"It's my Home away from Home:" A hermeneutic phenomenological study exploring decision-making experiences of choosing a freestanding birth centre for perinatal care.

PROBLEM: The high-value, midwifery-led birth centre (BC) model of care is underutilized in the United States, a country with high rates of obstetric intervention and maternal morbidity and mortality. BACKGROUND: Birth setting decision-making is a complex, preference-sensitive, and resource-dependent process. Understanding how people choose BCs for care may help increase the utilization of BCs and generate positive perinatal outcomes. AIM: This study explores the decision-making experiences of people with Medicaid insurance who chose to give birth in a BC in Massachusetts by gathering interview data to interpret and provide meaning about their selection of birth setting. METHODS: We employed a hermeneutic phenomenology study to interview people about their decision to give birth in a BC. Interview data were coded using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to interpret and provide meaning. FINDINGS: Twelve women participated in the study. Five themes emerged that described participants' decision-making processes: 1) Stepping Away from "the System," 2) Decision-Making with External Influences, 3) Accessing BC Care, 4) Finding a Home at the BC, and 5) Decision-Making as a Temporal Process. DISCUSSION: The decision to choose a BC was a dynamic process that occurred over time and was influenced by factors such as the quality of care, accessibility, external influences, and the physical environment. CONCLUSION: Prioritizing an individual's capacity to choose their birth setting and fostering awareness about options in the context of informed decision-making are pivotal steps toward attaining equity in perinatal health. Securing public insurance coverage and equitable reimbursement for BCs represent essential policies aimed at facilitating universal access to the BC model for all people.

Neonatal morbidity and mortality in birth centers in the United States 2018-2021: An observational study of low-risk birthing individuals.

BACKGROUND: Many studies reporting neonatal outcomes in birth centers include births with risk factors not acceptable for birth center care using the evidence-based CABC criteria. Accurate comparisons of outcomes by birth setting for low-risk patients are needed. METHODS: Data from the public Natality Detailed File from 2018 to 2021 were used. Logistic regression, including adjusted and unadjusted odds ratios, compared neonatal outcomes (chorioamnionitis, Apgar scores, resuscitation, intensive care, seizures, and death) between centers and hospitals. Covariates included maternal diabetes, body mass index, age, parity, and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: The sample included 8,738,711 births (8,698,432 (99.53%) in hospitals and 40,279 (0.46%) in birth centers). There were no significant differences in neonatal deaths (aOR 1.037; 95% CI [0.515, 2.088]; p-value 0.918) or seizures (aOR 0.666; 95% CI [0.315, 1.411]; p-value 0.289). Measures of morbidity either not significantly different or less likely to occur in birth centers compared to hospitals included chorioamnionitis (aOR 0.032; 95% CI [0.020, 0.052]; p-value < 0.001), Apgar score < 4 (aOR 0.814, 95% CI [0.638, 1.039], p-value 0.099), Apgar score < 7 (aOR 1.075, 95% CI [0.979, 1.180], p-value 0.130), ventilation >6 h (aOR 0.349; [0.281,0.433], p-value < 0.001), and intensive care admission (aOR 0.356; 95% CI [0.328, 0.386], p-value < 0.001). Birth centers had higher odds of assisted neonatal ventilation for <6 h as compared to hospitals (aOR 1.373; 95% CI [1.293, 1.457], p-value < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Neonatal deaths and seizures were not significantly different between freestanding birth centers and hospitals. Chorioamnionitis, Apgar scores < 4, and intensive care admission were less likely to occur in birth centers.

Listening to Black Women's Perspectives of Birth Centers and Midwifery Care: Advocacy, Protection, and Empowerment.

INTRODUCTION: Black women in Texas experience high rates of adverse maternal outcomes that have been linked to health inequities and structural racism in the maternal care system. Birth centers and midwifery care are highlighted in the literature as contributing to improved perinatal care experiences and decreased adverse outcomes for Black women. However, compared with White women, Black women underuse birth centers and midwifery care. Black women's perceptions in Texas of birth center and midwifery care are underrepresented in research. Thus, this study aimed to highlight the views of Black women residing in Texas on birth centers and midwifery care to identify their needs and explore ways to increasing access to perinatal care. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 10 pregnant and postpartum Black women residing in Texas. Questions focused on the women's access, knowledge, and use of birth centers and midwifery care in the context of their lived maternal care experiences. Interview transcripts were reviewed and analyzed using inductive, qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The Black women interviewed all shared experiences of discrimination and bias while receiving obstetric care that affected their interest in and overall perceptions of birth center and midwifery care. Participants also discussed financial and institutional barriers that impacted their ease of access to birth center and midwifery care services. Additionally, participants highlighted the need for culturally sensitive and respectful perinatal health care. DISCUSSION: The Black women interviewed in this study emphasized the prevalence of racism and discrimination in perinatal health care encounters, a reflection consistent with current literature. Black women also expressed a desire to use birth centers and midwifery care but identified the barriers in Texas that impede access. Study findings highlight the need to address barriers to promote equitable perinatal health care access for Black women.

Pain in Labor: Making Plans.

In this column, the associate editor of The Journal of Perinatal Education introduces Henci Goer's new book, Labor Pain: What's Your Best Strategy?: Get the Data. Make a Plan. Take Charge of Your Birth. The associate editor also describes the contents of this issue, which offer a broad range of resources, research, and inspiration for childbirth educators in their efforts to promote, support, and protect natural, safe, and healthy birth.

Contemporary Nurse-Midwifery Care in Colorado: A Survey of Certified Nurse-Midwife Practices in Hospital and Community Settings.

Lack of access to birth facilities and maternity care providers has contributed to rising US maternal mortality and morbidity rates, especially among women in rural areas. Evidence supports the increased use of midwives as a potential solution for access-to-care issues. This observational survey was conducted to identify the practice environment for Certified Nurse-Midwives® in Colorado for the purpose of informing future workforce expansion. Study results indicate that midwives provide services aligned with the midwifery model of care and have mostly autonomous practice in hospitals where midwifery practices are already established. However, there is limited use of midwives, as fewer than half of Colorado's 69 birthing hospitals have midwifery practices, and financial constraint created by low Medicaid reimbursement could be a limiting factor in establishing new midwifery practices. Policy recommendations based on survey results include (a) support for midwifery education and workforce development, (b) removal of hospital-level restrictions for privileges of midwives, and (c) consideration for public payment models that promote expansion of midwifery practices.

Strong Start Innovation: Equitable Outcomes Across Public and Privately Insured Clients Receiving Birth Center Care.

INTRODUCTION: The Birth Center model of care is a health care delivery innovation in its fourth decade of demonstration across the United States. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the model's potential for decreasing poverty-related health disparities among childbearing families. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2017, 26,259 childbearing people received care within the 45 Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation Strong Start birth center sites. Secondary analysis of the prospective American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data Registry was conducted. Descriptive statistics described sociobehavioral, medical risk factors, and core clinical outcomes to inform the logistic regression model. Privately insured consumers were independently compared with 2 subgroups of Medicaid beneficiaries: Strong Start enrollees (midwifery-led care with peer counselors) and non-Strong Start Medicaid beneficiaries (midwifery-led care without peer counselors). RESULTS: After controlling for medical risk factors, Strong Start Medicaid beneficiaries achieved similar outcomes to privately insured consumers with no significant differences in maternal or newborn outcomes between groups. Perinatal outcomes included induction of labor (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.86; 95% CI 0.61-1.13), epidural analgesia use (aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.68-1.48), cesarean birth (aOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.87-1.53), exclusive breastfeeding on discharge (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.48-2.56), low Apgar score at 5 minutes (aOR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.86-1.83), low birth weight (aOR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.77-1.64), and antepartum transfer of care after the first prenatal appointment (aOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 0.97-2.40). Medicaid beneficiaries who were not enrolled in the Strong Start midwifery-led, peer counselor program demonstrated similar results except for having higher epidural analgesia use (aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.10-1.53) and significantly lower exclusive breastfeeding on discharge (aOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.40-0.81) than their privately insured counterparts. DISCUSSION: The midwifery-led birth center model of care complemented by peer counselors demonstrated a pathway to achieve health equity.

Strengthening Interprofessional Collaboration to Improve Transfers Between a Freestanding Birth Center and an Academic Medical Center.

The number of individuals choosing to give birth in a freestanding birth center has doubled since 2004. As many as half of all pregnant persons planning for a birth center birth ultimately develop medical complications and are unable to give birth outside of the hospital. Integrating birth centers into their regional perinatal health care system optimizes outcomes by establishing predetermined pathways for antepartum and intrapartum transfers of care and facilitates ongoing communication and cooperation among clinicians. The Vanderbilt Birth Center is a freestanding birth center that is operated by an academic medical center and partners with a hospital-based midwifery practice that cares for patients transferring from the birth center. Since the inception of the birth center in 2015, the entire perinatal team has worked to improve the process and experience of patient transfer from birth center to hospital care. This article will present strategies implemented through the ongoing collaboration between birth center and hospital health care providers. These include adopting a shared electronic health record, clinical practice guidelines that align across birth sites, preparing birth center patients prenatally for the possibility hospital transfer, the presentation of a united team across birth sites, clear and widely disseminated communication pathways for hospital admission and patient handoff, and ongoing opportunities for interteam communication, collaboration, and education. These strategies may benefit similar midwifery practice models as they seek to partner with larger health care systems and improve the transfer experience for their patients.

Advancing Physiologic Birth Through Midwifery and Community Birth.

In this column, the associate editor of The Journal of Perinatal Education discusses the importance of advancing physiologic birth through midwifery and community birth by introducing the two featured articles in this issue by Dr. Carol Sakala: Improving Midwifery Care Through Midwifery (Sakala et al., 2021) and Improving Our Maternity Care Now Through Community Birth Centers (Sakala et al., 2022). The associate editor also describes the contents of this issue, which offer a broad range of resources, research, and inspiration for childbirth educators in their efforts to promote, support, and protect natural, safe, and healthy birth.

Integrating Traditional Midwives into the State Health System: A Critical Case Study from Chiapas, Mexico.

Efforts to integrate traditional midwives into state health systems have not succeeded in reducing perinatal mortality, but have nevertheless continued in many countries, including Mexico. The authors used ethnographic methods to examine an NGO's efforts to integrate traditional midwives into the state health system in the Sierra Madre region of Chiapas, Mexico. We found that most of the traditional midwives in the study area have little to gain by such integration, and ask whether it is possible, practical, and ethical to integrate traditional midwives into health institutions until and unless such policy is grounded in local realities.

Adoption of Consensus Guidelines for Safe Prevention of the Primary Cesarean Delivery by Freestanding Birth Centers.

INTRODUCTION: Slow or arrested progress in labor is the most frequent (64%) indication for nonemergent transfer of laboring people from freestanding birth centers to the hospital. After the 2014 publication of the Consensus Statement on Safe Prevention of Primary Cesarean Delivery (Consensus Statement), many freestanding birth centers changed their clinical practice guidelines to allow more time for active labor in the birth center prior to hospital transfer. The result of these changes has not been evaluated in birth centers. Evaluation of adoption of guidelines based on the Consensus Statement in hospitals has shown inconsistent results. METHODS: Birth centers were contacted to determine whether they changed clinical practice guidelines in response to the Consensus Statement. A before-after analysis compared outcomes for the 2 calendar years before and the 2 calendar years after adoption of new guidelines with a retrospective analysis of deidentified client-level data collected in the American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data Registry. RESULTS: A third of responding birth centers (11 of 33) changed their clinical practice guidelines, mostly redefining the onset of active labor as beginning at 6 cm cervical dilatation and allowing 4 hours of arrest of dilatation in active labor before transfer to the hospital. These changes were associated with fewer diagnoses of prolonged first stage of labor (13.8% vs 8.0%, P < .01) but not with fewer intrapartum transfers (14.0% vs 14.7%, P = .55) or cesarean births (5.0 vs 4.1%, P = .26.) DISCUSSION: We found no evidence that making these practice changes was associated with better outcomes. Two hours of a lack of documented cervical change in active labor is likely long enough to diagnose arrested progress in labor. Research on proportion of morbidity and mortality associated with prolonged labor could inform practice guidelines for transfers.

Choosing a Birth Setting: A Shared Decision-Making Approach.

Perinatal outcomes vary widely depending on individual birth settings (birth center, home, and hospital). The purpose of this case study is to explore a patient-centered, shared decision-making approach to achieve an informed, values-based choice about birth settings. Engaging in a shared decision-making approach regarding birth setting options would support people to have the information and ability to judge for themselves how benefits and risks across birth center, home, and hospital settings would best fit with their values and personal health. A patient decision aid about birth setting options could facilitate increased equity regarding access to birth settings that offer improved perinatal health outcomes, helping to reduce perinatal health disparities in the United States.

Salary and Workload of Midwives Across Birth Center Practice Types and State Regulatory Structures.

INTRODUCTION: Expansion of the midwifery-led birth center model of care is one pathway to improving maternal and newborn health. There are a variety of practice types among birth centers and a range of state regulatory structures of midwifery practice across the United States. This study investigated how those variations relate to pay and workload for midwives at birth centers. METHODS: Data from the American Association of Birth Centers Practice Survey and the Bureau of Labor Statistics' report on occupational employment and wage statistics were analyzed to explore how midwife salaries and workload at birth centers compare within and beyond the birth center model. RESULTS: Survey results from 161 birth centers across the United States demonstrate wide variation in nurse-midwife salaries and are inconsistent with nurse-midwife salaries across all settings as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The reported number of hours worked by midwives within the birth center model is high. Salaries of midwives who work in birth center-only practices were consistently lower than salaries of midwives who worked in blended birth center and hospital practices, independent of the midwife's level of experience, geographic region of the country, and state regulatory structure. DISCUSSION: Further research is needed to understand how to bring salaries and workload for midwives at birth centers into alignment with national averages.

Neonatal outcomes of births in freestanding birth centers and hospitals in the United States, 2016-2019.

BACKGROUND: Births in freestanding birth centers have more than doubled between 2007 and 2019. Although birthing centers, which are defined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists as ". . . freestanding facilities that are not hospitals," are being promoted as offering women fewer interventions than hospitals, there are limited recent data available on neonatal outcomes in these settings. OBJECTIVE: To compare several important measures of neonatal safety between 2 United States birth settings and birth attendants: deliveries in freestanding birth centers and hospital deliveries by midwives and physicians. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study using the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, and Division of Vital Statistics natality online database for the years 2016 to 2019. All term, singleton, low-risk births were eligible for inclusion. The study outcomes were several neonatal outcomes including neonatal death, neonatal seizures, 5-minute Apgar scores of <4 and <7, and neonatal death in nulliparous and in multiparous women. Outcomes were compared between the following 3 groups: births in freestanding birth centers, in-hospital births by a physician, and in-hospital births by a midwife. The prevalence of each neonatal outcome among the different groups was compared using Pearson chi-squared test, with the in-hospital midwife births being the reference group. Multivariate logistic regression models were performed to account for several potential confounding factors such as maternal prepregnancy body mass index, maternal weight gain, parity, gestational weeks, and neonatal birthweight and calculated as adjusted odds ratio. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 9,894,978 births; 8,689,467 births (87.82%) were in-hospital births by MDs and DOs, 1,131,398 (11.43%) were in-hospital births by midwives, and 74,113 (0.75%) were births in freestanding birth centers. Freestanding birth center deliveries were less likely to be to non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic, less likely to women with public insurance, less likely to be women with their first pregnancy, and more likely to be women with advanced education and to have pregnancies at ≥40 weeks' gestation. Births in freestanding birth center had a 4-fold increase in neonatal deaths (3.64 vs 0.95 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 4.00; 95% confidence interval, 2.62-6.1), a more than 7-fold increase in neonatal deaths for nulliparous patients (6.8 vs 0.92 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 7.7; 95% confidence interval, 4.42-13.76), a more than 2-fold increase in neonatal seizures (3.91 vs 1.94 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 2.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.48-3.22), and a more than 7-fold increase of a 5-minute Apgar score of <4 (194.84 vs 28.5 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 7.46; 95% confidence interval, 7-7.95). Compared with hospital midwife deliveries, hospital physician deliveries had significantly higher adverse neonatal outcomes (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Births in United States freestanding birth centers are associated with an increased risk of adverse neonatal outcomes such as neonatal deaths, seizures, and low 5-minute Apgar scores. Therefore, when counseling women about the location of birth, it should be conveyed that births in freestanding birth centers are not among the safest birth settings for neonates compared with hospital births attended by either midwives or physicians.

Increasing Access to Medications and Devices for the Care of Low-Risk Childbearing Families: An Analysis of Existing Law and Strategies for Advocacy.

Limited access to medications and devices relevant to the care of low-risk childbearing families acts as a barrier to the successful integration of high-quality midwifery care into health care systems. Families who live in clinically underserved areas, whether urban or rural, are particularly in need of perinatal professionals who can provide comprehensive care. This article reviews existing US laws that impact whether families who choose community-based care with direct entry midwives have access, through their chosen provider, to the medications and devices relevant to their normal perinatal and postpartum care. Scope of practice and practice authority are considered as they relate to access to medications and devices primarily for certified professional midwives and state-licensed midwives. These professionals are the primary health care providers offering community-based care and birth at home and in freestanding birth centers. Washington state laws are compared and contrasted with laws from other states and jurisdictions, with the aim of identifying ways to improve service delivery for families who choose community-based midwifery care. Recent and historical efforts to expand Washington state's midwifery drugs and devices formulary are described. This discussion outlines the Washington context for direct entry community midwifery practice, highlights relevant legal examples, and describes current and future efforts around quality improvement. Information from a midwifery clinic serving some of Washington's most vulnerable pregnant and postpartum families allows for an exploration of the role that access to essential medications and devices might play in supporting midwives to address health inequities. Ideal statutory and regulatory language, lessons learned from an analysis of Washington's experience, and strategies to overcome barriers are described to aid and inspire midwifery advocates in other jurisdictions who want to increase access and enhance their ability to offer current evidence-based care. Policy makers can improve health, health equity, consumer choice, and access to evidence-based care by using ideal legal language for midwifery practice authority.

Being Known: A Grounded Theory Study of the Meaning of Quality Maternity Care to People of Color in Boston.

INTRODUCTION: Experiences of people of color with maternity care are understudied but understanding them is important to improving quality and reducing racial disparities in birth outcomes in the United States. This qualitative study explored experiences with maternity care among people of color to describe the meaning of quality maternity care to the cohort and, ultimately, to inform the design of a freestanding birth center in Boston. METHODS: Using a grounded theory design and elements of community-based participatory research, community activists developing Boston's first freestanding birth center and academics collaborated on this study. Semistructured interviews and focus groups with purposefully sampled people of color were conducted and analyzed using a constant comparative method. Interviewees described their maternity care experiences, ideas about perfect maternity care, and how a freestanding birth center might meet their needs. Open coding, axial coding, and selective coding were used to develop a local theory of what quality care means. RESULTS: A total of 23 people of color participated in semistructured interviews and focus groups. A core phenomenon arose from the narratives: being known (ie, being seen or heard, or being treated as individuals) during maternity care was an important element of quality care. Contextual factors, including interpersonal and structural racism, power differentials between perinatal care providers and patients, and the bureaucratic nature of hospital-based maternity care, facilitated negative experiences. People of color did extra work to prevent and mitigate negative experiences, which left them feeling traumatized, regretful, or sad about maternity care. This extra work came in many forms, including cognitive work such as worrying about racism and behavioral changes such as dressing differently to get health care needs met. DISCUSSION: Being known characterizes quality maternity care among people of color in our sample. Maternity care settings can provide personalized care that helps clients feel known without requiring them to do extra work to achieve this experience.

Pivoting to Childbirth at Home or in Freestanding Birth Centers in the US During COVID-19: Safety, Economics and Logistics.

Birth-related decisions principally center on safety; giving birth during a pandemic brings safety challenges to a new level, especially when choosing the birth setting. Amid the COVID-19 crisis, the concurrent work furloughs, business failures, and mounting public and private debt have made prudent expenditures an inescapable second concern. This article examines the intersections of safety, economic efficiency, insurance, liability and birthing persons' needs that have become critical as the pandemic has ravaged bodies and economies around the world. Those interests, and the challenges and solutions discussed in this article, remain important even in less troubled times. Our economic analysis suggests that having an additional 10% of deliveries take place in private homes or freestanding birth centers could save almost $11 billion per year in the United States without compromising safety.

Birth Outcomes of Women with Obesity Enrolled for Care at Freestanding Birth Centers in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Current US guidelines for the care of women with obesity generalize obesity-related risks to all women regardless of overall health status and assume that birth will occur in hospitals. Perinatal outcomes for women with obesity in US freestanding birth centers need documentation. METHODS: Pregnancies recorded in the American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data Registry were analyzed (n = 4,455) to form 2 groups of primiparous women (n = 964; 1:1 matching of women with normal body mass indices [BMIs] and women with obese BMIs [>30]), using propensity score matching to address the imbalance of potential confounders. Groups were compared on a range of outcomes. Differences between groups were evaluated using χ2 test for categorical variables and Student's t test for continuous variables. Paired t test and McNemar's test evaluated the differences among the matched pairs. RESULTS: The majority of women with obese BMIs experienced uncomplicated perinatal courses and vaginal births. There were no significant differences in antenatal complications, proportion of prolonged pregnancy, prolonged first and second stage labor, rupture of membranes longer than 24 hours, postpartum hemorrhage, or newborn outcomes between women with obese BMIs and normal BMIs. Among all women with intrapartum referrals or transfers (25.3%), the primary indications were prolonged first stage or second stage (55.4%), inadequate pain relief (14.8%), client choice or psychological issue (7.0%), and meconium (5.3%). Primiparous women with obesity who started labor at a birth center had a 30.7% transfer rate and an 11.1% cesarean birth rate. DISCUSSION: Women with obese BMIs without medical comorbidity can receive safe and effective midwifery care at freestanding birth centers while anticipating a low risk for cesarean birth. The risks of potential, obesity-related perinatal complications should be discussed with women when choosing place of birth; however, pregnancy complicated by obesity must be viewed holistically, not simply through the lens of obesity.

Trajetória de mulheres assistidas em centro de parto normal e sua relação com escolhas terapêuticas / Trayectoria de mujeres atendidas en centro de parto normal y su relación con las opciones terapéuticas / Trajectory of women assisted in birth centers and their relationship with therapeutic choices

Objetivo: Conhecer trajetórias de mulheres assistidas em Centro de Parto Normal e a relação com suas escolhas de cuidado no parto e nascimento. Método: Pesquisa qualitativa com 28 mulheres em um Centro de Parto Normal utilizando-se entrevistas em profundidade. Resultados: Emergiram duas grandes categorias. Na primeira, os depoimentos demonstraram o trajeto percorrido para o parto e nascimento e escolhas no cuidado influenciados pelas vivências individuais, impressões da família e pessoas do convívio social. Na segunda, as mulheres reconheceram o Centro de Parto Normal, como um local de práticas diferenciadas no cuidado, sendo um local de aconchego que se assemelha ao lar. Conclusão: Os Centros de Parto Normal e a qualificação dos profissionais da enfermagem obstétrica são estratégias para a mudança do modelo de atenção obstétrica e, também, para que as mulheres possam (res)significar o cuidado que lhes é prestado, possibilitando que recontem suas histórias no processo de parto e nascimento(AU)

Purpose: To know about the trajectories of women assisted in Birth Centers and their relationship with their care choices during and after labor. Method: This is a qualitative research, done with in-depth interviews with 28 women in a Birth Center. Results: Two major categories emerged. First, the statements showed the trajectory taken for labor and labor, as well as choices in care influenced by individual experiences, family impressions and people living together. In the second category, the women recognized Birth Centers as a place of differentiated practices in care, offering coziness that resembles their home. Conclusion: Birth Centers and the qualification of obstetric nursing professionals are strategies to change the model of obstetric care and for women to (re)understand the care provided to them, enabling them to retell their stories in process of labor and labor(AU)

Objetivo: conocer las trayectorias de las mujeres atendidas en los Centros de Maternidad y su relación con sus opciones de cuidado durante y después del parto. Método: Se trata de una investigación cualitativa, realizada con entrevistas en profundidad a 28 mujeres en un Centro de Maternidad. Resultados: Surgieron dos categorías principales. En primer lugar, los enunciados muestran la trayectoria del trabajo y el trabajo, así como las opciones de cuidado influenciadas por las experiencias individuales, las impresiones familiares y las personas que conviven. En la segunda categoría, las mujeres reconocieron a los Centros de Maternidad como un lugar de prácticas diferenciadas en el cuidado, ofreciendo calidez que asemeja a su hogar. Conclusión: Los centros de maternidad y la capacitación de los profesionales de enfermería obstétrica son estrategias para cambiar el modelo de atención obstétrica y para que las mujeres (re) comprendan el cuidado que se les brinda, permitiéndoles volver a contar sus historias en el proceso de parto y parto(AU)

Rural resilience: The role of birth centers in the United States.

PURPOSE: To explore the role of the birth center model of care in rural health and maternity care delivery in the United States. METHODS: All childbearing families enrolled in care at an American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data RegistryTM user sites between 2012 and 2020 are included in this descriptive analysis. FINDINGS: Between 2012 and 2020, 88 574 childbearing families enrolled in care with 82 American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data RegistryTM user sites. Quality outcomes exceeded national benchmarks across all geographic regions in both rural and urban settings. A stable and predictable rate of transfer to a higher level of care was demonstrated across geographic regions, with over half of the population remaining appropriate for birth center level of care throughout the perinatal episode of care. Controlling for socio demographic and medical risk factors, outcomes were as favorable for clients in rural areas compared with urban and suburban communities. CONCLUSIONS: Rural populations cared for within the birth center model of care experienced high-quality outcomes. HEALTH POLICY IMPLICATIONS: A major focus of the United States maternity care reform should be the expansion of access to birth center models of care, especially in underserved areas such as rural communities.