Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 May 29;23(1):395.
doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-05690-7.

Experiences of water immersion during childbirth: a qualitative thematic synthesis

E Reviriego-Rodrigo  1 , N Ibargoyen-Roteta  2 , S Carreguí-Vilar  3 , L Mediavilla-Serrano  4 , S Uceira-Rey  5 , S Iglesias-Casás  6 , A Martín-Casado  7 , A Toledo-Chávarri  8 , G Ares-Mateos  9 , S Montero-Carcaboso  4 , B Castelló-Zamora  10 , N Burgos-Alonso  11 , A Moreno-Rodríguez  12 , N Hernández-Tejada  13 , C Koetsenruyter  14
Affiliations

Experiences of water immersion during childbirth: a qualitative thematic synthesis

E Reviriego-Rodrigo et al. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. .

Abstract

Background: The increasing demand for childbirth care based on physiological principles has led official bodies to encourage health centers to provide evidence-based care aimed at promoting women's participation in informed decision-making and avoiding excessive medical intervention during childbirth. One of the goals is to reduce pain and find alternative measures to epidural anesthesia to enhance women's autonomy and well-being during childbirth. Currently, water immersion is used as a non-pharmacological method for pain relief. This review aimed to identify and synthesize evidence on women's and midwives' experiences, values, and preferences regarding water immersion during childbirth.

Methods: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative evidence were conducted. Databases were searched and references were checked according to specific criteria. Studies that used qualitative data collection and analysis methods to examine the opinions of women or midwives in the hospital setting were included. Non-qualitative studies, mixed-methods studies that did not separately report qualitative results, and studies in languages other than English or Spanish were excluded. The Critical Appraisal Skills Program Qualitative Research Checklist was used to assess study quality, and results were synthesized using thematic synthesis.

Results: Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The qualitative studies yielded three key themes: 1) reasons identified by women and midwives for choosing a water birth, 2) benefits experienced in water births, and 3) barriers and facilitators of water immersion during childbirth.

Conclusions: The evidence from qualitative studies indicates that women report benefits associated with water birth. From the perspective of midwives, ensuring safe water births requires adequate resources, midwives training, and rigorous standardized protocols to ensure that all pregnant women can safely opt for water immersion during childbirth with satisfactory results.

Keywords: Childbirth; Labor; Natural childbirth; Water Immersion; Waterbirth.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow chart of included studies
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Maimburg RD, Væth M, Dahlen H. Women’s experience of childbirth - a five year follow-up of the randomised controlled trial “Ready for Child Trial. Women Birth. 2016;29(5):450–4. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2016.02.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mallén Pérez L, Terré Rull C, Palacio Riera M. Inmersión en agua durante el parto: revisión bibliográfica. Matronas Prof. 2015;16(3):108–13.
    1. Cluett ER, Burns E, Cuthbert A. Immersion in water during labour and birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;5(5):CD000111. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cooke A, Smith D, Booth A, Beyond PICO. The SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res. 2012;22(10):1435–43. doi: 10.1177/1049732312452938. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:45. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types