INTRODUCTION: The literature describes advantages for mothers giving birth in water, but waterbirth is controversial in Sweden and has not been offered at hospitals until recently. This study aimed to describe and compare the characteristics and outcome of waterbirths with spontaneous vaginal births at the same clinics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all waterbirths at two maternity units in Sweden from March 2014 to November 2015 (n=306), and a consecutively selected comparison group of 306 women having conventional spontaneous vaginal births. Logistic regression was used to analyze the primary outcome; second-degree perineal tears.

RESULTS: Women giving birth in water had a lower risk of second-degree perineal tears (adj. OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.4-0.9]). Their labor was shorter (6:03 hrs. vs 7:52 hrs.) and there were significantly less interventions than in the comparison group; amniotomy (13.7% vs. 35.3%), internal cardiotocography (11.1% vs.56.8%), and augmentation with oxytocin (5.2% vs.31.3%). There were no differences in Apgar scores or admissions to neonatal intensive care unit. The experience of childbirth, measured with a numeric rating scale, was higher in the waterbirth group indicating a more positive birth experience. Three newborns born in water had an umbilical cord avulsion.

CONCLUSIONS: In this low-risk population, waterbirth is associated with positive effects on perineal tears, the frequency of interventions, the duration of labor and women's birth experience. Midwives handling waterbirth should be aware of the risk of umbilical cord avulsion. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

OBJECTIVE: To describe women´s experiences and perceptions of giving birth in water.

DESIGN: A qualitative study with in-depth interviews three to five months after the birth. A content analysis of the interviews was made.

SETTING: One city-located hospital in Stockholm, offering waterbirth to low risk women.

PARTICIPANTS: 20 women, 12 primiparas and 8 multiparas, aged 27-39.

MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: The overall theme emerging from the analysis was, "Like an empowering micro-home", which describes the effect of being strengthened, enabled and authorized in the birth process. Three categories were found: "Synergy between body and mind", "Privacy and discretion", and "Natural and pleasant".

KEY CONCLUSIONS: The immersion in warm water provided the women with conditions that helped them to cope and feel confident during labour and birth. The homelike and limited space of a bathtub helped give a relaxed feeling of privacy, safety, control and focus for the women.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study contributes to a deeper understanding of what waterbirth offers to women. For some women, waterbirth may be a way to accomplish an empowering and positive birth experience, and could work as a tool that preserves the normality of, and increases self-efficacy in, childbirth.

BACKGROUND: For women with low risk births, waterbirth is an alternative that is requested and provided in approximately a hundred countries. However, in some countries, including Sweden, waterbirth is not generally available.

AIM: To explore the experiences, knowledge and attitudes regarding waterbirth among midwives, obstetricians/gynaecologists and neonatologists.

METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Sweden, using a web-based survey distributed via The Swedish Association of Midwives and the Heads of department of all Swedish maternity wards between April and June 2016. The respondents (n = 1609) answered a combination of Likert-scale and open-ended questions. The responses were analysed with descriptive statistics and quantitative content analyses.

FINDINGS: Both midwives and physicians stated a lack of experience, knowledge and clinical guidelines related to attending and assisting waterbirths. Overall, midwives had more positive attitudes to waterbirth (38.8% vs 4.5%) as well as towards providing and implementing waterbirth, compared to physicians (71.0% vs 14.9%). Midwives stated significantly more benefits and fewer risks for women and babies, compared to physicians who requested more evidence.

CONCLUSIONS: Opinions regarding waterbirth are to some extent based on attitudes rather than actual experience and knowledge. There are diverse interpretations of the strength of evidence and a lack of updating in the research field of waterbirth. As waterbirth is requested by women, health professionals need to update their knowledge in this topic in order to give coherent and evidence-based information and care to prospective parents.