Effect of planned place of birth on obstetric interventions and maternal outcomes among low-risk women: a cohort study in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The use of interventions in childbirth has increased the past decades. There is concern that some women might receive more interventions than they really need. For low-risk women, midwife-led birth settings may be of importance as a counterbalance towards the increasing rate of interventions. The effect of planned place of birth on interventions in the Netherlands is not yet clear. This study aims to give insight into differences in obstetric interventions and maternal outcomes for planned home versus planned hospital birth among women in midwife-led care. METHODS: Women from twenty practices across the Netherlands were included in 2009 and 2010. Of these, 3495 were low-risk and in midwife-led care at the onset of labour. Information about planned place of birth and outcomes, including instrumental birth (caesarean section, vacuum or forceps birth), labour augmentation, episiotomy, oxytocin in third stage, postpartum haemorrhage >1000 ml and perineal damage, came from the national midwife-led care perinatal database, and a postpartum questionnaire. RESULTS: Women who planned home birth more often had spontaneous birth (nulliparous women aOR 1.38, 95 % CI 1.08-1.76, parous women aOR 2.29, 95 % CI 1.21-4.36) and less often episiotomy (nulliparous women aOR 0.73, 0.58-0.91, parous women aOR 0.47, 0.33-0.68) and use of oxytocin in the third stage (nulliparous women aOR 0.58, 0.42-0.80, parous women aOR 0.47, 0.37-0.60) compared to women who planned hospital birth. Nulliparous women more often had anal sphincter damage (aOR 1.75, 1.01-3.03), but the difference was not statistically significant if women who had caesarean sections were excluded. Parous women less often had labour augmentation (aOR 0.55, 0.36-0.82) and more often an intact perineum (aOR 1.65, 1.34-2.03). There were no differences in rates of vacuum/forceps birth, unplanned caesarean section and postpartum haemorrhage >1000 ml. CONCLUSIONS: Women who planned home birth were more likely to give birth spontaneously and had fewer medical interventions.

Pregnancy related anxiety and general anxious or depressed mood and the choice for birth setting: a secondary data-analysis of the DELIVER study.

BACKGROUND: In several developed countries women with a low risk of complications during pregnancy and childbirth can make choices regarding place of birth. In the Netherlands, these women receive midwife-led care and can choose between a home or hospital birth. The declining rate of midwife-led home births alongside the recent debate on safety of home births in the Netherlands, however, suggest an association of choice of birth place with psychological factors related to safety and risk perception. In this study associations of pregnancy related anxiety and general anxious or depressed mood with (changes in) planned place of birth were explored in low risk women in midwife-led care until the start of labour. METHODS: Data (n = 2854 low risk women in midwife-led care at the onset of labour) were selected from the prospective multicenter DELIVER study. Women completed the Pregnancy Related Anxiety Questionnaire-Revised (PRAQ-R) to assess pregnancy related anxiety and the EuroQol-6D (EQ-6D) for an anxious and/or depressed mood. RESULTS: A high PRAQ-R score was associated with planned hospital birth in nulliparous (aOR 1.92; 95% CI 1.32-2.81) and parous women (aOR 2.08; 95% CI 1.55-2.80). An anxious or depressed mood was associated with planned hospital birth (aOR 1.58; 95% CI 1.20-2.08) and with being undecided (aOR 1.99; 95% CI 1.23-2.99) in parous women only. The majority of women did not change their planned place of birth. Changing from an initially planned home birth to a hospital birth later in pregnancy was, however, associated with becoming anxious or depressed after 35 weeks gestation in nulliparous women (aOR 4.17; 95% CI 1.35-12.89) and with pregnancy related anxiety at 20 weeks gestation in parous women (aOR 3.91; 95% CI 1.32-11.61). CONCLUSION: Low risk women who planned hospital birth (or who were undecided) more often reported pregnancy related anxiety or an anxious or depressed mood. Women who changed from home to hospital birth during pregnancy more often reported pregnancy related anxiety or an anxious or depressed mood in late pregnancy. Anxiety should be adequately addressed in the process of informed decision-making regarding planned place of birth in low risk women.

Perinatal mortality and morbidity up to 28 days after birth among 743 070 low-risk planned home and hospital births: a cohort study based on three merged national perinatal databases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare rates of adverse perinatal outcomes between planned home births versus planned hospital births. DESIGN: A nationwide cohort study. SETTING: The Netherlands. POPULATION: Low-risk women in midwife-led care at the onset of labour. METHODS: Analysis of national registration data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intrapartum and neonatal death, Apgar scores, and admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) within 28 days of birth. RESULTS: Of the total of 814 979 women, 466 112 had a planned home birth and 276 958 had a planned hospital birth. For 71 909 women, their planned place of birth was unknown. The combined intrapartum and neonatal death rates up to 28 days after birth, including cases with discrepancies in the registration of the moment of death, were: for nulliparous women, 1.02‰ for planned home births versus 1.09‰ for planned hospital births, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.79-1.24; and for parous women, 0.59‰ versus 0.58‰, aOR 1.16, 95% CI 0.87-1.55. The rates of NICU admissions and low Apgar scores did not significantly differ among nulliparous women (NICU admissions up to 28 days, 3.41‰ versus 3.61‰, aOR 1.05, 95% CI 0.92-1.18). Among parous women the rates of Apgar scores below seven and NICU admissions were significantly lower among planned home births (NICU admissions up to 28 days, 1.36 versus 1.95‰, aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: We found no increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes for planned home births among low-risk women. Our results may only apply to regions where home births are well integrated into the maternity care system.

The use of episiotomy in a low-risk population in the Netherlands: a secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: To examine the episiotomy incidence and determinants and outcomes associated with its use in primary care midwifery practices. METHODS: Secondary analysis of two prospective cohort studies (n = 3,404). RESULTS: The episiotomy incidence was 10.8 percent (20.9% for nulliparous and 6.3% for parous women). Episiotomy was associated with prolonged second stage of labor (adj. OR 12.09 [95% CI 6.0-24.2] for nulliparous and adj. OR 2.79 [1.7-4.6] for parous women) and hospital birth (adj. OR 1.75 [1.2-2.5] for parous women). Compared with episiotomy, perineal tears were associated with a lower rate of postpartum hemorrhage in parous women (adj. OR 0.58 [0.4-0.9]). Fewer women with perineal tears reported perineal discomfort (adj. OR 0.35 [0.2-0.6] for nulliparous and adj. OR 0.22 [0.1-0.3] for parous women). Among nulliparous women episiotomy was performed most frequently for prolonged second stage of labor (38.8%) and among parous women for history of episiotomy or prevention of major perineal trauma (21.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of episiotomy is high compared with some low-risk settings in other Western countries. Episiotomy was associated with higher rates of adverse maternal outcomes. Restricted use of episiotomy is likely to be beneficial for women.