Intrapartum and neonatal mortality in low-risk term women in midwife-led care and obstetrician-led care at the onset of labor: A national matched cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Midwife-led models of care have been the subject of debate for many years. We conducted a study to compare intrapartum and neonatal mortality rates in midwife-led (primary) vs obstetrician-led (secondary) care at the onset of labor in low-risk term women. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed an unmatched and a propensity score matched cohort study using data from the national perinatal audit registry (PAN) and from the national perinatal registry (PERINED) of the Netherlands. We included women with singleton pregnancies (without congenital anomalies or antepartum fetal death) who gave birth at term between 2010 and 2012. We excluded the following major risk factors: non-vertex position of the fetus, previous cesarean birth, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, prolonged rupture of membranes (≥24 hours), vaginal bleeding in the second half of pregnancy, nonspontaneous start of labor and post-term pregnancy (≥42 weeks). The primary outcome was intrapartum or neonatal mortality up to 28 days after birth. Secondary outcome measures were mode of delivery and a 5-minute Apgar score <7. RESULTS: We included 259 211 women. There were 100/206 642 (0.48‰) intrapartum and neonatal deaths in the midwife group and 23/52 569 (0.44‰) in the obstetrician group (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% CI 0.70-1.74). Propensity score matched analysis showed mortality rates of 0.49‰ (26/52 569) among women in midwife-led care and 0.44‰ (23/52 569) for women in obstetrician-led care (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.65-1.98). In the midwife group there were significantly lower rates of vaginal instrumental deliveries (8.4% vs 13.0%; matched OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.62-0.67) and intrapartum cesarean sections (2.6% vs 8.2%; matched OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.30-0.34), and fewer neonates with low Apgar scores (<7 after 5 minutes) (0.69% vs 1.11%; matched OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.53-0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Among low-risk term women, there were comparable intrapartum and neonatal mortality rates for women starting labor in midwife-led vs obstetrician-led care, with lower intervention rates and fewer low Apgar scores in the midwife group.

Public provision of emergency obstetric care: a case study in two districts of Pakistan.

OBJECTIVES: Pakistan is one out of five countries where together half of the global neonatal deaths occur. As the provision of services and facilities is one of the key elements vital to reducing this rate as well as the maternal mortality rate, this study investigates the status of the delivery of essential obstetric care provided by the public health sector in two districts in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in 2015 aiming to highlight areas where critical improvements are needed. SETTING: We analysed data from a survey of 22 primary and secondary healthcare facilities as well as 85 community midwives (CMWs) in Haripur and Nowshera districts. PARTICIPANTS: Using a structured questionnaire we evaluated the performance of emergency obstetric care (EmOC) signal functions and patient statistics in public health facilities. Also, 102 CMWs were interviewed about working hours, basic and specialised delivery service provision, referral system and patient statistics. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We investigate the public provision of emergency obstetric care using seven key medical services identified by the United Nations (UN). RESULTS: Deliveries by public health cadres account for about 30% of the total number of births in these districts. According to the UN benchmark, only a small fraction of basic EmOC (2/18) and half of the comprehensive EmOC (2/4) facilities of the recommended minimum number were available to the population in both districts. Only a minority of health facilities and CMWs carry out several signal functions. Only 8% of the total births in one of the study districts are performed in public EmOC health facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Both districts show a significant shortage of available public EmOC service provisions. Development priorities need to be realigned to improve the availability, accessibility and quality of EmOC service provisions by the public health sector alongside with existing activities to increase institutional births.

Birth Outcomes for Midwifery Clients Who Begin Postdates Induction of Labour Under Midwifery Care Compared With Those Who Are Transferred to Obstetrical Care.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to compare clinical outcomes of midwifery clients who had postdates induction of labour with oxytocin under midwifery care with those transferred to obstetrical care. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using 2006-2009 Ontario Midwifery Program data. All low-risk Ontario midwifery clients who had postdates oxytocin induction were included. Groups were established according to the planned care provider at onset of induction. The primary outcome was Cesarean section (CS). The secondary outcome was a composite of stillbirth, neonatal death, or serious morbidity. Other outcomes included assisted vaginal delivery, pharmaceutical pain relief, and use of episiotomy. We stratified by parity and used logistic regression to conduct analyses controlling for maternal age (Canadian Task Force Classification II-2). RESULTS: For nulliparas, postdates induction with oxytocin under midwifery care decreased the odds of interventions including assisted vaginal delivery (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.48-0.97), episiotomy (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.34-0.70), and pharmaceutical pain relief (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.36-0.90), with no difference in odds of neonatal morbidity or mortality (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.25-2.04) when compared with induction under obstetrical care. For multiparas, the use of pharmaceutical pain relief was significantly lower in the midwifery group (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.44-0.96). CONCLUSION: For low-risk midwifery clients at 41 weeks or more gestation, the odds of Caesarean section and neonatal morbidity and mortality are similar when induction of labour with oxytocin under the care of a midwife is compared with induction of labour under obstetrical care, and rates of intervention are decreased.

Getting the first birth right: A retrospective study of outcomes for low-risk primiparous women receiving standard care versus midwifery model of care in the same tertiary hospital.

BACKGROUND: There is national and international concern for increasing obstetric intervention in childbirth and rising caesarean section rates. Repeat caesarean section is a major contributing factor, making primiparous women an important target for strategies to reduce unnecessary intervention and surgeries in childbirth. AIM: The aim was to compare outcomes for a cohort of low risk primiparous women who accessed a midwifery continuity model of care with those who received standard public care in the same tertiary hospital. METHODS: A retrospective comparative cohort study design was implemented drawing on data from two databases held by a tertiary hospital for the period 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2011. Categorical data were analysed using the chi-squared statistic and Fisher's exact test. Continuous data were analysed using Student's t-test. Comparisons are presented using unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and p-values with significance set at 0.05. RESULTS: Data for 426 women experiencing continuity of midwifery care and 1220 experiencing standard public care were compared. The study found increased rates of normal vaginal birth (57.7% vs. 48.9% p=0.002) and spontaneous vaginal birth (38% vs. 22.4% p=<0.001) and decreased rates of instrumental birth (23.5% vs. 28.5% p=0.050) and caesarean sections (18.8% vs. 22.5% p=0.115) in the midwifery continuity cohort. There were also fewer interventions in this group. No differences were found in neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Strategies for reducing caesarean section rates and interventions in childbirth should focus on primiparous women as a priority. This study demonstrates the effectiveness of continuity midwifery models, suggesting that this is an important strategy for improving outcomes in this population.

Impact of maternity care policy in Catalonia: a retrospective cross-sectional study of service delivery in public and private hospitals.

BACKGROUND: As a result of the growing number of interventions that are now performed in the context of maternity care, health authorities have begun to examine the possible repercussions for service provision and for maternal and neonatal health. In Spain the Strategy Paper on Normal Childbirth was published in 2008, and since then the authorities in Catalonia have sought to implement its recommendations. This paper reviews the current provision of maternity care in Catalonia. METHODS: This was a descriptive study. Hospitals were grouped according to their source of funding (public or private) and were stratified (across four strata) on the basis of the annual number of births recorded within their respective maternity service. Data regarding the distribution of obstetric professionals were taken from an official government survey of hospitals published in 2010. The data on obstetric interventions (caesarean, use of forceps, vacuum or non-specified instruments) performed in 2007, 2010 and 2012 were obtained by consulting discharge records of 44 public and 20 private hospitals, which together provide care in 98% of all births in Catalonia. Proportions and confidence intervals were calculated for each intervention performed in all full-term (37-42 weeks) singleton births. RESULTS: Analysis of staff profiles according to the stratification of hospitals showed that almost all the hospitals had more obstetricians than midwives among their maternity care staff. Public hospitals performed fewer caesareans [range between 19.20% (CI 18.84-19.55) and 28.14% (CI 27.73-28.54)] than did private hospitals [range between 32.21% (CI 31.78-32.63) and 39.43% (CI 38.98-39.87)]. The use of forceps has decreased in public hospitals. The use of a vacuum extractor has increased and is more common in private hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Caesarean section is the most common obstetric intervention performed during full-term singleton births in Catalonia. The observed trend is stable in the group of public hospitals, but shows signs of a rise among private institutions. The number of caesareans performed in accredited public hospitals covers a limited range with a stable trend. Among public hospitals the highest rate of caesareans is found in non-accredited hospitals with a lower annual number of births.

Caseload midwifery compared to standard or private obstetric care for first time mothers in a public teaching hospital in Australia: a cross sectional study of cost and birth outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In many countries midwives act as the main providers of care for women throughout pregnancy, labour and birth. In our large public teaching hospital in Australia we restructured the way midwifery care is offered and introduced caseload midwifery for one third of women booked at the hospital. We then compared the costs and birth outcomes associated with caseload midwifery compared to the two existing models of care, standard hospital care and private obstetric care. METHODS: We undertook a cross sectional study examining the risk profile, birth outcomes and cost of care for women booked into one of the three available models of care in a tertiary teaching hospital in Australia between July 1st 2009 December 31st 2010. To control for differences in population or case mix we described the outcomes for a cohort of low risk first time mothers known as the 'standard primipara'. RESULTS: Amongst the 1,379 women defined as 'standard primipara' there were significant differences in birth outcome. These first time 'low risk' mothers who received caseload care were more likely to have a spontaneous onset of labour and an unassisted vaginal birth 58.5% in MGP compared to 48.2% for Standard hospital care and 30.8% with Private obstetric care (p < 0.001). They were also significantly less likely to have an elective caesarean section 1.6% with MGP versus 5.3% with Standard care and 17.2% with private obstetric care (p < 0.001). From the public hospital perspective, over one financial year the average cost of care for the standard primipara in MGP was $3903.78 per woman. This was $1375.45 less per woman than those receiving Private obstetric care and $1590.91 less than Standard hospital care per woman (p < 0.001). Similar differences in cost were found in favour of MGP for all women in the study who received caseload care. CONCLUSIONS: Cost reduction appears to be achieved through reorganising the way care is delivered in the public hospital system with the introduction of Midwifery Group Practice or caseload care. The study also highlights the unexplained clinical variation that exists between the three models of care in Australia.

Amniotomy and cord prolapse.

Research shows that artificially rupturing the amniotic sac (amniotomy) can cause umbilical cord prolapse. Amniotomy became a routine part of obstetrical care with the introduction of active management, without evidence of benefit. In the 30 years since active management was introduced, the rate at which amniotomy causes umbilical cord prolapse has not been directly studied. Two controlled studies from Turkey from 2002 and 2006 are the only published studies that provide enough data to extract the rate at which cord prolapse follows amniotomy. They show that 1 cord prolapse results from every 300 amniotomies (0.3%). There is data suggesting amniotomy may also increase neonatal GBS infection, maternal pain and fetal blood loss if placental blood vessels are punctured.

Effects of continuity of care by a primary midwife (caseload midwifery) on caesarean section rates in women of low obstetric risk: the COSMOS randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether primary midwife care (caseload midwifery) decreases the caesarean section rate compared with standard maternity care. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Tertiary-care women's hospital in Melbourne, Australia. POPULATION: A total of 2314 low-risk pregnant women. METHODS: Women randomised to caseload received antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum care from a primary midwife with some care by 'back-up' midwives. Women randomised to standard care received either midwifery or obstetric-trainee care with varying levels of continuity, or community-based general practitioner care. PRIMARY OUTCOME: caesarean birth. Secondary outcomes included instrumental vaginal births, analgesia, perineal trauma, induction of labour, infant admission to special/neonatal intensive care, gestational age, Apgar scores and birthweight. RESULTS: In total 2314 women were randomised-1156 to caseload and 1158 to standard care. Women allocated to caseload were less likely to have a caesarean section (19.4% versus 24.9%; risk ratio [RR] 0.78; 95% CI 0.67-0.91; P = 0.001); more likely to have a spontaneous vaginal birth (63.0% versus 55.7%; RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.06-1.21; P < 0.001); less likely to have epidural analgesia (30.5% versus 34.6%; RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.79-0.996; P = 0.04) and less likely to have an episiotomy (23.1% versus 29.4%; RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.67-0.92; P = 0.003). Infants of women allocated to caseload were less likely to be admitted to special or neonatal intensive care (4.0% versus 6.4%; RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.44-0.90; P = 0.01). No infant outcomes favoured standard care. CONCLUSION: In settings with a relatively high baseline caesarean section rate, caseload midwifery for women at low obstetric risk in early pregnancy shows promise for reducing caesarean births.

Midwives, labour induction and the Wooden Spoon award Part 2.

Rates of labour induction without clear medical indication have risen exponentially. This trend has not been without consequence of increased perinatal mortality and morbidity. Midwives must understand the importance of educating pregnant women and other obstetrical providers, about the risks associated with labour induction. Maternal-child health policy that minimises unnecessary interventions is urgently needed and prevention strategies are described in the second part of this article. Midwives are challenged to consider their role in reducing unnecessary labour inductions in a rapidly changing birth culture reflecting high intervention.

Midwives, labour induction and the Wooden Spoon award part I.

Labour induction rates have rocketed, largely due to consumer demands and provider convenience. This increase has been a significant factor in rapidly increasing caesarean birth rates and adverse perinatal outcomes. It is important that midwives understand the risks associated with labour induction. The article overviews those factors contributing to increasing induction rates and the associated risks. Midwives are challenged to consider the evidence for an intervention contributing to a cascade of birth interventions.

[National survey on midwifery practice in health facilities in China].

OBJECTIVE: To understand the use of midwifery practice in health facilities and get the baseline data for future action. METHODS: A national survey was conducted in 2003. Questionnaires were sent to 887 sampled health facilities in 31 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities. Midwifery practice data in year 2002 were collected and a descriptive study was done based on the data. RESULTS: The average proportion of cesarean section was 38.0%. The proportion of episiotomy per 100 vaginal deliveries was 44.9%. The percentage of births delivered by vacuum extraction was 3.6% and the percentage was 1.9% by forceps. The percentages of use of breech extraction and of internal version to vaginal delivery were 1.4% and 0.2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The appropriate use of midwifery practice is not fully guaranteed, thus national regulations should be made to standardize midwifery practice in health facilities imminently.

[German-speaking midwifes prefer vaginal mode of delivery to elective Caesarean]. / Hebammen präferieren vaginale Geburt statt Wunschsektio1.

Increasing ceasarean section rates are a world wide concern in obstetrics. One of the latest contributing factors is the elective caesarean section in uncomplicated singleton pregnancy at term. The preference for this mode of delivery was primarily brought forward by obstetric practitioners (Al Mufty, McCarthy, Fisk 1996). A questionnaire, which mainly aimed to ask germanspeaking midwifes in Austria, Germany and Switzerland about their personal choice of delivery mode, was included in one of the issues of the German-language midwifery journal "Die Hebamme". This questionnaire contained 5 half-closed/half open questions describing specific obstetric occurrences. The midwifes were asked to express their preferred mode of delivery and describe their reason for choosing. 446 questionnaires (12 %) were returned. The majority (100 %) of the german speaking midwifes preferred a normal vaginal delivery in an uncomplicated singleton pregnancy at term with a child in cephalic presentation. The rating was about the same (97 %) in the presence of general risk factors which don't indicate a primary caesarean section. Breech presentation and macrosomia are a matter of concern to the midwifes. Midwifes arguing for a first child in breech presentation or with macrosomia > 4.5 kg vote highly significantly more frequently for elective caesarean section than midwifes arguing for at least the second child. The first-rate reasons for the preference of vaginal delivery concern the natural and physiological way of delivery, the personal experience of delivery, the higher risks of caesarean section and the possibility of a later caesarean section in case of fetal distress during first or second stage of labour. Concerns are expressed about the maintenance of competence amongst practitioners, thus influencing the choice of mode of delivery in obstetrics.

Antenatal perineal massage and subsequent perineal outcomes: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effects of antenatal perineal massage on subsequent perineal outcomes at delivery. DESIGN: A randomised, single-blind prospective study. SETTING: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Watford General Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Eight hundred and sixty-one nulliparous women with singleton pregnancy and fulfilling criteria for entry to the trial between June 1994 and October 1995. RESULTS: Comparison of the group assigned to massage with the group assigned to no massage showed a reduction of 6.1% in second or third degree tears or episiotomies. This corresponded to tear rates of 75.1% in the no-massage group and 69.0% in the massage group (P = 0.073). There was a corresponding reduction in instrumental deliveries from 40.9% to 34.6% (P = 0.094). After adjustment for mother's age and infant's birthweight these reductions achieved statistical significance (P = 0.024 and P = 0.034, respectively). Analysis by mother's age showed a much larger benefit due to massage in those aged 30 and over and a smaller benefit in those under 30. CONCLUSION: Antenatal perineal massage appears to have some benefit in reducing second or third degree tears or episiotomies and instrumental deliveries. This effect was stronger in the age group 30 years and above.