A ten-year study of midwife-led care at an Austrian tertiary care center: a retrospective analysis with special consideration of perineal trauma.

BACKGROUND: In contrast to other countries, Austria rarely offers alternative models to medical led-care. In an attempt to improve the facilities, a midwife-led care service was incorporated within the Department of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine. The aim of the present study was to analyze the maternal and neonatal outcomes of this approach. METHODS: Over a 10-years period, a total of 2123 low-risk women receiving midwife-led care were studied. Among these women, 148 required obstetric referral. Age- and parity matched low-risk women with spontaneous vaginal birth overseen by an obstetrician-led team were used as controls to ensure comparability of data. RESULTS: Midwife-led care management demonstrated a significant decrease in interventions, including oxytocin use (p < 0.001), medical pain relief (p < 0.001), and artificial rupture of membranes (ARM) (p < 0.01) as well as fewer episiotomies (p < 0.001), as compared with obstetrician-led care. Moreover, no negative effects on maternal or neonatal outcomes were observed. The mean length of the second stage of labor, rate of perineal laceration and APGAR scores did not differ significantly between the study groups (p > 0.05). Maternal age (p < 0.01), head diameter (p < 0.001), birth weight (p < 0.001) and the absence of midwife-led care (p < 0.05) were independent risk factors for perineal trauma. The overall referral rate was low (7%) and was most commonly caused by pathologic cardiotocography (CTG) and prolonged first- and second-stage of labor. Most referred mothers nevertheless had spontaneous deliveries (77%), and there were low rates of vaginal operative deliveries and cesarean sections (vacuum extraction, 16%; cesarean section, 7%). CONCLUSIONS: The present study confirmed that midwife-led care confers important benefits and causes no adverse outcomes for mother and child. The favorable obstetrical outcome clearly highlights the importance of the selection of obstetric care, on the basis of previous risk assessment. We therefore fully support the recommendation that midwife-led care be offered to all low-risk women and that mothers should be encouraged to use this option. However, to increase the numbers of midwife-led care deliveries in Austria in the future, it will be necessary to expand this care model and to establish new midwife-led care units within hospital facilities.

Influence of the mode of delivery on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a comparison between elective cesarean section and planned vaginal delivery in a low-risk obstetric population.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare the maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with elective cesarean sections with planned vaginal delivery. METHODS: A total of 178 women with elective cesarean section were compared with the next parity- and age-matched women presenting in spontaneous labor. Our analysis was restricted to a sample of low-risk obstetrical women. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were the main outcome variables of interest. Maternal morbidity outcome variables included wound infection, trauma, puerperal febrile morbidity and significant blood loss (>500 ml). Neonatal outcomes were captured by Apgar scores, cord pH as well as the occurrence of neonatal infections. RESULTS: A significantly higher rate of puerperal febrile morbidity (n = 46 vs. 14, p = 0.0001) and wound infections (n = 16 vs. 2, p = 0.0001) could be detected in the elective cesarean section group. Additionally, a significant blood loss > 500 ml was more than twice as frequent in the cesarean section group (n = 22 vs. 10, p = 0.03) with non-significant lower postpartum hemoglobin levels being observed (10.4 vs. 11.2 g/dL, p > 0.05). A significant increase for the use of iron supplementation (n = 146 vs. 122, p = 0.002), analgesics (n = 168 vs. 60, p = 0.0001) and antibiotics (n = 48 vs. 18, p = 0.0001) could be found in the puerperal period and hospital admission was prolonged in elective cesarean section (6.8 vs. 3.5 days, p = 0.0001). Additionally, problems in breastfeeding occurred more frequently in this group (n = 18 vs. 4, p = 0.002). Neonatal complications were generally low in both the groups with no significant differences being observed (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The increased maternal morbidity in elective cesarean section included puerperal febrile morbidity, wound infections as well as breastfeeding problems in the postpartum period. Women should be sufficiently counseled regarding the increased risk of these complications.

Influence of the birth attendant on maternal and neonatal outcomes during normal vaginal delivery: a comparison between midwife and physician management.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the obstetric outcome of low-risk maternity patients attended by certified midwives with that of low-risk maternity patients attended by obstetricians. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Obstetric outcome of 1352 midwife patients was compared with that of 1352 age- and parity-matched physician patients with normal spontaneous vaginal delivery at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the University Hospital Vienna during the period from January 1997 to July 2002. Our analysis was restricted to a sample of low-risk pregnant women. Women with medical or obstetric risk factors were excluded. RESULTS: A significant decrease in the use of oxytocin (p=0.0001) was observed in women who selected a midwife as their primary birth attendant compared with women in the physician group. In both groups most women gave birth in a supine position; however, significantly more alternative birth positions were used by midwife patients (p = 0.0001). Concerning perineal trauma, a significantly lower rate of episiotomies (p = 0.0001) and perineal tears of all degrees (p=0.006) were found in midwife patients. When analyzing severe postpartum hemorrhage and postpartum infections, there were no significant differences between the two groups (p > 0.05). Concerning neonatal outcome, there were no significant differences in APGAR score < 7 at 5 minutes (p > 0.05). Our data clearly show the ability of certified midwives to successfully provide prenatal care and delivery to low-risk maternity patients, with neonatal outcomes comparable to those of physician patients. The use of certified midwives supervised by obstetricians may provide the optimum model for perinatal care, particularly for those women who are low-risk maternity patients, leaving physicians free to attend to the high-risk elements of care.

Women's position during labour: influence on maternal and neonatal outcome.

AIM: To assess the maternal, perineal and neonatal outcomes of an upright position compared with a supine position during vaginal delivery, in terms of defined outcome variables. METHODS: This case-control study was carried out at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the University Hospital Vienna between 1997 and 2002. A total of 307 women who delivered in an upright position were enrolled in the study. Upright position was defined as free squatting and was also described as an alternative birth position. 307 controls, delivering in a supine position, were selected from the delivery database as the next parity-matched normal spontaneous vaginal delivery. Our analysis was restricted to a sample of women with a gestational age > 37 weeks, a normal sized fetus and a pregnancy with cephalic presentation. Women with medical or obstetric risk factors were excluded. RESULTS: A statistically significant decrease for the use of medical analgesia (p = 0.0001) and oxytocin (p = 0.001) was observed in women using the upright birth position. The length of the first and second stages of labour did not significantly differ between the two groups (p > 0.05). A significantly lower rate of episiotomy was detected in women who delivered in an upright position compared with women delivering supine (p = 0.0001). The frequency of perineal tears, and vaginal and labial trauma did not differ between the two groups (p > 0.05). When analysing maternal blood loss, no significant differences between the two groups were found (p > 0.05). No differences in APGAR score < 7 at 1 and 5 minutes or cord pH < 7.1 were observed (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate that labouring and delivering in an upright position is associated with beneficial effects such as a lower rate of episiotomy, and a reduced use of medical analgesia and oxytocin. In our opinion, the best recommendation is to give low-risk maternity patients the option of bearing in the mode that is most comfortable for them.

Traditional care of the perineum during birth. A prospective, randomized, multicenter study of 1,076 women.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of the traditional hands-on versus the innovative hands-poised method on the risk of perineal trauma during vaginal delivery and on neonatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: In a prospective, randomized, multicenter study, 1,161 of 1,505 women giving birth at the Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the University Hospital of Vienna and Semmelweis Women's Hospital, Vienna, between February and September 1999, were randomized into the trial. In the hands-on method, the left hand of the midwife puts pressure on the infant's head, and the right hand is placed against the perineum. In the hands-poised method, the midwife guides the parturient through the birth without touching the perineum, prepared to apply light pressure on the infant's head. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-seven of 574 women (32.5%) in the hands-on group and 180 of 502 women (35.8%) in the hands-poised group experienced perineal tears (P = .5). Sixteen women (2.7%) treated with the hands-on method developed third-degree perineal tears as compared with five women (0.9%) treated with the hands-poised method (P < .05). In the hands-on group, 103 women (17.9%) underwent episiotomy as compared with 51 cases (10.1%) in the hands-poised group (P < .01). No significant differences in neonatal outcomes were observed between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that a policy of hands-poised care is more suitable for preserving the perineum during birth and is a safe and effective birthing alternative for women.

Effects of water birth on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Our purpose was to assess benefits and possible disadvantages of water births and to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes with normal vaginal deliveries. METHODS: This case-controlled study was carried out between January 2000 and July 2001. A total of 140 women who wanted water births were enrolled into the study. Our analysis was restricted to a sample of women with a gestational age > 37 weeks, a normal sized foetus, a reactive admission cardiotocography, drainage of clear amniotic fluid (if the membranes were already ruptured) and a pregnancy with cephalic presentation. Women with medical or obstetric risk factors were excluded. 140 controls were selected from the delivery database as the next parity-matched normal spontaneous vaginal delivery. RESULTS: A statistically significant lower rate of episiotomies (p = 0.0001) and vaginal trauma (p = 0.03) was detected in the group assigned to water birth, whereas the frequency of perineal tears and labial trauma remained similar in both groups (p > 0.05). A statistically significant decrease in the use of medical analgesia (p = 0.0001) and oxytocin (p = 0.002) was observed in women who had water births. A trend towards a reduction of the length of the first stage of labour was only observed in primiparous women bearing in water, but this reduction did not reach statistically significance (p > 0.05). Manual placenta removal (p = 0.017), severe postpartum haemorrhage (blood loss > 500 ml; p = 0.002) and maternal infection rate (p = 0.03) were statistically significant lower in women who delivered in water. When analysing the postpartum haemoglobin, no statistically significant differences could be observed between the two groups (p > 0.05). No statistically significant differences were detected for neonatal parameters (p > 0.05) between women who had had water births and those choosing conventional vaginal delivery.