Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
Birth ; 34(2): 140-7, 2007 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17542818

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The impact of midwifery versus physician care on perinatal outcomes in a population of women planning birth in hospital has not yet been explored. We compared maternal and newborn outcomes between women planning hospital birth attended by a midwife versus a physician in British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: All women planning a hospital birth attended by a midwife during the 2-year study period who were of sufficiently low-risk status to meet eligibility requirements for home birth as defined by the British Columbia College of Midwives were included in the study group (n=488). The comparison group included women meeting the same eligibility requirements but planning a physician-attended birth in hospitals where midwives also practiced (n=572). Outcomes were ascertained from the British Columbia Reproductive Care Program Perinatal Registry to which all hospitals in the province submit data. RESULTS: Adjusted odds ratios for women planning hospital birth attended by a midwife versus a physician were significantly reduced for exposure to cesarean section (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.86), narcotic analgesia (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18-0.37), electronic fetal monitoring (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.16-0.30), amniotomy (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56-0.98), and episiotomy (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.93). The odds of adverse neonatal outcomes were not different between groups, with the exception of reduced use of drugs for resuscitation at birth (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.83) in the midwifery group. CONCLUSIONS: A shift toward greater proportions of midwife-attended births in hospitals could result in reduced rates of obstetric interventions, with similar rates of neonatal morbidity.


Assuntos
Salas de Parto/organização & administração , Parto Obstétrico/estatística & dados numéricos , Bem-Estar Materno/estatística & dados numéricos , Tocologia/estatística & dados numéricos , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Resultado da Gravidez/epidemiologia , Adulto , Intervalos de Confiança , Parto Obstétrico/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Unidade Hospitalar de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia/organização & administração , Razão de Chances , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Gravidez
3.
CMAJ ; 166(3): 315-23, 2002 Feb 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-11868639

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The choice to give birth at home with a regulated midwife in attendance became available to expectant women in British Columbia in 1998. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of home birth by comparing perinatal outcomes for planned home births attended by regulated midwives with those for planned hospital births. METHODS: We compared the outcomes of 862 planned home births attended by midwives with those of planned hospital births attended by either midwives (n = 571) or physicians (n = 743). Comparison subjects who were similar in their obstetric risk status were selected from hospitals in which the midwives who were conducting the home births had hospital privileges. Our study population included all home births that occurred between Jan. 1, 1998, and Dec. 31, 1999. RESULTS: Women who gave birth at home attended by a midwife had fewer procedures during labour compared with women who gave birth in hospital attended by a physician. After adjustment for maternal age, lone parent status, income quintile, use of any versus no substances and parity, women in the home birth group were less likely to have epidural analgesia (odds ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-0.27), be induced, have their labours augmented with oxytocin or prostaglandins, or have an episiotomy. Comparison of home births with hospital births attended by a midwife showed very similar and equally significant differences. The adjusted odds ratio for cesarean section in the home birth group compared with physician-attended hospital births was 0.3 (95% CI 0.22-0.43). Rates of perinatal mortality, 5-minute Apgar scores, meconium aspiration syndrome or need for transfer to a different hospital for specialized newborn care were very similar for the home birth group and for births in hospital attended by a physician. The adjusted odds ratio for Apgar scores lower than 7 at 5 minutes in the home birth group compared with physician-attended hospital births was 0.84 (95% CI 0.32-2.19). INTERPRETATION: There was no increased maternal or neonatal risk associated with planned home birth under the care of a regulated midwife. The rates of some adverse outcomes were too low for us to draw statistical comparisons, and ongoing evaluation of home birth is warranted.


Assuntos
Salas de Parto/estatística & dados numéricos , Parto Domiciliar/estatística & dados numéricos , Tocologia/legislação & jurisprudência , Resultado da Gravidez/epidemiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Colúmbia Britânica/epidemiologia , Distribuição de Qui-Quadrado , Feminino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Gravidez , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Risco
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA