Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Care | Study protocol

Room4Birth - the effect of an adaptable birthing room on labour and birth outcomes for nulliparous women at term with spontaneous labour start: study protocol for a randomised controlled superiority trial in Sweden

Authors: Marie Berg, Lisa Goldkuhl, Christina Nilsson, Helle Wijk, Hanna Gyllensten, Göran Lindahl, Kerstin Uvnäs Moberg, Cecily Begley

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

An important prerequisite for optimal healthcare is a secure, safe and comfortable environment. There is little research on how the physical design of birthing rooms affects labour, birth, childbirth experiences and birthing costs. This protocol outlines the design of a randomised controlled superiority trial (RCT) measuring and comparing effects and experiences of two types of birthing rooms, conducted in one labour ward in Sweden.

Methods/design

Following ethics approval, a study design was developed and tested for feasibility in a pilot study, which led to some important improvements for conducting the study. The main RCT started January 2019 and includes nulliparous women presenting to the labour ward in active, spontaneous labour and who understand either Swedish, Arabic, Somali or English. Those who consent are randomised on a 1:1 ratio to receive care either in a regular room (control group) or in a newly built birthing room designed with a person-centred approach and physical aspects (such as light, silencer, media installation offering programmed nature scenes with sound, bathtub, birth support tools) that are changeable according to a woman’s wishes (intervention group). The primary efficacy endpoint is a composite score of four outcomes: no use of oxytocin for augmentation of labour; spontaneous vaginal births (i.e. no vaginal instrumental birth or caesarean section); normal postpartum blood loss (i.e. bleeding < 1000 ml); and a positive overall childbirth experience (7–10 on a scale of 1–10). To detect a difference in the composite score of 8% between the groups we need 1274 study participants (power of 80% with significance level 0.05). Secondary outcomes include: the four variables in the primary outcome; other physical outcomes of labour and birth; women’s self-reported experiences (the birthing room, childbirth, fear of childbirth, health-related quality of life); and measurement of costs in relation to the hospital stay for mother and neonate. Additionally, an ethnographic study with participant observations will be conducted in both types of birthing rooms.

Discussion

The findings aim to guide the design of birthing rooms that contribute to optimal quality of hospital-based maternity care.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03948815. Registered 13 May 2019—retrospectively registered.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
Wellfare TNBoHa. Statistics on pregnancies, deliveries and newborn infants 2017. Stockholm: National Board of Health and Welfare; 2019.
3.
4.
Panda S, Begley C, Daly D. Readmission following caesarean section: Outcomes for women in an Irish maternity hospital. Br J Midwifery. 2016;24(5):322–8.CrossRef
5.
Fobelets M, Beeckman K, Faron G, Daly D, Begley C, Putman K. Vaginal birth after caesarean versus elective repeat caesarean delivery after one previous caesarean section: a cost-effectiveness analysis in four European countries. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018;18:1–10.CrossRef
6.
Grobman WA, Rice MM, Reddy UM, Tita ATN, Silver RM, Mallett G, Hill K, Thom EA, El-Sayed YY, Perez-Delboy A, et al. Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(6):513–23.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
7.
Reiling J, Hughes RG, Murphy MR. The impact of facility design on patient safety. In: Hughes RG, editor. Patient safety and quality: an evidence-based handbook for nurses, vol. 2. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008.
8.
Gilmour JA. Hybrid space: constituting the hospital as a home space for patients. Nurs Inq. 2006;13(1):16–22.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Dijkstra K, Pieterse M, Pruyn A. Physical environmental stimuli that turn healthcare facilities into healing environments through psychologically mediated effects: systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2006;56(2):166–81.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Wijk H. Vårdmiljöns betydelse för hälsa och välbefinnande. In: Sigurdson O, Sjölander A, editors. Kultur och Hälsa i Praktiken. edn. Gothenburg: Göteborgs Unversitet, Centrum för kultur och hälsa; 2016 p. 91–114.
11.
Nordin S, McKee K, Wijk H, Elf M. The association between the physical environment and the well-being of older people in residential care facilities: a multilevel analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2017;73(12):2942–52.PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
Shepley MM, Gerbi RP, Watson AE, Imgrund S, Sagha-Zadeh R. The impact of daylight and views on ICU patients and staff. HERD. 2012;5(2):46–60.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Salonen H, Lahtinen M, Lappalainen S, Nevala N, Knibbs LD, Morawska L, Reijula K. Physical characteristics of the indoor environment that affect health and wellbeing in healthcare facilities: a review. Intell Buildings Int. 2013;5(1):3–25.CrossRef
15.
Kronqvist A. Ljus i publik vårdmiljö: En forskningsöversikt 2015; 2015.
16.
Edvardsson JD, Sandman PO, Rasmussen BH. Sensing an atmosphere of ease: a tentative theory of supportive care settings. Scand J Caring Sci. 2005;19(4):344–53.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Browall M, Koinberg I, Falk H, Wijk H. Patients’ experience of important factors in the healthcare environment in oncology care. Int J Qual Stud Health Well Being. 2013;8:20870.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Mauhov J, Tanin V, Kraetzl W-D, Meyer HHD, Bruckmaier RM. Inhibition of oxytocin release during repeated milking in unfamiliar surroundings: the importance of opioids and adrenal cortex sensitivity. J Dairy Res. 2002;69(1):63–73.CrossRef
19.
Foureur M. Creating birth space to enable undisturbed birth. In: Fahy K, Foureur M, Hastie C, editors. Birth territory and midwifery guardianship theory for practice, education and research. edn. New York: Elsevier; 2008. p. 57–77.
20.
Newton N. The relation of the milk-ejection reflex to the ability to breast feed. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1992;652:484.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Kozlowska K, Walker P, McLean L, Carrive P. Fear and the defense cascade: clinical implications and management. Harv Rev Psychiatry. 2015;23(4):263–87.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Sato Y, Hotta H, Nakayama H, Suzuki H. Sympathetic and parasympathetic regulation of the uterine blood flow and contraction in the rat. J Auton Nerv Syst. 1996;59(3):151–8.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Uvnäs Moberg K. Oxytocin : the biological guide to motherhood. Amarillo: Praeclarus Press; 2014.
24.
Uvnäs-Moberg K, Arn I, Magnusson D. The psychobiology of emotion: the role of the oxytocinergic system. Int J Behav Med. 2005;12(2):59–65.CrossRef
25.
Klaus MH, Kennell JH. The doula: an essential ingredient of childbirth rediscovered. Acta Paediatr (Oslo, Norway: 1992). 1997;86(10):1034–6.CrossRef
26.
Simkin P. Just another day in a woman’s life? Women's long-term perceptions of their first birth experience. Part I. Birth (Berkeley, Calif). 1991;18(4):203.CrossRef
27.
Parratt J. The impact of childbirth experiences on women’s sense of self: a review of the literature. Aust J Midwifery. 2002;15(4):10–6.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Lundgren I. Swedish women’s experience of childbirth 2 years after birth. Midwifery. 2005;21(4):346–54.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Nilsson C, Robertson E, Lundgren I. An effort to make all the pieces come together: women’s long-term perspectives on their experiences of intense fear of childbirth. Int J Childbirth. 2012;2(4):255–68.CrossRef
30.
Waldenstrom U, Hildingsson I, Rubertsson C, Radestad I. A negative birth experience: prevalence and risk factors in a national sample. Birth. 2004;31(1):17–27.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Nilsson C. The delivery room: Is it a safe place? A hermeneutic analysis of women's negative birth experiences. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2014;5(4):199–204.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Lukasse M, Schei B, Ryding EL. Prevalence and associated factors of fear of childbirth in six European countries. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2014;5(3):99–106.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Ayers S, Bond R, Bertullies S, Wijma K. The aetiology of post-traumatic stress following childbirth: a meta-analysis and theoretical framework. Psychol Med. 2016;46(6):1121–34.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Dencker A, Nilsson C, Begley C, Jangsten E, Mollberg M, Patel H, Wigert H, Hessman E, Sjöblom H, Sparud Lundin C. Causes and outcomes in studies of fear of childbirth: a systematic review. Women Birth. 2019;32(2):99–111.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Saisto T, Ylikorkala O, Halmesmaki E. Factors associated with fear of delivery in second pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;5(1):679–82.
36.
Sydsjö G, Angerbjörn L, Palmquist S, Bladh M, Sydsjö A, Josefsson A. Secondary fear of childbirth prolongs the time to subsequent delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013;92(2):210–4.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Ryding EL, Lukasse M, Parys ASV, Wangel AM, Karro H, Kristjansdottir H, Schroll AM, Schei B. Fear of childbirth and risk of cesarean delivery: a cohort study in six European countries. Birth. 2015;42(1):48–55.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Jamshidi Manesh M, Kalati M, Hosseini F. Snoezelen room and childbirth outcome: a randomized clinical trial. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2015;17(5):e18373.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Pirdel M, Pirdel L. Perceived environmental stressors and pain perception during labor among primiparous and multiparous women. J Reprod Infertil. 2009;10(3):217.PubMedCentral
40.
Hodnett ED. Personal control and the birth environment: comparisons between home and hospital settings. J Environ Psychol. 1989;9(3):207–16.CrossRef
41.
Mondy T, Fenwick J, Leap N, Foureur M. How domesticity dictates behaviour in the birth space: Lessons for designing birth environments in institutions wanting to promote a positive experience of birth. Midwifery. 2016;43:37–47.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Harte JD, Sheehan A, Stewart SC, Foureur M. Childbirth supporters’ experiences in a built hospital birth environment: exploring inhibiting and facilitating factors in negotiating the supporter role. HERD. 2016;9(3):135–61.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Morison S, Hauck Y, Percival P, McMurray A. Constructing a home birth environment through assuming control. Midwifery. 1998;14(4):233–41.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Hanson L, VandeVusse L, Harrod KS. The theater of birth: scenes from women’s scripts. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2001;15(2):18–35.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Elvander C, Cnattingius S, Kjerulff KH. Birth experience in women with low, intermediate or high levels of fear: findings from the first baby study. Birth. 2013;40(4):289–96.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Hodnett ED, Stremler R, Weston JA, McKeever P. Re-conceptualizing the hospital labor room: the PLACE (Pregnant and Laboring in an Ambient Clinical Environment) pilot trial. Birth. 2009;36(2):159–66.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Lorentzen I, Andersen CS, Jensen HS, Fogsgaard A, Foureur M, Lauszus FF, Nohr EA. Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating the effect of a birth environment room. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2019;(14):1–7. 100336.
48.
Ayerle GM, Schafers R, Mattern E, Striebich S, Haastert B, Vomhof M, Icks A, Ronniger Y, Seliger G. Effects of the birthing room environment on vaginal births and client-centred outcomes for women at term planning a vaginal birth: BE-UP, a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2018;19(1):641.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG, Mann H, Berlin JA, Dickersin K, Hrobjartsson A, Schulz KF, Parulekar WR, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2013;346:e7586.
50.
Lundgren C. Birthing room experiences - a qualitative interview study of women who have given birth: a Master thesis: Institute of Health and Care Sciences, University of Gothenburg; 2017.
51.
Robson M, Murphy M, Byrne F. Quality assurance: The 10-Group Classification System (Robson classification), induction of labor, and cesarean delivery. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015;131:S23–7.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Dencker A, Taft C, Bergqvist L, Lilja H, Berg M. Childbirth experience questionnaire (CEQ): development and evaluation of a multidimensional instrument. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2010;10:81.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
53.
Haines H, Pallant JF, Karlstrom A, Hildingsson I. Cross-cultural comparison of levels of childbirth-related fear in an Australian and Swedish sample. Midwifery. 2011;27(4):560–7.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Nilsson C, Hessman E, Sjoblom H, Dencker A, Jangsten E, Mollberg M, Patel H, Sparud-Lundin C, Wigert H, Begley C. Definitions, measurements and prevalence of fear of childbirth: a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018;18(1):28.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
55.
EuroQol. a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208.
56.
57.
Long D, Hunter C, Van Der Geest S. When the field is a ward or a clinic: Hospital ethnography. Anthropol Med. 2008;15(2):71–8.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Gadamer H-G. Truth and method, First paperback edition / translation revised by Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall. edn. London, New York: Bloomsbury Academic; 2013.
59.
Bossano CM, Townsend KM, Walton AC, Blomquist JL, Handa VL. The maternal childbirth experience more than a decade after delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(3):342.e341–8.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Room4Birth - the effect of an adaptable birthing room on labour and birth outcomes for nulliparous women at term with spontaneous labour start: study protocol for a randomised controlled superiority trial in Sweden
Authors
Marie Berg
Lisa Goldkuhl
Christina Nilsson
Helle Wijk
Hanna Gyllensten
Göran Lindahl
Kerstin Uvnäs Moberg
Cecily Begley
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Care
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3765-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Trials 1/2019 Go to the issue

Study protocol

Traditional Chinese medicine versus regular therapy in Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis in children: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Tranexamic Acid in Reducing Gross Hemorrhage and Transfusions of Spine Surgeries (TARGETS): study protocol for a prospective, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial

Study protocol

Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial to test for preventive effects of diabetic foot ulceration by telemedicine that includes sensor-equipped insoles combined with photo documentation

Research

Criteria for site selection in industry-sponsored clinical trials: a survey among decision-makers in biopharmaceutical companies and clinical research organizations

Study protocol

Effects of prophylactic swallowing exercises on dysphagia and quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer receiving (chemo) radiotherapy: the Redyor study, a protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Study protocol

Impact of physical activity in vascular cognitive impairment (AFIVASC): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial