Maternal and neonatal outcome of births planned in alongside midwifery units: a cohort study from a tertiary center in Germany.

BACKGROUND: For healthy women entering birth after uneventful pregnancy, midwife-led models of care have the potential to reduce interventions and increase the vaginal birth rate. In Germany, 98.4% of women are giving birth in consultant-led obstetric units. Alongside midwifery units (AMU) have been established in 2003. We compared the outcome of women registered for planned birth in the AMU at our hospital with a matched group of low-risk women who gave birth in standard obstetric care during the same period of time. METHODS: We used a retrospective cohort study design. The study group consisted of all women admitted to labor ward who had registered for birth in AMU from 2010 to 2017. For the control group, low-risk women were selected; additionally, matching was performed for parity. Mode of birth was chosen as primary outcome parameter for the mother. For the neonate, a composite primary outcome (5-min Apgar < 7 or umbilical cord arterial pH < 7.10 or transfer to specialist neonatal care) was defined. Secondary outcomes included epidural anesthesia, duration of the second stage of labor, episiotomy, obstetric injury, and postpartum hemorrhage. Non-inferiority was assessed, and multiple logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Six hundred twelve women were admitted for labor in AMU, the control group consisted of 612 women giving birth in standard obstetric care. Women in the study group were on average older and had a higher body mass index (BMI); birthweight was on average 95 g higher. Non-inferiority could be established for the primary outcome parameters. Epidural anesthesia and episiotomy rates were lower, and the mean duration of the second stage of labor was shorter in the study group; second-degree perineal tears were less common, higher-order obstetric lacerations occurred more frequently. Overall, 50.3% of women were transferred to standard obstetric care. Regression analysis revealed effects of parity, age and birthweight on the chance of transfer. CONCLUSION: Compared to births in our consultant-led obstetric unit, the outcome of births planned in the AMU was not inferior, and intervention rates were lower. Our results support the integration of AMU as a complementary model of care for low-risk women.

Births in Norwegian midwife-led birth units 2008-10; a population-based study. / Fødestuefødsler i Norge 2008­10 ­ en populasjonsbasert studie.

BAKGRUNN: Fødestuene utgjør en del av en differensiert og desentralisert fødselsomsorg i Norge. Hensikten med studien var å undersøke forekomst og karakteristika ved planlagte og ikke-planlagte fødestuefødsler og årsaker til overflytting samt resultater for mor og barn. MATERIALE OG METODE: I perioden 2008-10 ble et tilleggsskjema til rutinemeldingen til Medisinsk fødselsregister fortløpende utfylt av jordmor for 2 514 av i alt 2 556 (98,4 %) fødestuefødsler og for 220 fødsler som var planlagt i fødestue, men der fødselen foregikk andre steder. Data fra tilleggsskjema ble så koblet med rutinedata i Medisinsk fødselsregister og resultater fra fødestuefødsler sammenlignet med resultater fra en lavrisikofødepopulasjon i sykehus. RESULTATER: Av de 2 514 fødestuefødslene var 2 320 (92,3 %) planlagt å foregå der, mens 194 (7,7 %) ikke var det. Ved planlagt fødestuefødsel ble totalt 6,9 % overflyttet til sykehus under fødsel, hvorav 19,5 % blant førstegangsfødende. Det var 0,4 % operative vaginale fødsler ved vanlige fødestuer, 3,5 % ved forsterkede fødestuer og 12,7 % ved fødsler overflyttet fra fødestue til sykehus. Blant barn født i fødestue hadde 0,6 % apgarskår < 7 ved 5 minutter, mot 1,0 % blant barn født i lavrisikosammenligningsgruppen i sykehus (p = 0,04). FORTOLKNING: Fødestuer bør rapportere resultater for alle som var selektert for å føde der, uansett om fødselen endte med å foregå i fødestuen eller andre steder.

Differences in optimality index between planned place of birth in a birth centre and alternative planned places of birth, a nationwide prospective cohort study in The Netherlands: results of the Dutch Birth Centre Study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the Optimality Index of planned birth in a birth centre with planned birth in a hospital and planned home birth for low-risk term pregnant women who start labour under the responsibility of a community midwife. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Low-risk pregnant women under care of a community midwife and living in a region with one of the 21 participating Dutch birth centres or in a region with the possibility for midwife-led hospital birth. Home birth was commonly available in all regions included in the study. PARTICIPANTS: 3455 low-risk term pregnant women (1686 nulliparous and 1769 multiparous) who gave birth between 1 July 2013 and 31 December 2013: 1668 planned birth centre births, 701 planned midwife-led hospital births and 1086 planned home births. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The Optimality IndexNL-2015, a tool to measure 'maximum outcome with minimal intervention', was assessed by planned place of birth being a birth centre, a hospital setting or at home. Also, a composite maternal and perinatal adverse outcome score was calculated for the different planned places of birth. RESULTS: There were no differences in Optimality Index NL-2015 for pregnant women who planned to give birth in a birth centre compared with women who planned to give birth in a hospital. Although effect sizes were small, women who planned to give birth at home had a higher Optimality Index NL-2015 than women who planned to give birth in a birth centre. The differences were larger for multiparous than for nulliparous women. CONCLUSION: The Optimality Index NL-2015 for women with planned birth centre births was comparable with planned midwife-led hospital births. Women with planned home births had a higher Optimality Index NL-2015, that is, a higher sum score of evidence-based items with an optimal value than women with planned birth centre births.

Are freestanding midwifery units a safe alternative to obstetric units for low-risk, primiparous childbirth? An analysis of effect differences by parity in a matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Intrapartum complications and the use of obstetric interventions are more common in primiparous childbirth than in multiparous childbirth, leading to concern about out of hospital birth for primiparous women. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the effect of birthplace on perinatal and maternal morbidity and the use of obstetric interventions differed by parity among low-risk women intending to give birth in a freestanding midwifery unit or in an obstetric unit in the North Denmark Region. METHODS: The study is a secondary analysis of data from a matched cohort study including 839 low-risk women intending birth in a freestanding midwifery unit (primary participants) and 839 low-risk women intending birth in an obstetric unit (individually matched control group). Analysis was by intention-to-treat. Conditional logistic regression analysis was applied to compute odds ratios and effect ratios with 95% confidence intervals for matched pairs stratified by parity. RESULTS: On no outcome did the effect of birthplace differ significantly between primiparous and multiparous women. Compared with their counterparts intending birth in an obstetric unit, both primiparous and multiparous women intending birth in a freestanding midwifery unit were significantly more likely to have an uncomplicated, spontaneous birth with good outcomes for mother and infant and less likely to require caesarean section, instrumental delivery, augmented labour or epidural analgesia (although for caesarean section this trend did not attain statistical significance for multiparous women). Perinatal outcomes were comparable between the two birth settings irrespective of parity. Compared to multiparas, transfer rates were substantially higher for primiparas, but fell over time while rates for multiparas remained stable. CONCLUSIONS: Freestanding midwifery units appear to confer significant advantages over obstetric units to both primiparous and multiparous mothers, while their infants are equally safe in both settings. Our findings thus support the provision of care in freestanding midwifery units as an alternative to care in obstetric units for all low-risk women regardless of parity. In view of the global rise in caesarean section rates, we consider it an important finding that freestanding midwifery units show potential for reducing first-birth caesarean.

Work load and management in the delivery room: changing the direction of healthcare policy.

Nurse staffing, increased workload and unstable nursing unit environments are linked to negative patient outcomes including falls and medication errors on medical/surgical units. Considering this evidence, the aim of our study was to overview midwives' workload and work setting. We created a questionnaire and performed an online survey. We obtained information about the type and level of hospital, workload, the use of standardised procedures, reporting of sentinel and 'near-miss' events. We reported a severe understaffing in midwives' work settings and important underuse of standard protocols according to the international guidelines, especially in the South of Italy. Based on our results, we strongly suggest a change of direction of healthcare policy, oriented to increase the number of employed midwives, in order to let them fulfil their duties according to the international guidelines (especially one-to-one care). On the other hand, we encourage the adoption of standardised protocols in each work setting.

Barriers and facilitators to accessing skilled birth attendants in Afar region, Ethiopia.

OBJECTIVE: to explore barriers and facilitators that enable women to access skilled birth attendance in Afar Region, Ethiopia. DESIGN: researchers used a Key Informant Research approach (KIR), whereby Health Extension Workers participated in an intensive training workshop and conducted interviews with Afar women in their communities. Data was also collected from health-care workers through questionnaires, interviews and focus groups. PARTICIPANTS: fourteen health extension workers were key informants and interviewers; 33 women and eight other health-care workers with a range of experience in caring for Afar childbearing women provided data as individuals and in focus groups. FINDINGS: participants identified friendly service, female skilled birth attendants (SBA) and the introduction of the ambulance service as facilitators to SBA. There are many barriers to accessing SBA, including women׳s low status and restricted opportunities for decision making, lack of confidence in health-care facilities, long distances, cost, domestic workload, and traditional practices which include a preference for birthing at home with a traditional birth attendant. KEY CONCLUSIONS: many Afar men and women expressed a lack of confidence in the services provided at health-care facilities which impacts on skilled birth attendance utilisation. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: ambulance services that are free of charge to women are effective as a means to transfer women to a hospital for emergency care if required and expansion of ambulance services would be a powerful facilitator to increasing institutional birth. Skilled birth attendants working in institutions need to ensure their practice is culturally, physically and emotionally safe if more Afar women are to accept their midwifery care. Adequate equipping and staffing of institutions providing emergency obstetric and newborn care will assist in improving community perceptions of these services. Most importantly, mutual respect and collaboration between traditional birth attendants (Afar women׳s preferred caregiver), health extension workers and skilled birth attendants will help ensure timely consultation and referral and reduce delay for women if they require emergency maternity care.

Uterotonic use immediately following birth: using a novel methodology to estimate population coverage in four countries.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality in developing countries. While incidence of PPH can be dramatically reduced by uterotonic use immediately following birth (UUIFB) in both community and facility settings, national coverage estimates are rare. Most national health systems have no indicator to track this, and community-based measurements are even more scarce. To fill this information gap, a methodology for estimating national coverage for UUIFB was developed and piloted in four settings. METHODS: The rapid estimation methodology consisted of convening a group of national technical experts and using the Delphi method to come to consensus on key data elements that were applied to a simple algorithm, generating a non-precise national estimate of coverage of UUIFB. Data elements needed for the calculation were the distribution of births by location and estimates of UUIFB in each of those settings, adjusted to take account of stockout rates and potency of uterotonics. This exercise was conducted in 2013 in Mozambique, Tanzania, the state of Jharkhand in India, and Yemen. RESULTS: Available data showed that deliveries in public health facilities account for approximately half of births in Mozambique and Tanzania, 16% in Jharkhand and 24% of births in Yemen. Significant proportions of births occur in private facilities in Jharkhand and faith-based facilities in Tanzania. Estimated uterotonic use for facility births ranged from 70 to 100%. Uterotonics are not used routinely for PPH prevention at home births in any of the settings. National UUIFB coverage estimates of all births were 43% in Mozambique, 40% in Tanzania, 44% in Jharkhand, and 14% in Yemen. CONCLUSION: This methodology for estimating coverage of UUIFB was found to be feasible and acceptable. While the exercise produces imprecise estimates whose validity cannot be assessed objectively in the absence of a gold standard estimate, stakeholders felt they were accurate enough to be actionable. The exercise highlighted information and practice gaps and promoted discussion on ways to improve UUIFB measurement and coverage, particularly of home births. Further follow up is needed to verify actions taken. The methodology produces useful data to help accelerate efforts to reduce maternal mortality.

Two practice models in one labor and delivery unit: association with cesarean delivery rates.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to examine the association between labor and delivery practice model and cesarean delivery rates at a community hospital. STUDY DESGIN: This was a retrospective cohort study of 9381 singleton live births at 1 community hospital, at which women were provided labor and delivery care under 1 of 2 distinct practice models: a traditional private practice model and a midwife-physician laborist practice model. Cesarean rates were compared by practice model, adjusting for potential sociodemographic and clinical confounders. Statistical comparisons were performed using the χ(2) test and multivariable logistical regression. RESULTS: Compared with women managed under the midwife/laborist model, women in the private model were significantly more likely to have a cesarean delivery (31.6% vs 17.3%; P < .001; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.73-2.58). Women with nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex gestations also were more likely to have a cesarean delivery if they were cared for in the private model (29.8% vs 15.9%; P < .001; aOR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.33-2.58) as were women who had a prior cesarean delivery (71.3% vs 41.4%; P < .001; aOR, 3.19; 95% CI, 1.74-5.88). CONCLUSION: In this community hospital setting, a midwife-physician laborist practice model was associated with lower cesarean rates than a private practice model.

Audit of a new model of birth care for women with low risk pregnancies in South Africa: the primary care onsite midwife-led birth unit (OMBU).

BACKGROUND: South Africa's health system is based on the primary care model in which low-risk maternity care is provided at community health centres and clinics, and 'high-risk' care is provided at secondary/tertiary hospitals. This model has the disadvantage of delays in the management of unexpected intrapartum complications in otherwise low-risk pregnancies, therefore, there is a need to re-evaluate the models of birth care in South Africa. To date, two primary care onsite midwife-led birth units (OMBUs) have been established in the Eastern Cape. OMBUs are similar to alongside midwifery units but have been adapted to the South African health system in that they are staffed, administered and funded by the primary care service. They allow women considered to be at 'low risk' to choose between birth in a community health centre and birth in the OMBU. METHODS: The purpose of this audit was to evaluate the impact of establishing an OMBU at Frere Maternity Hospital in East London, South Africa, on maternity services. We conducted an audit of routinely collected data from Frere Maternity Hospital over two 12 month periods, before and after the OMBU opened. Retrospectively retrieved data included the number of births, maternal and perinatal deaths, and mode of delivery. RESULTS: After the OMBU opened at Frere Maternity Hospital, the total number of births on the hospital premises increased by 16%. The total number of births in the hospital obstetric unit (OU) dropped by 9.3%, with 1611 births out of 7375 (22%) occurring in the new OMBU. The number of maternal and perinatal deaths was lower in the post-OMBU period compared with the pre-OMBU period. These improvements cannot be assumed to be the result of the intervention as observational studies are prone to bias. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality data should be interpreted with caution as other factors such as change in risk profile may have contributed to the death reductions. There are many additional advantages for women, hospital staff and primary care staff with this model, which may also be more cost-effective than the standard (freestanding) primary care model.

Development and validation of a national data registry for midwife-led births: the Midwives Alliance of North America Statistics Project 2.0 dataset.

INTRODUCTION: In 2004, the Midwives Alliance of North America's (MANA's) Division of Research developed a Web-based data collection system to gather information on the practices and outcomes associated with midwife-led births in the United States. This system, called the MANA Statistics Project (MANA Stats), grew out of a widely acknowledged need for more reliable data on outcomes by intended place of birth. This article describes the history and development of the MANA Stats birth registry and provides an analysis of the 2.0 dataset's content, strengths, and limitations. METHODS: Data collection and review procedures for the MANA Stats 2.0 dataset are described, along with methods for the assessment of data accuracy. We calculated descriptive statistics for client demographics and contributing midwife credentials, and assessed the quality of data by calculating point estimates, 95% confidence intervals, and kappa statistics for key outcomes on pre- and postreview samples of records. RESULTS: The MANA Stats 2.0 dataset (2004-2009) contains 24,848 courses of care, 20,893 of which are for women who planned a home or birth center birth at the onset of labor. The majority of these records were planned home births (81%). Births were attended primarily by certified professional midwives (73%), and clients were largely white (92%), married (87%), and college-educated (49%). Data quality analyses of 9932 records revealed no differences between pre- and postreviewed samples for 7 key benchmarking variables (kappa, 0.98-1.00). DISCUSSION: The MANA Stats 2.0 data were accurately entered by participants; any errors in this dataset are likely random and not systematic. The primary limitation of the 2.0 dataset is that the sample was captured through voluntary participation; thus, it may not accurately reflect population-based outcomes. The dataset's primary strength is that it will allow for the examination of research questions on normal physiologic birth and midwife-led birth outcomes by intended place of birth.

A midwifery-led in-hospital birth center within an academic medical center: successes and challenges.

The University of California San Diego Community Women's Health Program (CWHP) has emerged as a successful and sustainable coexistence model of women's healthcare. The cornerstone of this midwifery practice is California's only in-hospital birth center. Located within the medical center, this unique and physically separate birth center has been the site for more than 4000 births. With 10% cesarean delivery and 98% breast-feeding rates, it is an exceptional example of low-intervention care. Integrating this previously freestanding birth center into an academic center has brought trials of mistrust and ineffectual communication. Education, consistent leadership, and development of multidisciplinary guidelines aided in overcoming these challenges. This collaborative model provides a structure in which residents learn to be respectful consultants and appreciate differences in medical practice. The CWHP and its Birth Center illustrates that through persistence and flexibility a collaborative model of maternity services can flourish and not only positively influence new families but also future generations of providers.

Apgar score of 0 at 5 minutes and neonatal seizures or serious neurologic dysfunction in relation to birth setting.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the occurrence of 5-minute Apgar scores of 0 and seizures or serious neurologic dysfunction for 4 groups by birth setting and birth attendant (hospital physician, hospital midwife, free-standing birth center midwife, and home midwife) in the United States from 2007-2010. METHODS: Data from the United States Centers for Disease Control's National Center for Health Statistics birth certificate data files were used to assess deliveries by physicians and midwives in and out of the hospital for the 4-year period from 2007-2010 for singleton term births (≥37 weeks' gestation) and ≥2500 g. Five-minute Apgar scores of 0 and neonatal seizures or serious neurologic dysfunction were analyzed for 4 groups by birth setting and birth attendant (hospital physician, hospital midwife, freestanding birth center midwife, and home midwife). RESULTS: Home births (relative risk [RR], 10.55) and births in free-standing birth centers (RR, 3.56) attended by midwives had a significantly higher risk of a 5-minute Apgar score of 0 (P < .0001) than hospital births attended by physicians or midwives. Home births (RR, 3.80) and births in freestanding birth centers attended by midwives (RR, 1.88) had a significantly higher risk of neonatal seizures or serious neurologic dysfunction (P < .0001) than hospital births attended by physicians or midwives. CONCLUSION: The increased risk of 5-minute Apgar score of 0 and seizures or serious neurologic dysfunction of out-of-hospital births should be disclosed by obstetric practitioners to women who express an interest in out-of-hospital birth. Physicians should address patients' motivations for out-of-hospital delivery by continuously improving safe and compassionate care of pregnant, fetal, and neonatal patients in the hospital setting.

Are first-time mothers who plan home birth more likely to receive evidence-based care? A comparative study of home and hospital care provided by the same midwives.

BACKGROUND: "Place of birth" studies have consistently shown reduced rates of obstetric intervention in low-technology birth settings, but the extent to which the place of birth per se has influenced the outcomes remains unclear. The objective of this study was to compare birth outcomes for nulliparous women giving birth at home or in hospital, within the practice of the same midwives. METHODS: An innovative survey was generated following a focus group discussion that compared midwifery practice in different settings. Two groups of matched, low-risk first-time mothers, one group who planned to give birth at home and the other in hospital, were compared with respect to birth outcomes and midwifery care, and in relation to evidenced-based care guidelines for low-risk women. RESULTS: Survey data (response rate: 72%) revealed that women in the planned hospital birth group (n = 116) used more pharmacological pain management techniques, experienced more obstetric interventions, had a greater rate of postpartum hemorrhage, and achieved spontaneous vaginal birth less often than those in the planned home birth group (n = 109). All results were significant (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite care by the same midwives, first-time mothers who chose to give birth at home were not only more likely to give birth with no intervention but were also more likely to receive evidence-based care. (BIRTH 39:2 June 2012).