Parto planeado em casa assistido por parteira certificada vs parto planeado no hospital assistido por parteira ou médico. (Em Inglês) (Outcomes of planned home birth with registered midwife versus planned hospital birth with midwife or physician - Patricia A. Janssen PhD)
Estudo publicado no CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal) em 2009 - www.cmaj.ca
Interpretation: Planned home birth attended by a registered midwife was associated with very low and comparable rates of perinatal death and reduced rates of obstetric interventions and other adverse perinatal outcomes compared with planned hospital birth attended by a midwife or physician.
Características, Intervenções e Resultados em Mulheres que usaram uma Piscina de Parto: Estudo Prospectivo Observacional (Em Inglês) (Characteristics, Interventions, and Outcomes of Women Who Used a Birthing Pool: A Prospective Observational Study - Ethel E. Burns, RM, MSc)
Estudo Publicado na Birth Issues in Perinatal Care em 2012
Conclusions: Birthing pool use was associated with a high frequency of spontaneous birth and normal birth, particularly among nulliparas. Findings reveal differences in mid-wifery practice among obstetric units, alongside mid-wifery units, and the community, which may affectoutcomes, particularly for nulliparas. The use of interventions and outcomes in alongside midwifery units was similar to that in the obstetric units, but not the community. With the exception of more normal births or community multiparas, no evidence was found that care setting affected interventions or outcomes in multiparas or outcomes for newborns. These data will help practitioners inform women about using a birthing pool during labor in the hospital, midwife-led, and community settings
Partos na Água comparados com Partos em terra: Um estudo observacional de 9 anos. (Em Inglês) (Waterbirths compared with landbirths: an observational study of nine years - Geissbuehler V, Stein S, Eberhard J.)
Estudo publicado por Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cantonal Hospital, Frauenfeld, Switzerland.
email@example.com J Perinat Med. 2004;32(4):308-14.
This study compares neonatal and maternal morbidity and mortality between waterbirths and landbirths (spontaneous singleton
births in cephalic presentation, vacuum extractions are excluded).
In this observational study covering nine years, standardized questionnaires were used to document 9,518 spontaneous singleton
cephalic presentation births, of which 3,617 were waterbirths and 5,901 landbirths.
Landbirths show higher rates of episiotomies as well as third and fourth degree perineal lacerations. Waterbirths show a
higher rate of births "without injuries", first and second-degree perineal lacerations, vaginal and labial tears. After a waterbirth, there is an average loss of 5.26 g/l blood; this is
significantly less than landbirths where there is an 8.08 g/l blood loss on average. In 69.7% waterbirths required no analgesic, compared to 58.0% for landbirths. Water and landbirths do not
differ with respect to maternal and neonatal infections. After landbirths, there was a higher rate of newborn complications with subsequent transfer to an external NICU. During the study, there
were neither maternal nor neonatal deaths related to spontaneous labor.
Waterbirths are associated with low risks for both mother and child when obstetrical guidelines are followed.
Parto na Água e Streptococus - Zanetti 2006 https://www.dropbox.com/s/orb5gxu7766nmrq/zanetti_2006_jan_streptoB.pdf?dl=0
CONCLUSIONS: Water birth is a valuable alternative to traditional delivery. The maternal and fetal infection
rate was comparable to traditional deliveries. A careful selection of a low risk collective is essential to minimize potential risks