting in too early may slow down contractions and prolong labour.

   Provided the correct water temperature is maintained and your temperature is monitored, it is safe to stay in the water as long as you like. The depth of the water is also important. The more your body is submerged the more help you will get from buoyancy.

   However, women’s preferences vary. While some like the water to be as deep as possible, others are more comfortable in less water.

   When you leave the pool it is advisable to have plenty of large towels available so that you can dry yourself completely. There should also be a heater in the room so that if you feel cold the temperature can be raised quickly.

Movements and Positions

   There are bound to be times when you prefer to need to be outside the pool on dry land during your labour, for example, if labour is not progressing well in water or if you do not feel like being in water. In early labour, as your contractions are beginning to intensify it is essential to make the most of the help of gravity.

   You can do this by using positions such as standing, sitting or squatting during your contractions and resting between them. Follow you instincts when moving during labour and you will find that these positions occur spontaneously.

   Most women use a variety of positions. Some prefer one or two while other women are more restless and change position frequently. During contractions movements such as circling your hips or rocking your pelvis can help to dissipate the pain.

   There are many ways to make yourself comfortable in upright positions so that you do not tire yourself out. It i s useful to bear in mind that the more vertical or upright your body is the more help you will get from gravity. When standing or walking you may find it helpful to lean forward onto a wall or to be held by your midwife or partner during the contractions.

   When kneeling make sure your knees are resting on a soft surface and use a firm beanbag or pile of cushions to make yourself comfortable to relaxing between the contractions and to make sure that your trunk stays fairly vertical.

   You may want to rest lying on your side, well propped up by cushions between contractions. For squatting, a low stool is very helpful and makes squatting less tiring. You can also hold onto a firm support or squat between your partner’s knees while he sits on a chair.

   Sitting on the toilet with your knees spread apart is very comfortable in labour and for many women the privacy of the bathroom is appealing. Here you can fill the basin and splash yourself with water if you want to and enjoy the sound of running water from the tap.

Entering the Pool

    Once you enter the pool, water powerfully increases your sense of privacy and adds a new dimension to the range of positions and movements you can use. The buoyancy of the water makes it much easier to move and change position and you will find that you will change positions instinctively and movement will occur spontaneously.

   It’s helpful to experiment in the pool or in a swimming pool in the days before your labour begins, and to submerge your head under water at times so that you feel completely familiar and at ease in the water. This is a way to block out sounds which are distracting.

   You will find that most of the movements and positions you can use on land can be used in water during contractions.

    Floating between contractions is a wonderful way to relax, and wetting your hair and going under the water at times reduces outside stimulation and sounds and helps you to let go. there is a wonderful sensuous quality to being in water in labour.

   It is like reconnecting with the original primal feelings you had in the womb. This is a tremendous aid to surrendering to the birth energy and to letting your body’s natural rhythms take over.

   There is no need to do anything. It will help if the room is darkened and you have enough privacy. With the water as deep as possible you can use your ability to relax and quieten your mind to sink deeply into your labour.

   Some women remain quite still in the water, changing positions occasionally, whereas others like to move a lot, rolling from front to back like a mermaid, or a dolphin.

  Movements and position changes will happen without you needing to think about them. Between contractions you can rest and benefit from the restorative and energising properties of the water.

    You can sink into its nurturing and feminine energy and accept its power to relax you. If you can let go completely you will rest, your energy will recharge and you will enter into a kind of timeless ocean of bliss between the contractions.

The End of Labour

   As the birth of the baby approaches contractions will be at their most intense. They will be longer (lasting up to sixty seconds) and closer together so that the intervals are very brief.

   This is the peak of labour when the ocean waves are high and turbulent, following upon each other with relentless frequency. The end of labour is usually referred to as ‘the transition stage’. You are close to full dilation and your baby’s head is about to emerge through the dilated cervix into your vagina ready to be born.

   It is normal to feel fearful at this stage. This is the time when you are likely to wish you could get away or have an epidural anaesthetic, when your courage and strength may be at a very low ebb.

   You may feel angry and irritable or despairing, as if you are exhausted and almost close to death. The breaks between your contractions may give you little respite before the next contraction looms large, like a tidal wave.

   It is very helpful to make the most of the respite between contractions and rest and relax deeply, almost sleeping until the next wave begins. this can restore and replenish your energy surprisingly – even though the gaps are short.

   The fear which is common at this stage has an important role to play. It triggers off a surge of adrenalin secretion, the ‘fight or flight’ hormone which stimulates the reflexive contractions which expel your baby during birth.

   At this time you are on the threshold of giving birth. This is when the powerful demon goddess takes over as the urge to bear down and give birth arises.Outside stimulation including sound and light or touch should be minimal, as you go through these last demanding contractions without distraction.

   You will be in an altered state of consciousness, deep inside your labour. Anyone who is present will need to be very discreet and avoid disturbing you, by watching, talking or by being falsely reassuring or anxious.

   This time can also be difficult for birth attendants and partners who may feel an intense desire to do something to help. However, their calm silence can be a source of strength, reassurance and encouragement as you go through the intensity of the end of labour.

   Some women are deeply afraid of the birth at a subconscious level and may experience difficulty in surrendering to the power of these final contractions. Being in warm water helps to let go. Often this intense phase passes very quickly or has a kind of timeless quality.

   However, if transition is long, you can keep up your energy by sipping water or dilute fruit juice. Most women feel very thirsty when the adrenalin response begins and need to drink a glass or two of water. The bach flower remedy called ‘Rescue Remedy’ can be very helpful.

   At this time near to the birth, the sounds emerging from the birth room tend to be loudest, so there is no need to try to be quiet. You will be in your full power, so feel free to roar like a lioness if you need to .

   Noise will help you to find the power to assist your baby to come down as your body opens to give birth. Your bowels empty spontaneously as your baby’s head presses down and you may need to retch as the expulsive reflex begins.

   Some women feel shy or inhibited about letting go to to these natural reflexes in the presence of other people. It helps to remember that your midwife is used to this and will welcome these events as a sign that the birth is imminent. Whatever happens your concentration will be focused deeply on the power of your contractions with moments of brief but blissful serenity in between them.

   At this stage you may feel that you are almost drowning in a sea of contractions. You may wish to leave the water, or alternatively surrender to the power in the weightlessness which its buoyancy allows you.

   Whether you are in or out of the pool, it is best to use the positions which feel most comfortable, making sure that you can relax, with your body supported between contractions. The water level in the pool should be as high as possible to offer you maximal support.

   As birth approaches, many women prefer kneeling. This position helps to give you a sense of control over the intensity of the contractions and makes it easier to relax or even sleep in the brief intervals between them without moving or changing position.

   At the very end of labour, contractions often slow down and the resting phases may lengthen. The contractions which expel our baby from the womb usually begin around the time full dilation of the cervix is reached.

   In some women the urge to push may start before dilation is complete and sometimes, on the other hand, there is a break or resting period before expulsion begins. This will feel like a lull, a period of time where suddenly the waves become still and the sea becomes calm.

   The lull may continue for quite a while before the pushing urge begins. On the other hand you may begin to feel the urge to bear down much earlier. Whatever happens you can trust in the wisdom of your body and surrender to its urges. Soon your baby will be born!

Giving birth in water

   When you feel you are ready to push and give birth to your baby you may decide to leave the pool, to feel the solidness and security of the ground underneath you. Or you may prefer to remain in the water for the second stage. Some women have a strong urge to get out, while this possibility may not even occur to others.

   In some places, especially when the midwives are new to water birth, pools are used only for labour and all women are asked to get out for the birth.

   The benefits of using a pool during labour are the main reason to consider using the help of water. If you are asked to leave the pool to give birth, it is still well worth getting in for labour. The birth often happens very soon after the mother leaves the pool at the end of active labour in water.

   A water birth is appropriate when labour has progressed well and when there is no sign of a potential problem during labour. When this is the case, studies have shown that giving birth in water is as safe as any other way of giving birth. A water birth is a soft and gentle way for a baby to be born and welcomed to the world.

   Birth in water is a ‘low risk’ option. It is only recommended when the baby’s heart tones are strong throughout labour and second stage and when there are no complications. That’s why your midwife will want to listen in to your baby every half hour or so during labour, and this is done even more frequently in the second stage.

   In places where a birth pool is encouraged as an option, women rate the experience of labour and/or birth in water very highly (one study showed that just over 90% of women who had a water birth rated it as ‘excellent’) and research has shown that fewer women need interventions.

   Using a birth pool, whether just for labour or for the birth itself, is an effective and harmless way to reduce the risk of complications and to increase your chances of a natural birth.

* The dive reflex – a major discovery

   The evidence of many thousands of water births all over the world has shown us that when the circumstances are appropriate, babies can be born safely into warm water at around body temperature and brought immediately to the surface to breathe. This is due to an innate reflex in human newborns called the ‘dive reflex’.

   This was first discovered by the Russian researcher Igor Tjarkovsky in the 1960’s and was first described in the medical literature by the eminent neonatal physiologist Paul Johnson, from the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford. He is an expert on the first breathing responses of the newborn. In March 1996 he published an article ‘Birth under water- to breathe or not to breathe?’ in the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. The dive reflex was also researched by the German obstetricians Eldering and Selke and their findings are published in the book Water Birth Unplugged.

   Johnson point out that the breathing reflex in a newborn baby is stimulated at birth, at the moment when the sensory chemoreceptors around the babies nose and mouth first come into contact with air.

   When the head emerges into warm water at body temperature during a water birth, this stimulation does not occur before the face emerges from the water. Under water, the dive reflex causes the air passages in the larynx to close and any water entering the nose or mouth is swallowed rather than inhaled.

   The only time the dive reflex may be overridden, causing the baby to gasp under water, would be if there was severe foetal distress. This is why diligent monitoring to rule out this possibility is an essential feature of a water labour or birth. Labour and birth in water tends to minimise stress and relax the birthing mother. This in itself is a preventative of foetal distress.

   However the death of a baby can occur on rare occasions with any method of birth. Infant mortality during water births that are skilfully managed, appears so far, to be exceptionally low, comparative with the national rate for low risk mothers (which is very low in the UK).

Birth in water

    The possibility of your baby being born in water may be very appealing and a water birth is certainly a beautiful, gentle way to welcome your baby. However it may not be appropriate at the time, so try to avoid having too much of preconceived idea about this. Even if you would love to have a water birth, try to keep an open mind.

   Water births happen when second stage progresses well and the mother does not want to leave the pool.

   The baby usually emerges without difficulty, sometimes the head and body are born in one contraction. Often though, the head is born first and there is a break between contractions when just the baby’s head is out. The dive reflex is working while the head is under water, so the baby will not inhale the water. He or she is still receiving oxygen from the placenta through the umbilical cord. The placenta remains attached and working until the baby is breathing independently.

   Usually with the second contraction, after the head has emerged, the shoulders and the body emerge next baby is born into the water. The buoyancy supports the baby’s body in the water and you may see the babies eyes open under water. The dive reflex is still working. The baby is then gently ‘caught’ and brought to the surface immediately.

   This is done in slow motion, without rushing, within about 10 seconds after the baby has been born, which gives the baby enough time to relax and uncurl in the water on the way out. The baby is lifted out in time to take the first breath, when the mouth and nose come in contact with the atmosphere.

   With this gentle way of birth, breathing usually starts slowly with the baby taking frequent little breaths instead of one big gasp. Within minutes breathing is established and it takes about 10 -15 minutes before the cord stops pulsating altogether and the transition to lung breathing is completed.

   Holding your baby in your arms for the first time, is one of the most wonderful experiences you will ever know. No doubt you will kiss and caress your baby and hold him or her close to your heart. Take your time to welcome and enjoy your baby in privacy – this first bonding is the beginning of a love affair which will last a lifetime!

After the birth

   While welcoming your baby you can stay in the pool and hold your baby in your arms, close to the breast. Your partner or birth attendants may need to alter the depth of the water to ensure that your baby’s body is submerged and kept warm, while the head is able to reach the breast easily above the water surface.

   This is a good moment to put on a heater so the room is very warm when you leave the pool. Facilitating the first undisturbed contact between mother and baby is what is most important now – ‘daddy bonding’ time happens a little later after the placenta has emerged safely. The birth is not over until then.

   While doing these practical tasks, try to keep the room very calm and quiet, maintaining privacy so that the mother is not distracted from her baby.

    It’s a good idea to encourage the baby to latch on to the breast and to get the first sucking going if possible. This will stimulate more contractions. The cord is usually clamped and cut after it stops pulsating or after the placenta has emerged.

   You may be asked to leave the pool when you start to get third stage contractions, so that the placenta is delivered when you are outside the pool. It’s possible to stay in the water while the placenta emerges and many experienced water birth midwives will have no objection. There is no evidence of this being a problem. However, as there is still uncertainty about this, many midwives have to adhere to a policy of the placenta being born on dry land.

    The important issue now is not where the placenta emerges, but that first contact with your baby is undisturbed. So if you need to leave the pool, stand up holding your baby. Step carefully out of the pool and sit on a soft surface on the floor (an inflatable swimming ring covered by a soft towel is ideal!). Have someone drape some warm towels or a bathrobe over your shoulders and carry on welcoming and feeding your baby.

    The room needs to be warm to the point of ‘over heated’ so the baby is kept very warm by your body heat and the room temperature! A soft warm towel or flannel sheet can be placed over the baby in your arms. Skin-to-skin contact with your baby should be maintained continuously, until the placenta has emerged, as this will enhance bonding and stimulate third stage contractions simultaneously.

   These can feel very crampy and it is a great relief to give birth to the placenta, which is softer and smaller than a baby! It’s a surprisingly pleasurable feeling birthing the placenta.

  Most women feel ecstatic after a physiological water birth. Babies tend to be calmer and often seem to smile fleetingly, although their face muscles only become strong enough to sustain a smile at around 6 weeks old. They generally settle into life easily with a sense of wholeness and continuity from the shelter of the womb to the close contact with mum after the birth. Many mother’s feel that this is the kindest, gentlest and most loving way to have a baby and that nothing could be more natural. For you and your partner it can be wonderful way to celebrate the birth of your child.

    “I got into the pool at 5 cms dilated after approximately 4/5 hours of comfortable early labour at home, having used lots of movement and upright positions. Getting into the pool made me feel very comfortable and much more mobile and seemed to speed up labour. The contractions were very effective and I was fully dilated and ready to push after about 2 hours in the water. Our lovely daughter Lily Martha was delivered into the water after about 40 minutes of pushing and seemed very happy about the whole experience. I got out of the pool for a natural delivery of the placenta. I felt the whole experience of being at home and using the pool was amazing and contributed to a stress-free and wonderful natural birth.”

Melissa Clarke, London N1. First baby born 5th May 2001

Reasons to consider a water birth

Bridge to Health –  Sian Smith

When considering their birth plan, more and more women are choosing to include the use of water at some stage.

In fact, around 30% of women now plan to use this method either for birthing their baby or as a natural way to reduce some of the intense sensations (pain!) associated with labour.

Here are some of the reasons why:

Water is relaxing!

Being able to bob around in a large pool of warm water is the perfect environment to help you stay calm and relaxed, in a situation most would normally consider pretty stressful.

For many, sliding into a warm bath is the ‘go to’ choice of relaxation after a hard day, so what better way to help you through one of the most physically demanding and memorable experiences of your life?

Additionally, a calmer birth may be less stressful for your baby, as moving from an environment of warm amniotic fluid to one of warm water is a gentle way of introducing them to their new surroundings.

Water is a natural pain reliever

The relaxing effects of water help encourage the body to produce its own pain-fighting substances.

This is beneficial both for Mum and baby; for Mum staying relaxed helps stimulate her natural production of oxytocin (the’ love hormone’ that helps the uterus contract) and endorphins, the ‘feelgood’ hormones that help work as a natural pain reliever.

For baby, a happy and relaxed Mum is more likely to birth quickly with a reduced need for medical intervention.

It reduces stress and anxiety

It is not just the water that helps to relax you. With a waterbirth, often the entire surroundings are altered to create a calming ambience e.g. dimmed lights and hushed voices.

This enables you to go into your own world much more easily than if in a harshly lit room with strange people popping in and out.

Additionally, this type of relaxation helps encourage deep abdominal breathing, preventing you from becoming tense which may make contractions feel more intense.

It reduces the risk of perineal tearing

The warmth of the water helps to promote increased blood flow to the vagina and perineum (the area between the vagina and anus that is susceptible to tearing during childbirth).

This increases flexibility of the tissues and can reduce the likelihood of tearing when birthing the baby’s head.

It allows you to adopt a more ‘active’ birth position

A reason that some women choose a water birth is that it allows you to retain some control throughout the labour process –being aware of the contractions and sensations your body is experiencing, with a reduced chance of medical intervention.

Additionally, the sensation of ‘weightlessness’ that being in the water provides, enables you to move around much more freely than your body has allowed you to for a while!

You are free to adopt almost any position that feels comfortable for you.

Hp7

The classic image of a labouring woman is that of her laying on her back with her legs in stirrups.

Whilst this is the case for many, it is actually a fairly difficult way to birth your baby as you have to work against gravity to push the baby’s head UP and over the lowest part of the spine – the coccyx.

The best way to counteract this is to work with gravity and adopt a more ‘active’ squatting or modified squatting position.

Being in the water allows you to stay in these positions for longer, as you can lean against the side of the birthing pool for support.

Remaining fit, healthy and active will also help you have as smooth a pregnancy as possible.

Your Osteopath can advise you on exercises that are suitable throughout pregnancy, specifically core, pelvic and lower limb strengthening exercises that will help you be able to adopt active birth positions and use the correct muscles to birth your baby as efficiently as possible.

It is safe!

Of course, water births are not suitable for everyone – the main criteria is that Mum and baby must be healthy, the baby must be in a head-down position, and the pregnancy must be between 37 and 42 weeks.

But as the majority of pregnancies are healthy, a water birth can offer a natural and more in control option to the labour choices a woman has.

And finally, one of the most frequently asked questions regarding waterbirths appears to be ‘will my baby drown underwater?’… to which the answer is no!

The baby receives all of its oxygen via the placenta and hormones circulating through the baby ensure this occurs until the baby is lifted out of the water.

It is also known as the ‘foetal dive reflex’ and allows babies to be underwater for short periods of time up until around 6 months old.

Exploring breech water birth

Maggie Banks – RM, PhD, ADN, RGON

The paucity of literature on labour and birth in water with breech- presenting babies highlights a need to share (and document) empirical knowledge on the subject to piece together women’s and midwives’ growing experiences.

I was asked recently if leaving a woman in a birth pool to give birth to a breech presenting baby, undiagnosed until on the perineum, was ‘reasonable’ midwifery practice.

The question was qualified in that if the breech baby had been known prior to labour, the birth would definitely not have occurred in water as it is contraindicated in all the waterbirth guidelines in New Zealand.

My initial reaction, though fleeting, was to shrink away and not own my own experiences, knowing that these would be viewed as ‘unreasonable’ given that guidelines were presented as a self-evident truth that could not be argued with, that is, a known breech baby would not be born in water.

The issue of breech presentation and waterbirth is one that I have repeatedly explored in the midwifery and obstetric literature over the years and have found little written on the subject.

What is there usually cites the same source – Herman Ponette, the Belgium obstetrician in Ostend who actively promotes waterbirth with breech babies.1 There is minimal acknowledgement that it occurs in hospitals in the USA and the UK.2, 3

A Google search using the term ‘breech waterbirth’ brings up a handful of consumer stories and the occasional midwifery website which discusses the issue. Of the numerous stories I receive from women and midwives about breech birth, increasingly they involve the use of water.

This article pieces together some knowledge gained from reading, discussions, several of my experiences of, and reflections on, the use of water immersion with breech babies.

Going with the Flow

Initially I had been mindful of Michel Odent’s recommendation of not using deep warm water during breech labour as he warns that the soothing effect of water may mask an unduly painful labour, thereby preventing early detection of what may prove to be a problematic birth.4

My own first experience of using water in a breech labour happened by accident in that the frank breech baby remained undiagnosed until on the perineum. The woman had used the pool unconventionally in labour – she chose to lounge in the pool between contractions and stood during them. Once the breech was diagnosed I asked her to leave the pool and she stood to give birth.

This made me re-look at Michel’s caution. My experience of waterbirth with cephalic presentation had shown me that water immersion only mellows out normal labour pain, not severe or pathological pain, which would indicate the bone on bone painof true disproportion between pelvis and presenting part.

I had to question why this should be any different for a breech presenting baby – and I could not find an answer.

With the same woman’s second frank breech baby, this time diagnosed in pregnancy, she again used the pool unconventionally to relax between her contractions, and she birthed standing on dry land.

These two experiences marked a small shift in the use of water during my attendance at breech labour and birth in that water immersion remained available with a known breech. However, I continued to arrange with women that they would leave the pool for birthing.

This request changed following the birth of Heath, a firstborn presenting as a flexed legs breech. His mother had been deeply relaxed in the pool, assuming a wide open kneeling position leaning over the edge of the pool.

When the baby was visible on the perineum and the urge to push was overwhelming I asked the woman to leave the pool as we had prearranged, which she did.

Whereas she had been strong, independently held her own weight, and was powerful in her pushing, once out of the pool, she needed physical support to be in active birth positions and was unable to relax deeply between contractions as she had previously done in the pool.

The baby was born within half an hour of pushing and all was well but it was clear to me that I had intervened in a physiological birth and this had altered the ease with which the woman gave birth.

This birth occurred some months after the 1st International Waterbirth Conference in 1995.

Publication of Paul Johnson’s classic article 5 on the mechanisms that prevent or, conversely, stimulate breathing in the unborn baby during waterbirth would occur the following year but, in concluding his conference write up, Johnson, a Consultant Clinical Physiologist in the O&G Department at the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford, wrote:

“…if the onset of labour is spontaneous, and no drugs are administered, a fetus born with its cord intact, into warm, fresh water, not asphyxiated, is inhibited from breathing”6 – a process not dependant on presentation.

Initiation of breathing following waterbirth occurs once the baby surfaces and is exposed to cooler, dryer air and clamping the umbilical cord 6 – again, irrespective of presentation.

Sheila Kitzinger would report his additional comment that “if water births are of psychological and physiological benefit, it is logical that this benefit should apply to high-risk women too”.7

I knew deep water immersion to be a very powerful modality for achieving a relaxed state for the woman, enhancing vasodilation and placental perfusion and, therefore, oxygenation, of the tissues and organs, including the placenta during the normally stressing (not distressing) time of labour.

I had seen women become oblivious to everyone and everything as they sank into the pool. I had come to recognise the depth of sigh on entering the pool that signalled release of pain, fear, social etiquette and conversation – and these observations were irrespective of whether the baby was coming head or bottom first.

The Buoyancy and Warmth of Water

Another dimension was added when I attended a woman with twins, the second baby being a breech presentation. The woman had grown her babies well and began labour spontaneously at 40 weeks.

Due to the heaviness of her abdomen, she was drawn to labouring in water – her bath at home then, when labour was well established and she had travelled to her chosen birth place, the spa bath in the obstetric hospital.

There was a point in her labour where she needed to be more upright than reclining in the spa bath allowed, so we set up my free standing birth pool for her.

With the water up to the level of her breasts she became almost weightless in the pool, and was able to assume her intuitive positioning in a deep squat for the births of both her babies, the second of which had remained breech.

The woman reflected how supportive the water had been and how the upright position engaged her strength and ability to birth well.

Controlling Pelvic Pressure

When vaginal breech birth was a common occurrence 15 years or so ago, epidural anaesthesia was commonly recommended to overcome a premature urge to push. However, discussion with midwifery colleagues indicates a premature urge to push with a term breech baby is rare in woman-controlled positioning.

One woman who did experience significant pelvic pressure from the onset of labour with spontaneous rupture of membranes while having her first baby – a frank breech presentation – provided a piece to the mosaic of the use of water.

She controlled the urge to push by long and slow breathes during contractions and lying on her side on a floor mattress for most of her labour, rising only to crawl to the toilet on her hands and knees. After 12 hours of this, the pressure was overwhelming, even when lying.

While her good progress was evident from the lengthening burgundy buttock crease and her birthing energy, it was not time to use that expulsive energy. A vaginal examination confirmed a thin rim of cervix remained.

While a hands and knees position reduced the pressure, it was not until she lounged in the pool on her abdomen that the pressure again became tolerable. The pool was invaluable for enabling her to resume breathing over the contractions for the next three hours.

In the last hour prior to the birth, the woman commenced her grunting expulsions. As this had not brought her baby to a visible position in that time, I asked her to stand for one contraction to test the power of this feeling.

Simply standing engaged the pelvic pressure enough to bring the baby to almost rumping with the first push.

The second surge saw the baby rumped and progress so the popliteal spaces (back of the knees) were visible. With the next, he was born to the ankles, then descended quickly to wear his ‘perineal hat’ and his head was gently released without perineal trauma. All of this occurred without a contraction as the women responded to the pelvic pressure.

Assessing the Baby

The New Zealand Guideline Group’s best practice evidence-based guideline on breech labour and birth acknowledges that the evidence does not support continuous electronic foetal heart rate (EFM) monitoring by cardiotocography over intermittent auscultation.8

This is because, just as for well women and their babies with no alerting factors, there are no significant differences in standard measures of newborn wellbeing (including cerebral palsy and infant mortality) with continuous EFM in labour for ‘high risk’ situations, which frank or flexed legs breech presentation at term is deemed to be by some.

Only beneficial for its association with a reduced incidence of neonatal seizures, continuous EFM is associated with increased maternal morbidity by way of the accompanying increase in Caesarean and operative birth rates.9

At any given point the midwife needs to know that the baby is coping well with labour by assessment of his movements10 and listening to his heart beat.

As with any other labour for well women and babies, listening can be easily acheived with a Pinard stethoscope (or handheld, waterproof doppler) during water immersion.

Essential Elements of Physiological Breech Birth

Midwives commonly reflect on how their practice changes with attending waterbirths of cephalic presenting babies to become more ‘hands-off ’ during birth.

Confident that the water frequently dissipates urges to explosively push, while also supporting the woman’s perineal tissues and the baby as he is born, the midwife is drawn to a non touch vigilant attendance. This ‘hands off ’ in the absence of problems is the ‘golden rule’ during breech birth.

Maternal effort is an important part of achieving a ‘hands-off ’, spontaneous birth. As with any birthing, the woman needs to be supported to choose positions of comfort in the water which enhance her power and strength – kneeling, squatting, hands and knees or reclining.

Whichever birth position is chosen, the midwife needs to position herself so she can see both the advancing baby and the umbilical cord, and be in a position to palpate the umbilical cord if necessary.

The midwife may need ‘hands on’ for the birth of the head but the support of the water usually ensures gentle and woman- controlled birth of the baby’s head. Due to the reduction in gravity and an accompanying reduction in an urge to push for the head, the woman may need to be reminded to release the baby’s head.

Midwives who regularly attend waterbirths with cephalic presentation frequently reflect that if there is a problem during birth, for example, shoulder dystocia, they will initially try to correct it in the pool.

This avoids delay while utilising the water’s buoyancy so the woman can move easily to adopt very wide open positions that are needed for manoeuvres.

While Pinotte1 notes a reduced need for routine manipulations of the breech baby with waterbirth, in the rare circumstance that a manoeuvre is needed – to bring down stuck arms11 and/or flex, cradle and scoop out the baby’s head12 – these could also initially be done in the pool, again, avoiding delay.

The woman, however, would be asked to get out of the pool if problems were not easily remedied.

The Ongoing Mosaic

For some maternity professionals the issue of vaginal breech birth is no longer worth considering in the wake of the Term Breech Trial13 despite concerns about its methodological flaws.14-17

For others it remains a planned option.18-22 There will, of course, always be undiagnosed breech babies in labour, irrespective of the degree of antenatal scrutiny.

While some consider undiagnosed breech an ‘obstetric emergency’, the manner in which a midwife facilitates
a vaginal breech birth, first diagnosed when birth is imminent, is the sameas if it was diagnosed antenatally and a vaginal breech birth is planned, albeit the latter having obstetric backup available with the birth in an obstetric hospital.

The use of deep water immersion with mal-presentation (read: breech)
is contraindicated in hospital clinical guidelines on waterbirth, and the use of water is absent as a modality in vaginal breech birth guidelines.

Embracing these, giving birth in water to a breech baby would be out of the question for some maternity providers.

Yet others are very specific
 in seeing breech presentation as a positive indication for waterbirth because of the buoyancy afforded to the baby and umbilical cord, both of which are kept warm in the water until surfacing into the cooler air,1,23,24 contraindicated only if the breech labour is not progressive and/
or is complicated.25

Midwifery can have additional knowledge fragments to obstetric knowledge, gained by our deep relationships with women.

Being attentive to women who are called to use water through breech labour and birth and walking side by side with them during this time has added to my understanding of facilitating physiological breech birth.

We need to be able to share the practice wisdom which comes from our experiences, discussions and reflections. We also need to be able to do this without fear of repercussions that may be activated from that disclosure. As a result, we will continue to find ongoing pieces to the mosaic of breech waterbirth.

References:

Ponette H. Breech and twin deliveries in the water. Accessed 20 March 2000. Available at http://www.helsinki. fi/~lauhakan/whale/waterbaby/p6.html
Kitzinger S. Sheila Kitzinger’s letter from England. Birth 1991;18(3):170–171.
Harper B. Waterbirth basics – from newborn breathing to hospital protocols. Midwifery Today 2000;54:9– 10,12–15,68.
Odent M. Birth reborn. Souvenir Press: New York, 1984:103–105.
Johnson P. Birth under water – to breathe or not to breathe. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1996;103(3):202–208.
Johnson P. Birth under water – to breathe or not to breathe. In, Lawrence Beech BA (ed).Water birth unplugged. Proceedings of the First International Water Birth Conference. Books for Midwives: Cheshire, England, 1996:31–33.
Kitzinger S. Sheila Kitzinger’s letter from England: is water birth dangerous? Birth 1995; 22(3):172–173.
New Zealand Guidelines Group. Care of women with breech presentation or previous Caesarean birth. New Zealand Guidelines Group: Wellington, 2004:xxi, 32.
Alfirevic Z, Devane D, Gyte GML. Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD006066. DOI: 10.1002/14651858. CD006066.
Banks M. Utilising the unborn baby’s in-labour movements. New Zealand College of Midwives Journal 2003;29:6.
Banks M. Breech birth woman-wise. Birthspirit: Hamilton, New Zealand, 1998:88–89.
Ibid., pp. 90–91.
Hannah M, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, et al. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicenter trial. Lancet 2000;356:1375–1383.
Glezerman M. Five years to the term breech trial: the rise and fall of a randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2006;194(1):20–25.
Kotaska A. In the literature: combating coercion: breech birth, parturient choice, and the evolution of evidence-based maternity care. Birth 2007;34(2):176–180.
Keirse MJNC. Evidence-based childbirth only for breech babies? Birth 2002;29(1):55–59.
Goer H. When research is flawed: planned vaginal birth versus elective Cesarean for breech presentation. Accessed 14 August 2007. Available at http://www.lamaze.org/ Research/WhenResearchisFlawed/ VaginalBreechBirth/tabid/167/ Default.aspx
Goffinet F, Carayol M, Foidart J, Alexander S, Uzan S, et al. Is planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term still an option? Results of an observational prospective survey in France and Belgium. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2006;194(4):1002–1011.
Hellsten C, Lindqvist PG, Olofsson P. Vaginal breech delivery: is it still an option? European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 2003;111(2):122–128.
Sibony O, Luton D, Oury J, Blot P. Six hundred and ten breech versus 12,405 cephalic deliveries at term: is there any difference in the neonatal outcome? European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 2003;107(2):140–144.
Giuliani A, Schöll WMJ, Basver A, Tamussino KF. Mode of delivery and outcome of 699 term singleton breech deliveries at a single centre. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2002;187(6):1694–1698.
van Roosmalen J, Rosendaal F. There is still room for disagreement about vaginal delivery of breech infants at term. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2002;109(9):967–969.
Charkowsky I. In: Napierala S. Water birth: a midwife’s perspective. Bergin & Garvey: London, 1994:181–182.
Enning C. Personal communication, 2008.
Ponette H. The New Aquatic Maternity in Ostend. Accessed 20 March 2000. Available at http://www.helsinki. fi/~lauhakan/whale/waterbaby/p2.html

The benefits of labouring in water for overweight and obese mothers

Excerpt from article published by Big Birtha who provides information and support for bigger mums and mums to be.

All women are more buoyant and supported by water, it’s one of the reasons swimming and aqua aerobics are particularly good forms of exercise while pregnant.

But the benefit is likely to be greater for obese women, as fatter bodies are naturally more buoyant.

The buoyancy and support provided by water eases movement, which may make both maintaining an active labour and facilitating access for monitoring easier.

On land, it is cumbersome and difficult for a heavily pregnant woman of any size to quickly move between kneeling, reclining, sitting, leaning, crouching, turning from front to back etc.

In water, it is simple and easy to shift to whatever position is most comfortable/convenient, even midway through contractions.

Being in water also promotes positions which are more agreeable for birthing. Lying flat on your back on a bed is one of the worst positions to be in during labour.

When you are on your back you are working against gravity; actually trying to push the baby out uphill.

It’s only a slight incline, but it’s there.

To add to the problem, when lying down, your body weight is also resting on your coccyx (tailbone), forcing it into the pelvic cavity and reducing space for the baby.

In water, even if you were to float on your back, you wouldn’t be putting the same pressure on your tailbone, and you are far more likely to take an upright position, crouching or kneeling, for instance; positions which on land are uncomfortable to maintain, but not in water.

This frees up your coccyx to keep out of the way.

It is well documented that warm water reduces pain felt by labouring women, and decreases the use of other pain relief.

Given the issues with providing epidural anaesthesia to obese women, it seems sensible that using water; an effective non-pharmaceutical intervention to help with pain should be an attractive alternative?

Obese women are at increased risk of having longer labours, and of moving on to instrumental delivery and caesarean sections for ‘failure to progress’.

Yet immersion in water has been shown to significantly reduce the length of labour in ‘normal’ sized women.

It doesn’t take much of a leap of imagination to consider that water might help to address this problem, at least in some obese women?

BigBirtha.co.uk...

Active Birth Pools are specially designed for to accomodate bigger mothers enabling them to move and benefit from the positions natural to labour and birth.

Various means of entry and exit from the pool as well as emergency evacuation have been considered and designed for to safeguard  over weight mothers and the midwives who care for them.

Clinical guidelines for a hospital water birth pool facility By Janet Balaskas

Professional advice for attending midwives

1. Must be the midwives choice to help mothers in the pool room.
Two midwives present for delivery

2. Adequate education

  • Literature
  • Videos
  • Regular study days and conferences

3. Professional and peer support

4. Familiarity with legal implications

(in UK code of practice 3.3.3. Sections C & D).

5. Record Keeping

  • Annual analysis and evaluation of outcomes

6. Health and Safety

  • Infection control (rubber gloves – half size smaller or gauntlets, immunization)
  • Cleaning of the bath and equipment
  • Electrical safety

7. Rehearse Emergency Procedures

  • Ensure proximity to paediatric resuscitation and other medical aid. Familiarise procedure.

8. Midwife’s Comfort

  • loose-fitting clothing
  • theatre clothing useful

Preparation of Parents

Aqua natal and other antenatal classes

  • Visit to pool room – rehearsal – 34 weeks +
  • Review of literature – albums – photographs
  • Leaflets and books
  • Videos and discussion
  • Meeting other parents who have used facility

Midwife explains use of the pool

Discuss:

  • Expectations
  • Birth plan
  • Other forms of pain relief possible in conjunction with the pool (TNS, homoeopathy, aromatherapy).
  • Music, camera etc
  • Back-up

File notes of parent’s wishes

Parents to agree in advance

  • The midwife will do her utmost to facilitate the parents wishes.

However

Midwife on duty must be competent and willing

Midwife’s judgement is paramount. If the midwife is not happy about aspects of progress in the pool and wants the mother to leave the pool, she will agree to do so.

“Midwives are accountable for their own practice”

PREPARING THE POOL ROOM

Portable Pool

1. Position the pool to allow easy access all the way round (consider trolley in an emergency).

Remove all unnecessary furniture.

2. Place blue disposable liner in position

3. Run tap for five minutes before filling the pool.

Put filling pipes over the side of the pool.

Fill pool two-thirds full – temperature 36-37 degrees C

As pool is filling, adjust creases in liner.

4. Maintain temperature to mother’s comfort between 32 and 37 degrees.

With this amount of water, temperature reduces at about 1 degree per hour – check half-hourly). Keep heat retaining cover on pool when not being used.

5. Clean up any spillage – remove unnecessary hose.

6. Equipment Required

  • Clean sieve to remove faecal debris
  • Electric fan – especially in warm weather
  • Cassette player
  • Good supply of bath towels and robe
  • Non-slip mat
  • Waterproof sonic aid for monitoring or Pinnard stethoscope
  • Candles or essential oils, homoeopathic remedies
  • A large jug or cold water for drinking
  • Inflatable cushions, rubber ring etc.
  • Easy access to resuscitaire heater in room or outside
  • Ensure that facilities for ‘land’ birth are available in room ie: mattress or delivery bed, stool, chair, non-slip mat, beanbag.
  • Call system and telephone location known
  • Water and room thermometer, delivery pack,
  • Syntometrine, Lignocaine etc.

Parents’ birth plan

Admission

1. Confirm mother still wishes to use the pool

2. Base line observations

  • Temperature
  • Pulse
  • Blood Pressure
  • Urine
  • Palpatation – presentation and lie

3. Assess strength of contractions

4. Obtain satisfactory CTG

5. Vaginal assessment

Avoid rupture of membranes

AIM – Physiologically normal labour

6. Glycerine suppositories – some offer microlax enema (5 mls). This is not usually necessary.

7. Encourage mother too remain outside pool until mid-labour.

Use:

  • TNS
  • TLC

Aromatherapy Massage

  • Lavendar
  • Jasmine
  • Clary Sage

Homoeopathy

  • Arnica 200 (pain)
  • Aconite 200 (fear)
  • Pulsatilla 200 (weepy)
  • Kali Phos 200 (exhaustion)
  • Caulophyllum 200 (ineffectual contractions)

Labour – Inclusion criteria

  • Term Babies only 37 -43 weeks
  • Cephalic presentation established in labour
  • Spontaneous rupture of membranes if contracting
  • Induction by vaginal PGE
  • Good progress
  • Previous caesarian
  • Twin babies

Labour – Exclusion criteria

  • Foetal distress
  • Fresh meconium-stained liquor
  • Intra-uterine growth retardation
  • Babies at risk
  • Ante-partum haemorrhage
  • Previous post-partum haemorrhage (?)
  • Intravenous infusion
  • Severe pre-eclampsia or raised blood pressure
  • Epilepsy
  • Skin conditions
  • Known Hepatitis or positive HIV status
  • Sedation
  • Poor progress
  • Breech

Caring for the mother and baby in the pool

Labour

Priority – remember too many interruptions breaks the mother’s concentration.

Disturb as little as possible

1. Labour established prior to mother’s entry to pool (4cm onwards)

2. Mother can adopt any position she likes. Frequent changes are good.

3. Adjust depth of water for comfort

4. Lower lights

5. Midwife in constant but discrete attendance while mother is in the pool.

6. Check water temperature regularly Mother comfortable – not too warm or too cold 36-37 degrees at delivery

7. Ensure plenty of fluids – mother, partner and staff – to prevent dehydration.

8. Ventilation and room temperature to comfort.

Observations during Labour

  • Maternal and foetal, as usual
  • Maternal temperature and pulse (2 hourly)
  • Blood pressure (4 hourly)
  • Foetal heart (half hourly)
  • Vaginal (4 hourly, or at midwife’s discretion)
  • In any position Mother standing up
  • With partners help – float mother to surface, partner supports her under pelvis

Amniotomy

Usually unnecessary, membranes left intact as long as possible, but can be performed in water.

Pain Relief

1. Warm water may be enough

2. Breathing, visualization, relaxation techniques

3. Massage – holding – partner in pool optional (bathing trunks to be worn)

4. Homoeopathy

5. Essential oils by inhalation – Lavendar, Clary Sage or Marjoram

6. Verbal support – partner participation

7. Opitons – N20 + 02 (Entenox) – Pethidine (not to exceed 50 mgm)

Elimination

1. Inclusion of toilet in pool room preferable

2. Mother usually empties her bladder without being aware of it.

Birth in water

Exclusion Criteria

  • Foetal distress
  • Premature babies (37 –38 weeks)
  • Post mature babies (42 – 43 weeks)
  • Prolonged second stage or poor progress
  • Mother needs to be grounded – no power
  • Twins – multiple births
  • Breech presentation
  • Possible shoulder dystocia – baby large in proportion to mother
  • Water unusually dirty
  • Previous Caesarean section

Second Stage in the pool

If contractions slow down in second stage, the mother should leave the pool – if contractions are effective birth may occur under water.

Two midwives present

Second stage initiation usually self-evident. Vaginal examination not necessary as a routine.

Guidance, support – sometimes suggest different position. Do not actively encourage pushing if progress is normal. (if progress is not satisfactory – advise mother to deliver on dry land).

Crowning: manual support of perineum and control of head not usually needed, due to softening effects of water.

Baby born from front. Head delivered – with next contraction body is delivered. Slowly raise the baby to the surface of the water without delay. Baby face up under water, face down when lifted up. Mother assists or is given baby and welcomes baby with head above water but body below water to minimize heat-loss by evaporation (water level may need adjustment so mother can sit comfortably and hold baby like this)

Baby born from behind into water. Do not bring baby to surface from behind mother. Pass baby, face up, through mother’s legs and invite mother to reach down and receive the baby herself and then hold the baby’s head above, body below water surface level.

If mother stands up or baby is born above the water surface, ensure that the head does not resubmerge. Pass baby to mother (between the legs if from behind), she can then sit down in the pool with baby’s body submerged and head above the water level.

Midwife checks apex beat and cord pulsation, Apgar and blood loss observation.

Mother and father welcome baby, take photographs etc.

First sucking takes place.

Third stage in water

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Heavy Blood loss (> 500 mls)
  • Mother feels faint
  • Delayed delivery of placenta
  • Baby needs resuscitation

First contact between mother and baby undisturbed if possible.

Discreet, unhurried observations

Placenta:

  • In water? Out of water?
  • Theoretical risk of water embolism (no actual case reported).
  • Privacy maintained for optimal oxytocin secretion
  • Room temperature raised
  • Mother helped out of pool
  • Offered warm robe or towels
  • Baby suckling encouraged
  • Mother sitting upright – supported
  • Placenta expelled – using squatting position if necessary

A physiological third stage is logical after a natural birth.

Use oxytocic drugs only if blood loss is excessive

  • After delivery inspect placenta and perineum for trauma
  • Suturing best done one hour after leaving pool to allow recovery from the effects of saturation.
  • Check uterus is well-contracted and blood loss is not excessive
  • Leave mother comfortable with baby.

Emptying a portable pool

  • Place pump in the pool
  • Hose to suitable outlet – ensure end is securely anchored
  • Start pump – takes about 20 minutes
  • Dispose of last gallon with liner

Dealing with Emergencies

If in doubt – Get her out!

Cord around neck

  • No need to feel for cord after delivery of head.
  • If cord entanglement – loosen, slip over baby’s head or body after delivery
  • In rare instance of needing to cut the cord, ask mother to stand up. Once rest of the baby is delivered, mother may sit back into the pool and welcome the baby as usual.

Remember: NEVER cut the cord prior to underwater delivery

Once out of water, the baby’s head must not be allowed to resubmerge, as breathing may have initiated already.

Shoulder dystcoia

  • Try to exclude potential shoulder dystocia prior to onset of second stage in water.
  • Stand mother up out of water
  • Call for assistance and paediatrician
  • Ask mother to bend over and grip side of the pool, standing with legs well apart.
  • The midwife will have to step into the pool and work from behind the mother
  • An emergency episiotomy may have to be performed. Give traction towards mother’s back to release anterior shoulder.
  • In most cases of dystocia this should be effective, if shoulder in the anterior / posterior position.
  • If on palpation the baby feels excessively large, then perhaps it would be advisable for the mother to labour in the pool only, and deliver on dry land. Certainly ask mother to leave the pool if progress is slow with a large baby in second stage.

Episiotomy Procedure

Episiotomy is rarely needed for a water birth

Only done if baby is stuck or in an emergency where mother cannot leave the pool.

Not difficult to do in the pool

  • Change mother’s position – across the pool, partner supporting her shoulders
  • Float mother up so perineum is just under the surface (if local anaesthetic is used, ask mother to sit up on the edge of the pool for a minute or too while it is administered,
  • With perineum under the water surface, two fingers of left hand between head and perineum – line up scissors.
  • At height of next contraction – cut
  • Mother sinks deeper into the pool
  • Head delivered

Woman Collapsing in Pool
(this rarely happens if guidelines are observed)

Call for assistance.

Do not empty pool – if possible fill to maximum as buoyancy aids removal of mother from pool.

If partner is present, ask him to support woman but do not lift.

Midwife maintains airway until assistance arrives.

Assistance Arrives

  • State ‘Pool Emergency’ – summon further help – minimum three people, ideally four (team leader coordinates procedure.
  • Trolley – slide board, handling slings brought in. Tip head of trolley down and place at edge of pool. Slide board placed over edge of pool, bridging gap between pool and trolley.
  • Two assistants enter pool – place handling slings under woman’s chest and buttocks. Third assistant supports head.
  • Use buoyancy of water to float woman from pool to slide board to trolley
  • Dry and cover woman and escort to delivery suite if necessary, giving appropriate emergency treatment. NB: check equipment regularly.
  • Attend regular ‘lifting’ refresher courses with prior practice highly recommended for anyone atttending water labour or birth.

Baby slow to breathe

  • It has been commonly observed that babies born underwater are very calm and initiation of breathing is usually slower.
  • Blowing on baby’s skin stimulates breathing
  • Suction of air passages can be carried out with mother holding baby in the pool.
  • If further resuscitation is required, clamp and cut cord and take baby to resuscitaire. Clear airways and administer oxygen while summoning paediatrician. Keep warm and dry.
  • All midwives should attend a course on advanced neonatal resuscitation.

Please note: This is copyrighted material. But you’re free to forward it to anyone you like, as long as you don’t make any changes or profit from its use.

Water Safety Management

When it comes to the creation and care of water birth facilities nothing is more important.

Micro-organisms breed freely in warm moist environments and must be prevented from propagating.

Below a list of guidelines to help you create a safe water birth facility.

Designed to optimise safety, negate risk and deliver safer birthing environments

 

Active Birth Pools Information Hub

Groundbreaking research confirms benefits of water birth

Systematic review and meta-analysis to examine intrapartum interventions, and maternal and neonatal outcomes following immersion in water during labour and waterbirth

Library of Medicine

Abstract

Objectives: Water immersion during labour using a birth pool to achieve relaxation and pain relief during the first and possibly part of the second stage of labour is an increasingly popular care option in several countries. It is used particularly by healthy women who experience a straightforward pregnancy, labour spontaneously at term gestation and plan to give birth in a midwifery led care setting. More women are also choosing to give birth in water. There is debate about the safety of intrapartum water immersion, particularly waterbirth. We synthesised the evidence that compared the effect of water immersion during labour or waterbirth on intrapartum interventions and outcomes to standard care with no water immersion. A secondary objective was to synthesise data relating to clinical care practices and birth settings that women experience who immerse in water and women who do not.

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources: A search was conducted using CINAHL, Medline, Embase, BioMed Central and PsycINFO during March 2020 and was replicated in May 2021.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Primary quantitative studies published in 2000 or later, examining maternal or neonatal interventions and outcomes using the birthing pool for labour and/or birth.

Data extraction and synthesis: Full-text screening was undertaken independently against inclusion/exclusion criteria in two pairs. Risk of bias assessment included review of seven domains based on the Robbins-I Risk of Bias Tool. All outcomes were summarised using an OR and 95% CI. All calculations were conducted in Comprehensive Meta-Analysis V.3, using the inverse variance method. Results of individual studies were converted to log OR and SE for synthesis. Fixed effects models were used when I2 was less than 50%, otherwise random effects models were used. The fail-safe N estimates were calculated to determine the number of studies necessary to change the estimates. Begg’s test and Egger’s regression risk assessed risk of bias across studies. Trim-and-fill analysis was used to estimate the magnitude of effect of the bias. Meta-regression was completed when at least 10 studies provided data for an outcome.

Results: We included 36 studies in the review, (N=157 546 participants). Thirty-one studies were conducted in an obstetric unit setting (n=70 393), four studies were conducted in midwife led settings (n=61 385) and one study was a mixed setting (OU and homebirth) (n=25 768). Midwife led settings included planned home and freestanding midwifery unit (k=1), alongside midwifery units (k=1), planned homebirth (k=1), a freestanding midwifery unit and an alongside midwifery unit (k=1) and an alongside midwifery unit (k=1). For water immersion, 25 studies involved women who planned to have/had a waterbirth (n=151 742), seven involved water immersion for labour only (1901), three studies reported on water immersion during labour and waterbirth (n=3688) and one study was unclear about the timing of water immersion (n=215).Water immersion significantly reduced use of epidural (k=7, n=10 993; OR 0.17 95% CI 0.05 to 0.56), injected opioids (k=8, n=27 391; OR 0.22 95% CI 0.13 to 0.38), episiotomy (k=15, n=36 558; OR 0.16; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.27), maternal pain (k=8, n=1200; OR 0.24 95% CI 0.12 to 0.51) and postpartum haemorrhage (k=15, n=63 891; OR 0.69 95% CI 0.51 to 0.95). There was an increase in maternal satisfaction (k=6, n=4144; OR 1.95 95% CI 1.28 to 2.96) and odds of an intact perineum (k=17, n=59 070; OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.79) with water immersion. Waterbirth was associated with increased odds of cord avulsion (OR 1.94 95% CI 1.30 to 2.88), although the absolute risk remained low (4.3 per 1000 vs 1.3 per 1000). There were no differences in any other identified neonatal outcomes.

Conclusions: This review endorses previous reviews showing clear benefits resulting from intrapartum water immersion for healthy women and their newborns. While most included studies were conducted in obstetric units, to enable the identification of best practice regarding water immersion, future birthing pool research should integrate factors that are known to influence intrapartum interventions and outcomes. These include maternal parity, the care model, care practices and birth setting.

Prospero registration number: CRD42019147001.

Keywords: Maternal medicine; PRIMARY CARE; Pain management.

Research review backs benefits of water births for mothers and babies  

Nursing Times

Water births provide “clear benefits” over standard care for healthy mothers and their newborns, according to UK researchers.

They found water births were associated with fewer interventions and complications during and after the birth, as well as higher levels of satisfaction for the mother.

“Water immersion is an effective method to reduce pain in labour, without increasing risk”

Study authors

Researchers compared the extent of healthcare interventions needed during and after labour to see if outcomes differed between a water birth and standard care – without a birthing pool.

They noted that a water birth involves using a birthing pool to achieve relaxation and pain relief, with the mother either exiting the pool for the birth, so the newborn can emerge into air to breathe, or remaining in the pool and bringing the newborn to the surface to start breathing.

They trawled research databases looking for relevant studies published over 20 years between 2000 and 2021, finding 36 studies involving 157,546 women. Most were carried out in obstetric units.

The study results showed that a water birth, regardless of whether women birth in or out of the pool, “has clear benefits to women” in obstetric units, where most births take place and where interventions and complications are more likely than in midwife-led units.

A waterbirth was as safe as standard care for healthy mothers and their newborns, they said in the journal BMJ Open.

Compared with standard care, a water birth significantly reduced the use of epidurals, injected opioids, episiotomy, as well as pain and heavy bleeding after the birth.

In addition, it increased mothers’ satisfaction levels and the odds of an intact perineum. There was no difference in the rate of Caesarean sections, said the study authors from Oxford Brookes University.

“Water immersion can significantly increase the likelihood of an intact perineum and reduce episiotomy, an intervention which offers no perineal or foetal benefit, can increase postnatal pain, anxiety, and impact negatively on a woman’s birth experience,” they said.

However, they observed more instances of umbilical cord breakage among water births, but the rate was still low – 4.3 per 1,000 births in water compared with 1.3 per 1,000 births with standard care.

This finding may be linked to pulling on the umbilical cord when the newborn is brought up out of the water, the researchers suggested.

Overall, they stated: “Water immersion provides benefits for the mother and newborn when used in the obstetric setting, making water immersion a low-tech intervention for improving quality and satisfaction with care.

“In addition, water immersion during labour and waterbirth alter clinical practice, resulting in less augmentation, episiotomy, and requirements for pharmacological analgesia,” they said.

They concluded: “Water immersion is an effective method to reduce pain in labour, without increasing risk.”

However, they acknowledged that information on birth settings, care practices, interventions and outcomes varied considerably among the included studies, and few were carried out in midwife-led units or in the mother’s home, which may have affected the findings of the analysis.

To strengthen the evidence base, future research should include factors that are known to influence interventions and outcomes during and after labour or birth, they added.

For example, how many children a woman has already had, where she gives birth, who looks after her, and the care she receives.

“The challenge now is to ensure this choice is open to all women wherever they live”

Clare Livingstone

Commenting on the research, Clare Livingstone, professional policy advisor at the Royal College of Midwives, said: “This is really good news for women choosing to have a water birth or thinking of having one.

“There has been previous research outlining the benefits for women and this significant study adds weight to those. It is also positive because it is more information for women when deciding how they want to give birth.”

She said: “Water births are becoming more widely available for women across the UK, but this isn’t the case everywhere. The challenge now is to ensure this choice is open to all women wherever they live.”

Ms Livingstone added: “What is needed now is to see more research into water births in midwife-led settings and in women’s homes. This will give us a broader picture of the impact of water births.”

Birth under water – Michel Odent

Michel Odent’s groundbreaking report “Birth Under Water” that was published in the Lancet in December 1983 is widely regarded as the seminal moment in time when the use of water for labour and birth entered our consciousness.

I’d personally like to thank Michel for being the inspiration that led me to begin to create and develop water birth pools in 1987 and for facilitating the birth of my son Theo at home in 1988.

Keith Brainin – Founder & Director Active Birth Pools

Birth under water – Michel Odent

Originally published in the Lancet: 1983

Centre Hospitalier Général de Pithiviers, PIthiviers 45300, France

The 100th birth under water in our hospital in June provided my team with an opportunity to summarise our experience of the use of water in an obstetric unit.

Since a report on birth under water in 1805,1 the subject has been rarely broached in the medical literature.

In Pithiviers, a hospital which is, in other respects, a conventional state hospital,2 a small pool has been installed close to the homely birthing room.

This pool is large enough (2m in diameter) and deep enough (about 0.7m) to make it easy for a woman in it to change her posture.

Many parturients feel and irresistible attraction to water. We don’t advise women to try the pool; we simply offer the pool as a possibility.

The water is ordinary mains tap water, at a temperature of 37 °C. The water is not sterilized, and contains no chemicals or additives on any sort.

We tend to reserve the pool for women who are experiencing especially painful contractions (lumbar pains, in particular), and where the dilation of the cervix is not progressing beyond about 5cm. In these circumstances, there is commonly a strong demand for drugs.

In most cases, the cervix becomes fully dilated within 1 or 2 hours of immersion in the pool, especially if the lights are dimmed.

It is possible to check the fetal heartbeat regularly with a small ultrasound stethoscope or with a traditional obstetrical stethoscope. Most women choose to leave the water in the second stage.

We believe that the warm pool facilitates the first stage of labour because of the reduction of the secretion of nor-adrenaline and other catecholamines; the reduction of sensory stimulation when the ears are under water; the reduction of the effects of gravity; the alteration of nervous conduction; the direct muscular stretching action; and peripheral vascular action.

Other factors, however, are difficult to rationalise. We have found, for example, that the mere sight of water and the sound of it filling the pool are sometimes sufficient stimuli to release inhibitions so that a birth may occur before the pool is full.

We have observed that water seems to help many parturients reach a certain state of consciousness where they become indifferent to what is going on around them.

Although nearly all the women who enter the pool leave it before birth, the process of delivery can sometimes be so extraordinarily fast under water, that some parturients do not leave the pool at the second stage.

Birth under water is therefore not exceptional in our unit, although it may not be intentional. During the second stage, immersion in warm water seems to help women to lose inhibitions. Most women cry out freely during the last contractions.

When the birth happens under water, the newborn infant is brought gently to the surface and placed in the mother’s arms. This is always done within seconds but without rushing (I am present at the pool for every underwater delivery).

Our experience confirms that the newborn’s first breathing is triggered by contact with the air and the sudden difference in temperature.

There is no risk of inhalation of water. It is useful to remember that in the human species carotid chemoreceptors are thought to be insensitive at birth, and very likely play no part at the time of the first cry. 3,4,5 Only 2 newborn infants out of 100 needed suction of the upper respiratory tract and a short period of manual ventilatory support.

At the time of first contact, most mothers are in a vertical position, kneeling in the water.  They hold the baby in their arms in such a way that skin-to-skin and eye-to-eye contact are as perfect as possible.

An early demonstration of the rooting reflex is almost the rule, and a first sucking 20 min after the birth is common.

Water seems to facilitate the development of the mother-infant relationship. We cut the umbilical cord and help the mother leave the pool just before expulsion of the placenta.

We consider that there might be a risk of water embolism if the mother were to stay in the pool after this time. In 100 underwater deliveries there were 2 manual removals of placenta (our general rate is less than 1%).

All the presentations were cephalic. In breech presentations, our strategy is to use the first stage as a test before deciding on either a vaginal delivery or a caesarian section: in these cases we prefer not to interfere with drugs or with a bath.

Among the 100 women who gave birth underwater, there were 43 primipara, 37 secundiparas, 14 para 3, 2 para 4, one para 5, one para 6, and one para 7.

The youngest was 19 and the oldest was 43. The average age was 28. The lowest birth weight was 2.15kg and the highest was 4.40 kg, we did not perform any episiotomies.

All the tears (of which there were 29) were first degree. We had no infectious complications, even where the membranes were already broken.

There were no perinatal deaths. One infant was transferred to a paediatric unit one day after the birth with groaning and respiratory failure, symptoms which were diagnosed as subarachnoid haemorrhage after delivery in the posterior position at 37 weeks.

Only one infant was jaundiced and required phototherapy (15mg/dl bilirubin on the second day). One of the infants born under water died suddenly some weeks later, although it was previously considered to be perfectly healthy.

We have found no risk attached either to labour or to birth under water, and in any hospital where a pool is in daily use, a birth under water is bound to happen now and then.

Compared with the supported squatting position in the birthing room, we have found that the end of the second stage of labour can be more difficult under water, particularly for primipara, but immersion during the second half of the first stage of labour is helpful, particularly for parturients having painful and insufficient contractions.

It should be possible for any conventional hospital to have a pool situated close to the birthing room and operating theatre.

The use of warm water during labour requires further research, but we hope that other experience would confirm that immersion in warm water is an efficient, easy, and economical way to reduce the use of drugs and the rate of intervention in parturition.

img_1025

REFERENCES

1. Embry M. Observation sur un accouchement terminé dans le bain. Ann Soc Méd Prat Montpellier 1805; 5: 13.

2. Gillett J. Chilbirth in Pithiviers, France. Lancet 1979; ii: 894-96.

3. Girard F, Lacaisse A, Dejours P. Lestimulus O 2 ventilatoire à la période néonatale chez l’homme. J Physiol (Paris) 1960; 52: 108-09.

4.  Purves MJ. The effects of hypoxia in the newborn lamb before and after denervation of the carotid chemoreceptors. J Physiol 1966; 185: 60-77.

5.  Purves MJ. Chemoreceptors and their reflexes with special reference to the fetus and newborn. J Devl Physiol 1981;  3: 21-57.

 

The Benefits of Water Birth for Overweight Women

Pregnancy is a transformative journey, and every woman deserves the best possible experience. Overweight or obese women often face unique challenges during pregnancy and childbirth.

However, the option of water birth has emerged as a promising alternative for these women, offering a range of benefits that can contribute to a more comfortable and empowering birthing experience.

In this article, we will explore the advantages of water birth for overweight women and why it might be a suitable choice.

Weight Support and Buoyancy

One of the primary benefits of water birth for overweight women is the buoyancy provided by being in warm water.

This buoyancy helps alleviate the strain on the joints and supports the weight of the body, making it easier for women carrying excess weight to move and change positions during labor.

This can be particularly beneficial during the first stage of labor when women often need to walk or change positions to encourage the progression of labor.

Pain Relief

Warm water has been found to be an effective natural pain reliever during labor.

It can help overweight women manage the discomfort and pain associated with contractions.

The warm water relaxes the muscles, reduces tension, and promotes a sense of calm, which can be especially helpful for women with added weight, as they might experience increased pressure on their joints and muscles.

Improved Blood Circulation

Overweight women are at a higher risk of developing conditions like gestational diabetes and high blood pressure during pregnancy.

Water immersion can improve blood circulation, which, in turn, can help regulate blood pressure.

The increased circulation can also aid in oxygenating the baby, reducing stress on the cardiovascular system during labor.

Reduced Stress and Anxiety

Labor can be an emotionally and mentally challenging process, and overweight women may have concerns or fears related to their weight and the birth process.

Being in a warm, soothing environment can help reduce stress and anxiety, leading to a more positive birthing experience.

Water birth promotes relaxation, encourages the release of endorphins, and fosters a sense of control over the birthing process.

Increased Mobility

Water birth allows for increased mobility and freedom of movement.

Overweight women may have difficulty moving comfortably on land due to the added weight, but buoyancy in the water makes it easier to change positions, squat, or kneel.

These positions can be beneficial for facilitating the baby’s descent and easing the passage through the birth canal.

Painful Perineum Relief

Overweight women may be concerned about the potential for perineal tears during childbirth.

The warm water of a birthing pool can help relax and soften the perineum, reducing the risk of tears.

Additionally, water can provide relief and comfort to the perineal area after childbirth, aiding in the healing process.

Promotes Natural Birth

Water birth aligns with the principles of natural childbirth.

It encourages women to trust their bodies and follow their instincts during labor.

This approach can empower overweight women to have a more active role in their birthing experience and reduce the need for medical interventions.

Conclusion

Water birth can offer numerous benefits for overweight women during pregnancy and childbirth.

The buoyancy, pain relief, improved circulation, reduced stress, increased mobility, and natural childbirth principles make water birth an attractive option.

However, it’s important for overweight women to consult with their healthcare providers to determine if they are good candidates for water birth and to ensure that their pregnancy and labor are appropriately monitored.

Ultimately, the goal of water birth for overweight women, as for all expectant mothers, is to provide a safe and positive birthing experience that prioritizes their comfort, well-being, and the health of their baby.

The benefits of labouring in water for overweight and obese mothers

Nothing helps mothers cope with pain in labour more effectively

Birthing Pool Rules: Journal of Water Safety Forum Spring 2021

Water births are largely considered safe — but are there potential microbiological risks? And what are the best recommendations to eliminate any possible dangers?

Dr Jimmy Walker clarifies some of the advice outlined in an upcoming ‘back to basics’ book* aimed at training and education on the potential microbiological risks from water in healthcare facilities.

Water births have long been considered a safe way of giving birth for women who are not expected to have complex deliveries, with the literature backing up this record to show that rates of neonatal infections are no greater in water births than conventional bed births.1,2,3,4

However, this doesn’t mean there are no risks at all. Rare instances of adverse events have occurred, including microbial neonatal infections caused by a range of organisms that have included Legionella, the cause of Legionnaires’ disease, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa — although these have largely been related to home births.

There are several routes for potential contamination of water during a water birth:

Water supply

If either of the above organisms were found in a pool, this would indicate either contamination in the water system or at the tap outlet. If only a tap outlet were colonised, the contamination may be diluted to negligible levels in the pool once that tap is run. However, running a tap when there is biofilm build-up, either in the last two metres or further back in the system, would continue to release microorganisms leading to microbial concentrations in the pool water that could lead to infections.

This is a highly unlikely scenario that would only occur if water maintenance has been neglected enough to allow conditions for microbial growth to develop: for example where pipes have not been lagged properly causing the hot water to become cooler and the cold pipe to become warmer, creating ideal temperatures to enable growth of Legionella bacteria, for example.

Bodily fluids, birthing ‘debris’ and maternal contamination

As part of the birth process, water in birthing pools will inevitably be contaminated by bodily fluids and ‘debris’, such as placenta, some of which will be caught in strainers. Pool water can also be contaminated by faecal matter and any P. aeruginosa the mother may be carrying (P. aeruginosa can occur naturally on the skin of healthy individuals), although newborns are unlikely to be at risk from maternal ‘flora’.

A clear protocol is essential for drainage of the pool, cleaning and also disinfection to remove this contamination. All accessories must also be cleaned and thoroughly disinfected — or be single use.

If contamination is not properly dealt with, then any remaining residues will encourage microbial growth that could lead to potentially dangerous contamination of the next user’s water.

 Drains

The role of drains as a source of healthcare associated infections (HAIs) and potential reservoirs of antibiotic resistant organisms is now being regularly documented, with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CREs) a particular concern.

Single use plugs and strainers are now most commonly used, with a large access valve for nurses and midwives to retain water in the bath. However, because birthing pools are usually located at floor level, the gradient of the drainage pipework may not be sufficient to remove the material caught in the drain. Although such an event has not yet been reported, this creates the potential for biofilmbuild-up over time, to a level that may be difficult for disinfectants to penetrate and possible contamination of the pool as soon as it is filled.

Birthing pool design

Birthing pools could be improved to prevent this backflow scenario from the drain, with designs that ensure efficient drainage of contaminating material and valves and drains that are easy to disinfect.

There are also examples of birthing pools where the pool is filled via a wall tap that enters the pool at a level where the water could flow back into the tap. This again has the potential for back contamination of the tap, with bacterial colonisation reaching even further back into the system in contravention of the water fitting directive.

Birthing pools should be designed with taps that are well above the pool’s edge and which are fitted with suitable backflow protection.

Some birthing pools also have an associated showerhead for cleaning the pool after use. However, this is also inadvisable as the flexible hose and shower head may become contaminated when they are suspended in the water. This could not only lead to backflow and contamination of the supply, but also, the contaminated hose and shower head could introduce harmful bacteria to the pool if they are not cleaned and disinfected appropriately or replaced between uses.

In addition, because water births are not always considered appropriate, there may be a prolonged period when the pool is not used. Where this is the case, a flushing regime is essential to minimise water stagnation, biofilm build-up and microbial proliferation in the water supply.

Resolving issues

Maternity units are well aware of the risks and must carry out their own risk assessments, but it is important that they are assisted in this by appropriate members of the hospitals’ water safety groups (WSGs – see p 10-12), who can provide additional specialist knowledge e.g. from microbiologists and the estates team.

Health Building Note 09-02 provides regulations and recommendations for birthing pools

References

  1. Thoeni, A. et al “Review of 1600 water births. Does water birth increase the risk of neonatal infection?” J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 17: 357–361, 2005. “https://doi.org/10.1080/14767050500140388″doi.org/10.1080/14767050500140388
  2. Neiman, E. et al “Outcomes of water birth in a US hospital-based midwifery practice: A retrospective cohort study of water immersion during labour and birth”, J Midwifery Womens Health 65:216–223, 2020. “https://doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.13033″/doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.13033
  3. Bovbjerg, M.L., Cheyney, M., Everson, C. “Maternal and newborn outcomes following waterbirth: The midwives alliance of North America statistics project, 2004 to 2009 Cohort, J Midwifery Womens Health 61:11–20, 2016. “https://doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.12394″doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.12394
  4. 4. Taylor, H. et al “Neonatal outcomes of water birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal 101(4):357-365, 2016. doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2015-309600

Ventilation for the birthing environment

Engineering experts Phil Nedin and Dr. Anna Coppel from Arup’s advanced Technology and Research team look at the science of ventilating a birthing room.

Water Birth Pools expel a high volume of moisture that must be considered when designing the ventilation system for a water birth room.

Ventilation for birthing pool facilities