Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Hospital-Based Deliveries With Water Immersion.

OBJECTIVE: To compare neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) or special care nursery admission for deliveries with water immersion compared with deliveries in the matched control group without water immersion. Secondary outcomes included adverse neonatal diagnoses, maternal infections, and perineal lacerations. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using electronic health record data (2014-2018) from two health systems (eight hospitals), with similar clinical eligibility, associated with low risks of intrapartum complications, and implementation policies for waterbirth. The water immersion group included women intending waterbirth. Water immersion was recorded prospectively during delivery. The comparison population were women who met the clinical eligibility criteria for waterbirth but did not experience water immersion during labor. Comparison cases were matched (1:1) using propensity scores. Outcomes were compared using Fischer's exact tests and logistic regression with stratification by stage of water immersion. RESULTS: Of the 583 women with water immersion, 34.1% (199) experienced first-stage water immersion only, 65.9% (384) experienced second-stage immersion, of whom 12.0% (70) exited during second stage, and 53.9% (314) completed delivery in the water. Neonatal intensive care unit or special care nursery admissions were lower for second-stage water immersion deliveries than deliveries in the control group (odds ratio [OR] 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.7). Lacerations were lower in the second-stage immersion group (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.7). Neonatal intensive care unit or special care nursery admissions and lacerations were not different between the first-stage immersion group and their matched comparisons. Cord avulsions occurred for 0.8% of second-stage water immersion deliveries compared with none in the control groups. Five-minute Apgar score (less than 7), maternal infections, and other adverse outcomes were not significantly different between either the first- or second-stage water immersion groups and their control group. CONCLUSION: Hospital-based deliveries with second-stage water immersion had lower risk of NICU or special care nursery admission and perineal lacerations than matched deliveries in the control group without water immersion.

Who Gives Birth in the Water? A Retrospective Cohort Study of Intended versus Completed Waterbirths.

INTRODUCTION: Most waterbirth studies have been conducted outside the United States with a primary focus on birth outcomes. Studies to date provide limited information about how often women choosing waterbirth end water immersion before the birth and about the reasons for tub exit. This study examines a cohort of women intending a hospital-based waterbirth and documents the timing and reasons for tub exit. Demographic, clinical, and intrapartum care provider characteristics among women completing waterbirth were compared with those who exited the water prior to birth. METHODS: This is a collaborative, multisite study from 2 health systems (8 hospitals) using retrospective electronic health records from August 2014 through December 2017. RESULTS: Of 576 women who entered the waterbirth tub, 48% exited prior to the birth. The primary reasons for exit were maternal choice (50%), medical indication (32%), and provider decision (13%). Women exiting in the first stage did so primarily by choice (57%), whereas medical indication (42%) was the most common reason among women exiting in the second stage. Women who completed waterbirth did not differ from those who exited prior to birth with regard to age, race, ethnicity, country of origin, language, marital status, or intrapartum care provider specialty. Women completing waterbirth were more likely to have previously given birth (72% vs 47%) and to have a provider with more water immersion births during the study period (65% vs 55%). DISCUSSION: Giving birth in the tub was associated with parity and intrapartum care provider experience. Half of the women intending waterbirth in this study exited the tub, with variation in exit reason by stage and provider type. It is important for women to understand that they or their provider may change the birth plan based on labor progress and maternal experience.

Prophylactic Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in Obese Patients Following Cesarean Delivery.

OBJECTIVE: Negative pressure therapy (NPT) offers the potential to reduce infection in obese patients. The goal of this study was to explore the association between NPT use and infection after cesarean delivery among obese women. METHODS: We initiated a hospital protocol wherein women with a body mass index (BMI) of 40 kg/m2 or greater who delivered after January 1, 2011 were to receive NPT following cesarean section. A retrospective comparison of surgical site infection (SSI) in women receiving the intervention to a similar group with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater, a historical control group of women who delivered before January 1, 2011. Incidence of SSI was compared between time periods using logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 233 patients in the preintervention (control) group and 234 patients in the intervention group were included in the analysis. In the control group, 23 (9.9%) developed SSI, compared with 13 (5.6%) in the intervention group. After adjustment for potential confounding factors, women in the postintervention period experienced a statistically significant reduction in SSI rates (adjusted odds ratio =0.45, 95% CI = 0.22-0.95); P = .04). CONCLUSION: Implementation of a hospital protocol of NPT following cesarean delivery in obese women resulted in reduced incidence of postoperative SSI. This study suggests that using NPT after cesarean delivery in women with a BMI ≥40 kg/m2 is an efficacious method to reduce incidence of postoperative wound infections.