A critical analysis of Australian policies and guidelines for water immersion during labour and birth

作者：Cooper Megan^*; McCutcheon Helen; Warland Jane

来源：Women and Birth, 2017, 30(5): 431-441.

DOI：10.1016/j.wombi.2017.04.001

• Practice guideline
• Risk
• Choice
• Childbirth
• Waterbirth
• Water immersion

Background: Accessibility of water immersion for labour and/or birth is often dependent on the care provider and also the policies/guidelines that underpin practice. With little high quality research about the safety and practicality of water immersion, particularly for birth, policies/guidelines informing the practice may lack the evidence necessary to ensure practitioner confidence surrounding the option thereby limiting accessibility and women's autonomy.
Aim: The aims of the study were to determine how water immersion policies and/or guidelines are informed, who interprets the evidence to inform policies/guidelines and to what extent the policy/guideline facilitates the option for labour and birth.
Method: Phase one of a three-phase mixed-methods study critically analysed 25 Australian water immersion policies/guidelines using critical discourse analysis.
Findings: Policies/guidelines pertaining to the practice of water immersion reflect subjective opinions and views of the current literature base in favour of the risk-focused obstetric and biomedical discursive practices. Written with hegemonic influence, policies and guidelines impact on the autonomy of both women and practitioners.
Conclusion: Policies and guidelines pertaining to water immersion, particularly for birth reflect opinion and varied interpretations of the current literature base. A degree of hegemonic influence was noted prompting recommendations for future maternity care policy and guidelines'.
Ethical considerations: The Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of South Australia approved the research.

• 出版日期2017-10