Parity Moderates the Socioeconomic Predictors of Birth Setting Choice.

BACKGROUND: The increase in the number of people choosing community birth has raised interest in understanding the factors that influence birth setting choices. This study investigates how parity influences the association between maternal socioeconomic factors and choice of community versus hospital birth. METHODS: We used 2009-2021 US birth certificate data to identify community births (planned home or birth center births), parity, and maternal characteristics, including Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program participation, race, ethnicity, educational attainment, marital status, body mass index (BMI), and age. Parity was interacted with each covariate in a multivariable logistic regression model of birth setting. RESULTS: Among 26,526,010 eligible births, 58% were to multiparous mothers, with 1.9% occurring in a birth center or at home. For most maternal characteristics, associations with community birth were stronger in the multiparous group compared to the nulliparous group. For example, being married was associated with greater odds of community birth in both groups, but the strength of this association was greater within the multiparous group (odds ratio 4.00 vs. 1.94, interaction p < 0.001). The same pattern (stronger association with community birth in the multiparous group than in the primiparous group) was observed for race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and WIC participation, all of which were associated with lower odds of community birth. CONCLUSION: This study shows that parity significantly moderates associations between maternal socioeconomic characteristics and birth setting, implying studies of decision-making in this context should purposively stratify samples and analyses by parity.

Intrapartum time intervals and transfer of nulliparae from community births to maternity care units in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Over one-third of nulliparae planning births either at home or in freestanding midwife-led birthing centers (community births) in high-income countries are transferred during labor. Perinatal data are reported each year in Germany for women planning community birth. So far, data sets have not been linked to describe time-related factors associated with nulliparous transfer to hospital. OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of referral for nulliparae and assess maternal and labor characteristics associated with intrapartum transfer. METHODS: Perinatal data from 2010 to 2015 were linked (n = 26,115). Women were reviewed with respect to international eligibility criteria for community birth; 1997 women were excluded (7.6%). Descriptive statistics were reported; unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) tested the predictive effect of demographic and labor factors on rates of intrapartum transfer. RESULTS: One in three nulliparous women (30.6%) were transferred to hospital. Compared with community births, transferred women were significantly more likely to experience longer time intervals during labor: from rupture of membranes (ROM) until birth lasting 5 to 18 h (OR 6.05, CI 5.53-6.61) and 19 to 24 h (OR 10.83, CI 9.45-12.41) compared to one to 4 h; and from onset of labor until birth 11 to 24 h (OR 6.72, CI 6.24-7.23) and 25 to 29 h (OR 26.62, CI 22.77-31.11) compared to one to 10 h. When entering all factors into the model, we found the strongest predictors of transfer to be fetal distress, longer time intervals between ROM until birth and onset of labor until birth. CONCLUSIONS: Nulliparous transfer rates were similar to rates in other high-income countries; 94% of referrals were non-urgent. Time was found to be an independent risk factor for the transfer of nulliparae planning community birth.

Cost minimisation analyses of birth care in low-risk women in Norway: a comparison between planned home birth and birth in a standard obstetric unit.

BACKGROUND: Evidence exists that planned home births for low-risk women in settings in which they have access to hospital transfer if needed are safe. The costs of planned home births, compared to low-risk births in obstetric units, are not clear. The aim of this study was to compare costs associated with hospital births versus home births under different home birth organizations. METHODS: We performed a cost minimisation analysis (CMA) based on decision-analytic modelling while assuming that health outcomes were not affected by place of birth. Estimations of resource use were mainly based on three existing Norwegian datasets: (1) women with planned home births (n = 354), (2) women with planned home births (n = 482) of which 63 were transferred to a hospital, and (3) women with planned births in a hospital (n = 1550). RESULTS: Planned home birth costs 45.9% (credibility interval [CrI] 39.1-54.2) of a low-risk birth at a hospital. For planned home birth, the birth was the costliest activity (32.1%). The costs for planned home birth were estimated to be €1872 (CrI 1694-2071) and included hospitalisations for some. Costs for only those with actual home birth was €1353 (CrI 1244-1469). Costs of a birth, including possible birth-related complications, in low-risk women in a hospital was €4077 (CrI 3575-4615). When including the costs of being on call for one woman at a time, a planned home birth costs €5,531 (CrI 5,171-5,906), which is 135.7% (CrI 117.7-156.8) of low-risk births at a hospital. When organizing midwives in the on call teams for multiple women at a time, a planned home birth costs € 2,842 (CrI 2,647-3,053), which is 69.7% (CrI 60.3-80.9) of a low-risk birth in a hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Home birth can be cost-effective if the midwives who facilitate home births are organised into larger groups, or they work for hospitals that also facilitate home births. A model in which midwives work separately or in pairs to assist with a home birth and are on call for one birth at a time may not be cost-effective.

Predictors of planned home birth before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To determine how demographic and clinical predictors of home birth have changed since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. METHODS: Using National Vital Statistics birth certificate data, a retrospective population-based cohort study was performed with planned home births and hospital births among women age ≥18 years during calendar years 2019 (pre-pandemic) and 2021 (pandemic-era). Birth location (planned home birth vs. hospital birth) was analyzed using univariate and multivariable logistic regression, systematically examining the interaction of each demographic and clinical covariate with study year. RESULTS: After exclusions, a total of 6,087,768 birth records were retained for analysis, with the proportion of home births increasing from 0.82 % in 2019 to 1.24 % in 2021 (p<0.001). In the final multivariable logistic regression model of planned home birth, five demographic variables retained a statistically significant interaction with year: race and ethnicity, age, educational attainment, parity, and WIC participation. In each case, demographic differences between those having planned home births and hospital births became smaller (odds ratios closer to 1) in 2021 compared to 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Planned home births increased by more than 50 % during the pandemic, with greater socioeconomic diversity in the pandemic-era home birth cohort. The presence of clinical risk factors remained a strong predictor of hospital birth, with no evidence that pandemic-era home births had a higher clinical risk profile as compared to the pre-pandemic period.

Why do women choose home births.

In recent years, the US has seen a significant rise in the rate of planned home births, with a 60 % increase from 2016 to 2023, reaching a total of 46,918. This trend positions the US as the leading developed country in terms of home birth prevalence. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) suggests stringent criteria for selecting candidates for home births, but these guidelines have not been adopted by home birth midwives leading to poor outcomes including increased rates of neonatal morbidity and mortality. This paper explores the motivations behind choosing home births in the US despite the known risks. Studies highlight factors such as the desire for a more natural birth experience, previous negative hospital experiences, and the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on perceptions of hospital safety. We provide new insights into why women choose home births by incorporating insights from Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman's theories on decision-making, suggesting that cognitive biases may significantly influence these decisions. Kahneman's work provides a framework for understanding how biases and heuristics can lead to the underestimation of risks and overemphasis on personal birth experiences. We also provide recommendations ("nudges according to Richard Thaler") to help ensure women have access to clear, balanced information about home births. The development of this publication was assisted by OpenAI's ChatGPT-4, which facilitated the synthesis of literature, interpretation of data, and manuscript drafting. This collaboration underscores the potential of integrating advanced computational tools in academic research, enhancing the efficiency and depth of our analyses.

Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Genetic Counselors and Genetic Testing Among Certified Professional Midwives in Vermont: A Modified Grounded Theory Study.

Increasingly, pregnant people in the United States are choosing to give at birth at home, and certified professional midwives (CPMs) often attend these births. Care by midwives, including home birth midwives, has the potential to decrease unnecessary medical interventions and their associated health care costs, as well as to improve maternal satisfaction with care. However, lack of integration into the health care system affects the ability of CPMs to access standard medications and testing for their clients, including prenatal screening. Genetics and genomics are now a routine part of prenatal screening, and genetic testing can contribute to identifying candidates for planned home birth. However, research on genetics and midwifery care has not, to date, included the subset of midwives who attend the majority of planned home births, CPMs. The purpose of this study was to examine CPMs' access to, and perspectives on, one aspect of prenatal care, genetic counselors and genetic counseling services. Using semi-structured interviews and a modified grounded theory approach to narrative analysis, we identified three key themes: (1) systems-level issues with accessing information about genetic counseling and genetic testing; (2) practice-level patterns in information delivery and self-awareness about knowledge limitations; and (3) client-level concerns about the value of genetic testing relative to difficulties with access and stress caused by the information. The results of this study can be used to develop decision aids that include information about genetic testing and genetic counseling access for pregnant people intending home births in the United States.

The impact of birth settings on pregnancy outcomes in the United States.

In the United States, 98.3% of patients give birth in hospitals, 1.1% give birth at home, and 0.5% give birth in freestanding birth centers. This review investigated the impact of birth settings on birth outcomes in the United States. Presently, there are insufficient data to evaluate levels of maternal mortality and severe morbidity according to place of birth. Out-of-hospital births are associated with fewer interventions such as episiotomies, epidural anesthesia, operative deliveries, and cesarean deliveries. When compared with hospital births, there are increased rates of avoidable adverse perinatal outcomes in out-of-hospital births in the United States, both for those with and without risk factors. In one recent study, the neonatal mortality rates were significantly elevated for all planned home births: 13.66 per 10,000 live births (242/177,156; odds ratio, 4.19; 95% confidence interval, 3.62-4.84; P<.0001) vs 3.27 per 10,000 live births for in-hospital Certified Nurse-Midwife-attended births (745/2,280,044; odds ratio, 1). These differences increased further when patients were stratified by recognized risk factors such as breech presentation, multiple gestations, nulliparity, advanced maternal age, and postterm pregnancy. Causes of the increased perinatal morbidity and mortality include deliveries of patients with increased risks, absence of standardized criteria to exclude high-risk deliveries, and that most midwives attending out-of-hospital births in the United States do not meet the gold standard for midwifery regulation, the International Confederation of Midwives' Global Standards for Midwifery Education. As part of the informed consent process, pregnant patients interested in out-of-hospital births should be informed of its increased perinatal risks. Hospital births should be supported for all patients, especially those with increased risks.

The exciting potential for ChatGPT in obstetrics and gynecology.

Natural language processing-the branch of artificial intelligence concerned with the interaction between computers and human language-has advanced markedly in recent years with the introduction of sophisticated deep-learning models. Improved performance in natural language processing tasks, such as text and speech processing, have fueled impressive demonstrations of these models' capabilities. Perhaps no demonstration has been more impactful to date than the introduction of the publicly available online chatbot ChatGPT in November 2022 by OpenAI, which is based on a natural language processing model known as a Generative Pretrained Transformer. Through a series of questions posed by the authors about obstetrics and gynecology to ChatGPT as prompts, we evaluated the model's ability to handle clinical-related queries. Its answers demonstrated that in its current form, ChatGPT can be valuable for users who want preliminary information about virtually any topic in the field. Because its educational role is still being defined, we must recognize its limitations. Although answers were generally eloquent, informed, and lacked a significant degree of mistakes or misinformation, we also observed evidence of its weaknesses. A significant drawback is that the data on which the model has been trained are apparently not readily updated. The specific model that was assessed here, seems to not reliably (if at all) source data from after 2021. Users of ChatGPT who expect data to be more up to date need to be aware of this drawback. An inability to cite sources or to truly understand what the user is asking suggests that it has the capability to mislead. Responsible use of models like ChatGPT will be important for ensuring that they work to help but not harm users seeking information on obstetrics and gynecology.

"I had no choice": A mixed-methods study on access to care for vaginal breech birth.

INTRODUCTION: Although current recommendations support vaginal breech birth as a reasonable option, access to breech birth in US hospitals is limited. This study explored the experiences of decision-making and perceptions of access to care in people who transferred out of the hospital system to pursue home breech birth. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study of people with a singleton, term breech fetus who transferred out of the US hospital system to pursue home breech birth. Twenty-five people completed an online demographic and psychosocial survey, and 23 (92%) participated in semi-structured interviews. We used an interpretive description approach informed by situational analysis to analyze qualitative data about participants' experiences and perceived access to care. RESULTS: Of 25 individuals who left the hospital system to pursue a home breech birth, most felt denied informed choice (64%) and threatened or coerced into cesarean (68%). The majority reported low or very low autonomy in decision-making (n = 20, 80%) and high decisional satisfaction using validated measures. Many participants felt safer in a hospital setting but were not able to access care for planned vaginal breech hospital birth, despite extensive efforts. Participants felt "backed into a corner" and "forced into homebirth," perceiving a lack of access to safe and respectful care in the hospital system. CONCLUSION: Some service users believe that home birth is their only option when they cannot access hospital-based care for vaginal breech birth. Current barriers to care for breech birth limit birthing people's autonomy and may be placing them and their infants at increased risk.

Relationship between out-of-facility deliveries and distance and travel time to delivery facilities in Hokkaido, Japan: An ecological study.

AIM: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between the distance and travel time from each municipality to the nearest delivery facilities in the other municipalities and the frequency of out-of-facility deliveries in Hokkaido. METHODS: Vital statistics from 2016 to 2020 were used. For municipalities without delivery facilities, the distance and travel time from the town office of each municipality to the nearest delivery facility was measured using Google maps. Negative binomial regression with an offset term was used to calculate the relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of out-of-facility delivery for distance (<30, 30-59, ≥60 km), and travel time by car (<30, 30-59, and ≥60 min) from the town office to the nearest delivery facility compared with the presence of delivery facilities. RESULTS: The overall rate of out-of-facility deliveries in Hokkaido was 2.1‰; in municipalities with delivery facilities, 1.8‰, and in municipalities without delivery facilities, 3.1‰. The adjusted RRs (95% CIs) for out-of-facility deliveries were significantly higher in municipalities with less than 30 km and travel time of less than 30 min to delivery facilities, 2.63 (1.34-5.17) and 2.76 (1.36-5.58), respectively, compared to municipalities with delivery facilities. However, the adjusted RR of out-of-facility delivery for municipalities ≥30 km was higher, although the difference was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Even in municipalities with a distance to delivery facilities of less than 30 km or travel time of less than 30 min, we should keep in mind the occurrence of out-of-facility deliveries.

Exploring home births in Catalonia (Spain): A cross-sectional study of women's experiences and influencing factors.

AIM: The study explores the experiences of women with low-risk pregnancies and no complications who planned a home birth. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online questionnaire. METHODS: The questionnaire included socio-demographic, obstetric and perinatal variables. Birth satisfaction was evaluated via the Spanish version of the childbirth experience questionnaire. The study group comprised home-birthing women in Catalonia, Spain. Data were collected from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2021. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS. RESULTS: A total of 236 women responded. They reported generally positive experiences, with professional support and involvement being the most highly rated dimensions. Better childbirth experiences were associated with labour lasting less than 12 h, no perineal injuries, no intrapartum transfers to hospital, euthocic delivery and the presence of a midwife. CONCLUSIONS: Women's positive home birth experiences were linked to active participation and midwife support. Multiparous women felt safer. Medical interventions, especially transfers to hospitals, reduced satisfaction, highlighting the need for improved care during home births. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: Home births should be included among the birthplace options offered by public health services, given the extremely positive feedback reported by women who gave birth at home. IMPACT: Home birth is not an option offered under Catalonia's public health system only as a private service. The experience of home-birthing women is unknown. This study shows a very positive birth experience due to greater participation and midwife support. The results help stakeholders assess home birth's public health inclusion and understand valued factors, supporting home-birthing women. REPORTING METHOD: The study followed the STROBE checklist guidelines for cross-sectional studies. PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Women who planned a home birth participated in the pilot test to validate the instrument, and their contributions were collected by the lead researcher. The questionnaire gathered the participants' email addresses, and a commitment was made to disseminate the study's results through this means.

Factors associated with choice of home birth as place of delivery among women of reproductive age in South Africa.

A growing prevalence of home births has been reported, yet factors predicting this prevalence have not been adequately investigated in South Africa. Using the 2016 South Africa Demographic and Health Survey dataset, this study aimed to examine the factors associated with the choice of birth at home as the place of delivery among women of reproductive age in South Africa. A total of 2862 women (aged 15-49 years) who gave birth within five years preceding the survey were included in the analysis. Both univariate and multivariable regression analyses were used to determine the predictors for the choice of home birth. The prevalence of births in health facilities and home childbirths were 96.0% and 4.0%, with the majority in non-urban areas, and in Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal and Eastern Cape Provinces (≥ 11.4%). After adjusting for confounders, the factors associated with the choice of place of delivery were: primary education [AOR = 1.97; p < 0.001], secondary/higher education [AOR = 3.51; p > 0.05]); cohabitation [AOR = 1.88; p < 0.01]; and parity 4-6 [COR = 2.59; p < 0.001], parity 7+ [AOR = 5.41; p < 0.001]. Predictors for choice of home birth as a place of delivery included increased educational attainment, cohabitation, higher parity and non-urban place of residence. Innovative strategies reinforcing polices or behaviours aimed at women of reproductive age with the aforementioned demographic indicators are needed to increase the use of healthcare facilities for childbirth, thereby reducing maternal and neonatal mortality, especially in non-urban provinces of South Africa.

Home births as a "right" of female patients in the context of medicine, legislation and court jurisprudence.

Currently, in the Czech Republic and Slovakia, more and more women prefer a planned home birth to a hospital birth, despite the fact that the hospital provides a safe environment for laboring women, thanks to the possibility to intervene at any time in case of complications. These women consider childbirth a natural process, while obstetric care is often considered unnecessary. According to the World Health Organization, birth can only be defined as physiological after birth. Even though women can give birth without medical assistance, it is not possible to identify in advance the mothers and newborns who will need some kind of intervention during childbirth. Although a planned home birth is associated with fewer maternal interventions and the probability of a spontaneous vaginal birth, compared to a planned hospital birth, the risk of neonatal death is two- to three-times higher.

Out-of-hospital births and infant mortality in the United States: Effect measure modification by rural maternal residence.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital births have been increasing in the United States, and home births are almost twice as common in rural vs. urban counties. Planned home births and births in rural areas have each been associated with an increased risk of infant mortality. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effect of birth setting on infant mortality in the United States and how this is modified by rural-urban county of maternal residence. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of infants born in the United States during 2010-2017 using the National Center for Health Statistics' period-linked birth-infant death files. Unadjusted and adjusted Poisson regression models were used to calculate infant mortality rate ratios and 95% confidence intervals for out-of-hospital births vs. hospital births stratified by maternal residence. Relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI) was calculated to assess effect measure modification on the additive scale. RESULTS: The study included 25,210,263 live births. Of rural births, 97.8% was in hospitals, 0.5% was in birth centres, and 1.5% was planned home births; of urban births, 98.6% was in hospitals, 0.5% was in birth centres, and 0.7% was planned home births. After adjusting for maternal demographics and markers of high-risk pregnancy and stratifying by maternal residence, infant mortality rates were generally higher for out-of-hospital as compared to hospital births (e.g. rural planned home births aRR 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42, 1.85, and rural birth centre aRR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05, 1.68). There were positive additive effects of rural residence on infant mortality for planned home births and birth centre births. CONCLUSIONS: Within both rural and urban areas, out-of-hospital births generally had higher rates of infant mortality than hospital births after accounting for maternal demographics and markers of high-risk pregnancy. The risks associated with planned home births and birth centre births were more pronounced for women in rural counties.

Determinants of place birth: a multinomial logistic regression and spatial analysis of the Ethiopian mini demographic and health survey data, 2019.

BACKGROUND: Maternal and neonatal health significantly improves when birth is attended at health institutions where there are quality services and skilled attendants. In contrary, home birth results in high rates of maternal and neonatal mortality. Thus, this study aimed to determine the spatial distribution of home birth and to identify determinants of place of birth in Ethiopia based on the recent national survey. METHODS: Ethiopian mini-DHS-2019 data was used in this analysis. A weighted sample of 5423 mothers were included. While health facility was a reference, home and health post were used as comparison categories to identify determinants of place of birth in a survey multinomial logistic regression model. An adjusted relative risk ratio, marginal effect, and a corresponding 95% confidence interval and a p-value of < 0.05 were used to declare statistical significance. The Global Moran's I analysis was done by using ArcMap 10.8 to evaluate the clustering of home birth. The prevalence of home birth was predicted by ordinary kriging interpolation. Then, scanning was done by SaTScan V.9.6 software to detect scanning windows with low or high rates of home birth. RESULT: Prevalence of home birth in Ethiopia was 52.19% (95% CI: 46.49 - 57.83). Whereas, only 2.99% (95% CI: 1.68 - 5.25) of mothers gave birth in the health posts. Bigger family size, family wealth, multiparity, none and fewer antenatal visits, and low coverage of cluster level 4 + antenatal visits were predictors of home birth. Also, home birth was clustered across enumeration areas and it was over 40% in most parts of the country with > 75% in the Somali region. SaTScan analysis detected most likely primary clusters in the Somali region and secondary clusters in the rest five regions of the country. CONCLUSION: Home birth is a common practice in Ethiopia. Among public health facilities, health posts are the least utilized institutions for labor and delivery care. Nationally, implementing the 2016 WHO's recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience and providing quality antenatal and delivery care in public facilities by qualified providers and back-up systems in place could be supportive.

United States community births increased by 20% from 2019 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: Anecdotal and emerging evidence suggested that the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic may have influenced women's attitudes toward community birth. Our purpose was to examine trends in community births from 2019 to 2020, and the risk profile of these births. METHODS: Recently released 2020 birth certificate data were compared with prior years' data to analyze trends in community births by socio-demographic and medical characteristics. RESULTS: In 2020, there were 71 870 community births in the United States, including 45 646 home births and 21 884 birth center births. Community births increased by 19.5% from 2019 to 2020. Planned home births increased by 23.3%, while birth center births increased by 13.2%. Increases occurred in every US state, and for all racial and ethnic groups, particularly non-Hispanic Black mothers (29.7%), although not all increases were statistically significant. In 2020, 1 of every 50 births in the United States was a community birth (2.0%). Women with planned home and birth center births were less likely than women with hospital births to have several characteristics associated with poor pregnancy outcomes, including teen births, smoking during pregnancy, obesity, and preterm, low birthweight, and multiple births. More than two-thirds of planned home births were self-paid, compared with one-third of birth center and just 3% of hospital births. CONCLUSIONS: It is to the great credit of United States midwives working in home and birth center settings that they were able to substantially expand their services during a worldwide pandemic without compromising standards in triaging women to optimal settings for safe birth.

Individual and community-level factors associated with home birth: a mixed effects regression analysis of 2017-2018 Benin demographic and health survey.

BACKGROUND: Home birth is a common contributor to maternal and neonatal deaths particularly in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). We generally refer to home births as all births that occurred at the home setting. In Benin, home birth is phenomenal among some category of women. We therefore analysed individual and community-level factors influencing home birth in Benin. METHODS: Data was extracted from the 2017-2018 Benin Demographic and Health Survey females' file. The survey used stratified sampling technique to recruit 15,928 women aged 15-49. This study was restricted to 7758 women in their reproductive age who had complete data. The outcome variable was home birth among women. A mixed effect regression analysis was performed using 18 individual and community level explanatory variables. Alpha threshold was fixed at 0.05 confidence interval (CI). All analyses were done using STATA (v14.0). The results were presented in adjusted odds ratios (AORs). RESULTS: We found that 14% (n = 1099) of the respondents delivered at home. The odds of home births was high among cohabiting women compared with the married [AOR = 1.57, CI = 1.21-2.04] and women at parity 5 or more compared with those at parity 1-2 [AOR = 1.29, CI = 1.01-1.66]. The odds declined among the richest [AOR = 0.07, CI = 0.02-0.24], and those with formal education compared with those without formal education [AOR = 0.71, CI = 0.54-0.93]. Similarly, it was less probable for women whose partners had formal education relative to those whose partners had no formal education [AOR = 0.62, CI = 0.49-0.79]. The tendency of home birth was low for women who did not have problem in getting permission to seek medical care [AOR = 0.62, CI = 0.50-0.77], had access to mass media [AOR = 0.78, CI = 0.60-0.99], attained the recommended ANC visits [AOR = 0.33, CI = 0.18-0.63], belonged to a community of high literacy level [AOR = 0.24, CI = 0.14-0.41], and those from communities of high socio-economic status (SES) [AOR = 0.25, CI = 0.14-0.46]. CONCLUSION: The significant predictors of home birth are wealth status, education, marital status, parity, partner's education, access to mass media, getting permission to go for medical care, ANC visit, community literacy level and community SES. To achieve maternal and child health related goals including SDG 3 and 10, the government of Benin and all stakeholders must prioritise these factors in their quest to promote facility-based delivery.

Let complete numbers speak for themselves.

The authors describe the challenges they encountered, having attempted to retrospectively complete a home birth outcome data set for New York State. In addition, they provide a compelling argument for a midwifery data collective that would bring together health record data for all midwife-attended births nationwide, regardless of setting.

Perinatal outcomes of planned home birth after cesarean and planned hospital vaginal birth after cesarean at term gestation in British Columbia, Canada: A retrospective population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective population-based cohort study was to determine whether the mode of delivery and maternal and neonatal outcomes differ between planned home VBAC (HBAC) and planned hospital VBAC. METHODS: All midwifery clients with at least one prior cesarean birth delivered between April 2000 and March 2017 (N = 4741; n = 4180 planned hospital VBAC, n = 561 planned HBAC) were included. Multivariate binomial logistic regression analyses were conducted to calculate the odds ratios adjusted for the potential covariates. The primary outcome was the mode of delivery, and the secondary outcomes were uterine rupture/dehiscence, postpartum hemorrhage, nonintact perineum, episiotomy, obstetric trauma, Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes, neonatal resuscitation requiring positive pressure ventilation, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and a composite outcome of severe neonatal mortality and morbidity and maternal mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: Planned HBAC was associated with a significant 39% decrease in the odds of having a cesarean birth (aOR 0.61, 95% CI 0.47-0.79) adjusting for the prepregnancy and pregnancy characteristics. Severe adverse outcomes were relatively rare in both settings; thus, our study did not have sufficient power to detect the true differences associated with the place of birth. CONCLUSIONS: Home births for those eligible for VBACs and attended by registered midwives within an integrated health system were associated with higher vaginal birth rates compared with planned hospital VBACs. Severe adverse outcomes were relatively rare in both settings.

Neonatal mortality in the United States is related to location of birth (hospital versus home) rather than the type of birth attendant.

BACKGROUND: Planned home births have leveled off in the United States in recent years after a significant rise starting in the mid-2000s. Planned home births in the United States are associated with increased patient-risk profiles. Multiple studies concluded that, compared with hospital births, absolute and relative risks of perinatal mortality and morbidity in US planned home births are significantly increased. OBJECTIVE: To explore the safety of birth in the United States by comparing the neonatal mortality outcomes of 2 locations, hospital birth and home birth, by 4 types of attendants: hospital midwife; certified nurse-midwife at home; direct-entry ("other") midwife at home; and attendant at home not identified, using the most recent US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention natality data on neonatal mortality for planned home births in the United States. Outcomes are presented as absolute risks (neonatal mortality per 10,000 live births) and as relative risks of neonatal mortality (hospital-certified nurse-midwife odds ratio, 1) overall, and for recognized risk factors. STUDY DESIGN: We used the most current US Centers for Disease and Prevention Control Linked Birth and Infant Death Records for 2010-2017 to assess neonatal mortality (neonatal death days 0-27 after birth) for single, term (37+ weeks), normal-weight ( >2499 g) infants for planned home births and hospital births by birth attendants: hospital-certified nurse-midwives, home-certified nurse-midwives, home other midwives (eg, lay or direct-entry midwives), and other home birth attendant not identified. RESULTS: The neonatal mortality for US hospital midwife-attended births was 3.27 per 10,000 live births, 13.66 per 10,000 live births for all planned home births, and 27.98 per 10,000 live births for unintended/unplanned home births. Planned home births attended by direct-entry midwives and by certified nurse-midwives had a significantly elevated absolute and relative neonatal mortality risk compared with certified nurse-midwife-attended hospital births (hospital-certified nurse-midwife: 3.27/10,000 live births odds ratio, 1; home birth direct-entry midwives: neonatal mortality 12.44/10,000 live births, odds ratio, 3.81, 95% confidence interval, 3.12-4.65, P<.0001; home birth-certified nurse-midwife: neonatal mortality 9.48/10,000 live births, odds ratio, 2.90, 95% confidence interval, 2.90; P<.0001). These differences increased further when patients were stratified for recognized risk factors. CONCLUSION: The safety of birth in the United States varies by location and attendant. Compared with US hospital births attended by a certified nurse-midwife, planned US home births for all types of attendants are a less safe setting of birth, especially when recognized risk factors are taken into account. The type of midwife attending US planned home birth appears to have no differential effect on decreasing the absolute and relative risk of neonatal mortality of planned home birth, because the difference in outcomes of US planned home births attended by direct-entry midwives or by certified nurse-midwives is not statistically significant.