¿Es seguro el parto planificado en casa para las gestantes de bajo riesgo? / Is planned home birth safe for low-risk pregnant women?

Objetivo: Identificar la evidencia sobre la seguridad del parto en casa en comparación con el parto en hospital en gestantes de bajo riesgo en los países desarrollados.Material y métodos: Para este artículo de revisión se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en las bases de datos Pubmed, Cochrane Library Plus, Embase, Web of Science y Google Scholar. La calidad metodológica de los artículos encontrados se valoró mediante dos instrumentos: el ResQu Index y la escala NOS.Resultados: Se identificaron y evaluaron 48 estudios; solo 23 pasaron a formar parte de la revisión. Se compararon los resultados maternos y neonatales según la localización del parto en los países desarrollados. La muestra total fue de 1881156 partos en casa y de 6835189 partos hospitalarios. Tras aplicar la escala de calidad metodológica ResQu Index, se valoró que 22 estudios eran de calidad alta y 1 de calidad moderada. Con la aplicación de la escala NOS, 9 estudios obtuvieron una puntuación de 8/9, 6 estudios de 7/9, 7 estudios de 6/9 y un único estudio de 4/9. Fueron en total 15 estudios de cohortes retrospectivos y 7 prospectivos. El artículo de calidad moderada fue incluido en la revisión para tener una muestra mayor.Conclusiones: Las mujeres que planificaron su parto en casa, con respecto a las que decidieron tener un parto en el hospital, tenían una mayor probabilidad de presentar un parto normal, menor tasa de episiotomía, parto instrumental y cesárea, hemorragia posparto, desgarros perineales complicados y menor demanda de epidural. Además, no se observó una mayor morbimortalidad neonatal: no hubo diferencias en la tasa de mortalidad perinatal ni en el test de Apgar, aunque hubo menor probabilidad de ingreso en la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos Neonatal. (AU)

Objective: To identify the evidence on the safety of home versus hospital delivery in low-risk pregnant women in developed countries.Material and methods: Review. A bibliographic search was carried out in the Pubmed, Cochrane Library Plus, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases. The methodological quality of the articles found was assessed using two instruments: ResQu Index and NOS scale.Results: Forty-eight studies were identified and evaluated; only 23 were included in the review. There were 15 retrospective and 7 prospective cohort studies. They compared maternal and neonatal outcomes by delivery location in developed countries. The total sample was 1,881,156 home births and 6,835,189 hospital births. After applying the ResQu Index methodological quality scale, 22 studies were of high quality and 1 was of moderate quality. With the application of the NOS scale, 9 studies scored 8/9, 6 studies 7/9, 7 studies 6/9 and a single study 4/9.Conclusions: Women who planned home birth had increased likelihood of normal delivery, lower rate of episiotomy, instrumental delivery and cesarean section, postpartum hemorrhage, complicated perineal tears, and reduced demand for epidural over hospital birth. In addition, no increased neonatal morbidity and mortality was observed: there was no difference in the perinatal mortality rate or in the Apgar test, although there was a lower probability of admission to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. (AU)

Why do women attend antenatal care but give birth at home? a qualitative study in a rural Ghanaian District.

BACKGROUND: The Sustainable Development Goal Three has prioritised reducing maternal, under-5 and neonatal mortalities as core global health policy objectives. The place, where expectant mothers choose to deliver their babies has a direct effect on maternal health outcomes. In sub-Saharan Africa, existing literature has shown that some women attend antenatal care during pregnancy but choose to deliver their babies at home. Using the Andersen and Newman Behavioural Model, this study explored the institutional and socio-cultural factors motivating women to deliver at home after attending antenatal care. METHODS: A qualitative, exploratory, cross-sectional design was deployed. Data were collected from a purposive sample of 23 women, who attended antenatal care during pregnancy but delivered their babies at home, 10 health workers and 17 other community-level stakeholders. The data were collected through semi-structured interviews, which were audio-recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. RESULTS: In line with the Andersen and Newman Model, the study discovered that traditional and religious belief systems about marital fidelity and the role of the gods in childbirth, myths about consequences of facility-based delivery, illiteracy, and weak women's autonomy in healthcare decision-making, predisposed women to home delivery. Home delivery was also enabled by inadequate midwives at health facilities, the unfriendly attitude of health workers, hidden charges for facility-based delivery, and long distances to healthcare facilities. The fear of caesarean section, also created the need for women who attended antenatal care to deliver at home. CONCLUSION: The study has established that socio-cultural and institutional level factors influenced women's decisions to deliver at home. We recommend a general improvement in the service delivery capacity of health facilities, and the implementation of collaborative educational and women empowerment programmes by stakeholders, to strengthen women's autonomy and reshape existing traditional and religious beliefs facilitating home delivery.

Home delivery practice and its predictors in South Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: Institutional delivery is one of the key interventions to reduce maternal death. It ensures safe birth, reduces both actual and potential complications, and decreases maternal and newborn death. However, a significant proportion of deliveries in developing countries like Ethiopia are home deliveries and are not attended by skilled birth attendants. We investigated the prevalence and determinants of home delivery in three districts in Sidama administration, Southern Ethiopia. METHODS: Between 15-29 October 2018, a cross sectional survey of 507 women who gave birth within the past 12 months was conducted using multi-stage sampling. Sociodemographic and childbirth related data were collected using structured, interviewer administered tools. Univariate and backward stepwise multivariate logistic regression models were run to assess independent predictors of home delivery. RESULTS: The response rate was 97.6% (495). In the past year, 22.8% (113), 95% confidence interval (CI) (19%, 27%) gave birth at home. Rural residence, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 13.68 (95%CI:4.29-43.68); no maternal education, aOR = 20.73(95%CI:6.56-65.54) or completed only elementary school, aOR = 7.62(95% CI: 2.58-22.51); unknown expected date of delivery, aOR = 1.81(95% CI: 1.03-3.18); being employed women (those working for wage and self-employed), aOR = 2.79 (95%CI:1.41-5.52) and not planning place of delivery, aOR = 26.27, (95%CI: 2.59-266.89) were independently associated with place of delivery. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of institutional delivery in the study area has improved from the 2016 Ethiopian Demography Health Survey report of 26%. Uneducated, rural and employed women were more likely to deliver at home. Strategies should be designed to expand access to and utilization of institutional delivery services among the risky groups.

Out-of-Hospital Birth.

Since the 1970s, most births in the United States have been planned to occur in a hospital. However, a small percentage of Americans choose to give birth outside of a hospital. The number of out-of-hospital births has increased, with one in every 61 U.S. births (1.64%) occurring out of the hospital in 2018. Out-of-hospital (or community) birth can be planned or unplanned. Of those that are planned, most occur at home and are assisted by midwives. Patients who choose a planned community birth do so for multiple reasons. International observational studies that demonstrate comparable outcomes between planned out-of-hospital and planned hospital birth may not be generalizable to the United States. Most U.S. studies have found statistically significant increases in perinatal mortality and neonatal morbidity for home birth compared with hospital birth. Conversely, planned community birth is associated with decreased odds of obstetric interventions, including cesarean delivery. Perinatal outcomes for community birth may be improved with appropriate selection of low-risk, vertex, singleton, term pregnancies in patients who have not had a previous cesarean delivery. A qualified, licensed maternal and newborn health professional who is integrated into a maternity health care system should attend all planned community births. Family physicians are uniquely poised to provide counseling to patients and their families about the risks and benefits associated with community birth, and they may be the first physicians to evaluate and treat newborns delivered outside of a hospital.

Part a casa. Hi estem preparats? / No disponible

No disponible

What influences home delivery among women who live in urban areas? Analysis of 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey data.

BACKGROUND: In Ghana, home delivery among women in urban areas is relatively low compared to rural areas. However, the few women who deliver at home in urban areas still face enormous risk of infections and death, just like those in rural areas. The present study investigated the factors associated with home delivery among women who live in urban areas in Ghana. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data for this study was obtained from the 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey. We used data of 1,441 women who gave birth in the 5 years preceding the survey and were dwelling in urban areas. By the use of Stata version 14.2, we conducted both descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: We found that 7.9% of women in urban areas in Ghana delivered at home. The study revealed that, compared to women who lived in the Northern region, women who lived in the Brong Ahafo region [AOR = 0.38, CI = 0.17-0.84] were less likely to deliver at home. The likelihood of home delivery was high among women in the poorest wealth quintile [AOR = 2.02, CI = 1.06-3.86], women who professed other religions [AOR = 3.45; CI = 1.53-7.81], and those who had no antenatal care visits [AOR = 7.17; 1.64-31.3]. Conversely, the likelihood of home delivery was lower among women who had attained secondary/higher education [AOR = 0.30; 0.17-0.53], compared to those with no formal education. CONCLUSION: The study identified region of residence, wealth quintile, religion, antenatal care visits, and level of education as factors associated with home delivery among urban residents in Ghana. Therefore, health promotion programs targeted at home delivery need to focus on these factors. We also recommend that a qualitative study should be conducted to investigate the factors responsible for the differences in home delivery in terms of region, as the present study could not do so.

Prevalence of Home Births and Associated Risk Profile and Maternal Characteristics, 2016-2018.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of pregnancies that meet the low-risk criteria for planned home births and describe geographic and maternal characteristics of home births compared with hospital births. METHODS: Data from the 2016-2018 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS), a survey among women with recent live births, and linked birth certificate variables were used to calculate the prevalence of home births that were considered low-risk. We defined low-risk pregnancy as a term (between 37 and 42 weeks of gestation), singleton gestation with a birth weight within the 10th-90th percentile mean for gestational age (as a proxy for estimated fetal size appropriate for gestational age), without prepregnancy or gestational diabetes or hypertension, and no vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). We also calculated the prevalence of home and hospital births by site and maternal characteristics. Weighted prevalence estimates are presented with 95% CIs to identify differences. RESULTS: The prevalence of home births was 1.1% (unweighted n=1,034), ranging from 0.1% (Alabama) to 2.6% (Montana); 64.9% of the pregnancies were low-risk. Among the 35.1% high-risk home births, 39.5% of neonates were large for gestational age, 20.5% of neonates were small for gestational age, 17.1% of the women had diabetes, 16.9% of the women had hypertension, 10.6% of the deliveries were VBACs, and 10.1% of the deliveries were preterm. A significantly higher percentage of women with home births than hospital births were non-Hispanic White (83.9% vs 56.5%), aged 35 years or older (24.0% vs 18.1%), with less than a high school-level of education (24.6% vs 12.2%), and reported no health insurance (27.0% vs 1.9%). A significantly lower percentage of women with home births than hospital births initiated prenatal visits in the first trimester (66.9% vs 87.1%), attended a postpartum visit (80.1% vs 90.0%), and most often laid their infants on their backs for sleep (59.3% vs 79.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the risk profile, geographic distribution, and characteristics of women with home births can guide efforts around safe birthing practices.

Home births: A growing phenomenon with potential risks.

Home birth is a controversial issue that raises safety concerns for paediatricians and obstetricians. Hospital birth was the cornerstone to reduce maternal and neonatal mortality. This reduction in mortality has resulted in considering pregnancy and childbirth as a safe procedure, which, together with a greater social awareness of the need for the humanisation of these processes, have led to an increase in the demand for home birth. Studies from countries such as Australia, the Netherlands, and United Kingdom show that home birth can provide advantages to the mother and the newborn. It needs to be provided with sufficient material means, and should be attended by trained and accredited professionals, and needs to be perfectly coordinated with the hospital obstetrics and neonatology units, in order to guarantee its safety. Therefore, in our environment, there are no safety data or sufficient scientific evidence to support home births at present.

(In)seguridad del parto en el domicilio: una revisión bibliográfica / (Un)safety of home birth: a literature review

OBJETIVO: Analizar el concepto de seguridad sobre el parto en el domicilio en la literatura científica. METODOLOGÍA: Revisión bibliográfica en 5 bases de datos, PubMed, Scopus, WoS, CINAHL y Cochrane Library, con 3 combinaciones booleanas: «patient safety AND home childbirth»; «safety AND home childbirth»; «risk AND home childbirth». RESULTADOS: De un total de 4.647 artículos, 30 cumplían con los criterios de inclusión. Categorías principales: 1) riesgo de muerte; 2) escenario del parto; 3) modelo consensuado. CONCLUSIONES: La literatura científica que aborda el concepto de seguridad del parto en el domicilio está atravesada por nociones de riesgo y mortalidad. Ambas son determinantes al momento de tomar la decisión y decretar un lugar idóneo para el nacimiento. No obstante, la evidencia científica determina estándares de seguridad para llevar a cabo el parto en el domicilio: bajo riesgo obstétrico, acompañamiento de una matrona experta y un sistema de transferencia sanitaria bien integrado

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the concept of home birth safety in the scientific literature.METHODOLOGY: Bibliographic review in five databases: PubMed, Scopus, WoS, CINAHL and Cochrane Library, with three Boolean combinations: «patient safety AND home childbirth»; «safety AND home childbirth»; «risk AND home childbirth». RESULTS: From a total of 4.647 articles, 30 were selected that met the inclusion criteria, emerging three main categories: 1) risk of death; 2) childbirth scenario; 3) model agreed upon. CONCLUSIONS: The scientific literature that addresses the concept of home birth safety is mainly traversed by risk and mortality. Both are decisive when making the decision and decree an ideal place for the birth to take place. However, the scientific evidence determines the conditions to carry out the delivery at home under safety standards, these are: under obstetric risk, the accompaniment of an expert midwife and a health transfer system well integrated to the home

Perceptions and practices related to birthweight in rural Bangladesh: Implications for neonatal health programs in low- and middle-income settings.

BACKGROUND: Globally, low birthweight (LBW) infants (<2.5 kilograms) contribute up to 80% of neonatal mortality. In Bangladesh, approximately 62% of all births occur at home and therefore, weighing newborns immediately after birth is not feasible. Thus, estimates of birthweight in Bangladesh are mostly obtained based on maternal perception of the newborn's birth size. Little is known about how birthweight is perceived in rural communities, and whether families associate birthweight with newborn's health status. Our objective was to explore families' perceptions of newborn's birthweight, and preventive and care practices for a LBW newborn in rural Bangladesh. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study in two rural settings of Bangladesh, including 32 in-depth interviews (11 with pregnant women, 12 with recently delivered women, 4 with husbands whose wives were pregnant or had a recent birth, 5 with mothers-in-law whose daughters-in-law were pregnant or had a recent birth), 2 focus group discussions with husbands and 4 key-informant interviews with community health workers. We used thematic analysis to analyse the data. RESULTS: Most participants did not consider birthweight a priority for assessing a newborn's health status, although there was a desire for a healthy newborn. Recognition of different categories of birthweight was subjective and often included several physical descriptors including birth size of the newborn. LBW was not considered as a criterion of a newborn's illness unless the newborn appeared unwell. Maternal poor nutrition, inadequate diet in pregnancy, anaemia, illness during pregnancy, short stature, twin births and influence of supernatural spirit were identified as the major causes of LBW. Women's preventive practices for LBW or small newborns were predominantly constrained by a lack of awareness of birthweight and fear of caesarean section. As an effort to avoid caesarean section during birth, several women tended to perform potentially harmful practices in order to give birth to a small size newborn; such as avoiding nutritious food and eating less in pregnancy. Common practices to treat a LBW or small newborn who appeared ill included breastfeeding, feeding animal milk, feeding sugary water, feeding formula, oil massage, keeping the small newborn warm and seeking care from formal and informal care providers including a spiritual leader. Maternal lack of decision-making power, financial constraint, home birth and superstition were the major challenges to caring for a LBW newborn. CONCLUSION: Birthweight was not well-understood in the rural community, which highlighted substantial challenges to the prevention and care practices of LBW newborns. Community-level health education is needed to promote awareness related to the recognition of birthweight in rural settings.

Trends and state variations in out-of-hospital births in the United States, 2004-2017.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital births have been increasing in the United States, although past studies have found wide variations between states. Our purpose was to examine trends in out-of-hospital births, the risk profile of these births, and state differences in women's access to these births. METHODS: National birth certificate data from 2004 to 2017 were analyzed. Newly available national data on method of payment for the delivery (private insurance, Medicaid, self-pay) were used to measure access to out-of-hospital birth options. RESULTS: After a gradual decline from 1990 to 2004, the number of out-of-hospital births increased from 35 578 in 2004 to 62 228 in 2017. In 2017, 1 of every 62 births in the United States was an out-of-hospital birth (1.61%). Home births increased by 77% from 2004 to 2017, whereas birth center births more than doubled. Out-of-hospital births were more common in the Pacific Northwest and less common in the southeastern states such as Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Women with planned home and birth center births were less likely to have a number of population characteristics associated with poor pregnancy outcomes, including teen births, smoking during pregnancy, obesity, and preterm, low birthweight, and multiple births. More than 2/3 of planned home births were self-paid, compared with 1/3 of birth center and just 3% of hospital births, with large variations by state. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of insurance or Medicaid coverage is an important limiting factor for women desiring out-of-hospital birth in most states. Recent increases in out-of-hospital births despite important limiting factors highlight the strong motivation of some women to choose out-of-hospital birth.

Planned home deliveries in Finland, 1996-2013.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate trends and perinatal outcomes of planned home deliveries in Finland. STUDY DESIGN: All infants born in 1996-2013, excluding those born preterm, by operative delivery, and without information on birth mode or gestational age, were studied. The study group included 170 infants born at home as planned, 720,047 infants born at hospital were controls. RESULT: The rate of planned home deliveries increased from 8.3 to 39.4 per 100,000. In the study group 63%, containing two perinatal deaths, were not low-risk pregnancies according to national guidelines. The rate of hypothermia, asphyxia, and need of invasive ventilation was increased in low-risk home deliveries. One infant had a major congenital malformation. Maternal outcomes were favorable. CONCLUSION: The rate of planned home deliveries increased. Guidelines for low-risk deliveries were not followed in a majority of cases, including two perinatal deaths. Even in low-risk home deliveries, the neonatal morbidity appeared to be increased.

Trends in characteristics of women choosing contraindicated home births.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) contraindicated home births and the women who are receiving these births in hopes of identifying venues for intervention. METHODS: The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) birth certificate records from 1990 to 2015 were used. "Planned home births" were defined as those births in which birthplace was coded as "residence" and birth attendant was coded as "certified nurse midwife (CNM)" or "other midwife". Contraindicated home births were defined as "planned home births" from 1990 to 2015 that had one or more of the ACOG risk factors for home births, which include vaginal birth after prior cesarean delivery (VBAC), breech presentation and multiple gestations. RESULTS: A review of trends in contraindicated home births from 1990 to 2015 suggests that they are increasing in number (481-1396) and as a percentage of total births (0.01%-0.04%, P<0.001). There has been an increase in the proportion of college-educated women (31%-51%, P<0.001). Most women receive prenatal care (>95%), which is most frequently initiated in the first trimester. The majority of home births were paid out-of-pocket (65%-69%). CONCLUSION: The increasing number of contraindicated home births in the United States requires public health action. Home births are likely a matter of choice rather than a lack of resources. It is unclear if women choose home births while knowing the risk or due to a lack of information. Prenatal education about contraindicated home births is possible, as almost all women receive prenatal care.

[The evolution of places of birth]. / L'évolution des lieux de naissance.

Since the beginning of the 19th century, medical advances have drastically cut the number of deaths at birth, ensuring a maximum level of safety of childbirth today. However, there is increasing demand for alternative forms of childbirth which take into account more the expectations of the future parents as well as the psychological and relational dimensions. The current experimentation involving birth centres could lead the way for the development of such possibilities from 2018.

Improving the quality and content of midwives' discussions with low-risk women about their options for place of birth: Co-production and evaluation of an intervention package.

OBJECTIVE: Women's planned place of birth is gaining increasing importance in the UK, however evidence suggests that there is variation in the content of community midwives' discussions with low risk women about their place of birth options. The objective of this study was to develop an intervention to improve the quality and content of place of birth discussions between midwives and low-risk women and to evaluate this intervention in practice. DESIGN: The study design comprised of three stages: (1) The first stage included focus groups with midwives to explore the barriers to carrying out place of birth discussions with women. (2) In the second stage, COM-B theory provided a structure for co-produced intervention development with midwives and women representatives; priority areas for change were agreed and the components of an intervention package to standardise the quality of these discussions were decided. (3) The third stage of the study adopted a mixed methods approach including questionnaires, focus groups and interviews with midwives to evaluate the implementation of the co-produced package in practice. SETTING: A maternity NHS Trust in the West Midlands, UK. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 38 midwives took part in the first stage of the study. Intervention design (stage 2) included 58 midwives, and the evaluation (stage 3) involved 66 midwives. Four women were involved in the intervention design stage of the study in a Patient and Public Involvement role (not formally consented as participants). FINDINGS: In the first study stage participants agreed that pragmatic, standardised information on the safety, intervention and transfer rates for each birth setting (obstetric unit, midwifery-led unit, home) was required. In the second stage of the study, co-production between researchers, women and midwives resulted in an intervention package designed to support the implementation of these changes and included an update session for midwives, a script, a leaflet, and ongoing support through a named lead midwife and regular team meetings. Evaluation of this package in practice revealed that midwives' knowledge and confidence regarding place of birth substantially improved after the initial update session and was sustained three months post-implementation. Midwives viewed the resources as useful in prompting discussions and aiding communication about place of birth options. KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Co-production enabled development of a pragmatic intervention to improve the quality of midwives' place of birth discussions with low-risk women, supported by COM-B theory. These findings highlight the importance of co-production in intervention development and suggest that the place of birth package could be used to improve place of birth discussions to facilitate informed choice at other Trusts across the UK.

Out-of-hospital births in California 1991-2011.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the frequencies and characteristics of out-of-hospital births in a 20-year period in California, where 1 of every 7 births in the United States occurs. STUDY DESIGN: Birth certificate records of deliveries in California between 1991 and 2011 were analyzed. Out-of-hospital births were assessed by year, parity, gestational age and maternal race/ethnicity. RESULTS: In the 20-year period there were 10 593,904 deliveries, of which 46 243 occurred out of hospital (0.44%). Out-of-hospital births decreased from 0.54 to 0.38% per year between 1991 and 2004, and increased from 0.41% in 2005 to 0.61% in 2011. In contrast, preterm out-of-hospital births declined from 7.2% in 2006 to 5.0% in 2011. The frequency of vaginal birth after cesarean in the out-of-hospital birth cohort increased from 1.2% (n=19) in 1996 to 4.2% (n=82) in 2011. CONCLUSION: California birth records from a 20-year period show an increase in out-of-hospital births from years 2005 to 2011, following a period of decline from 1991 to 2004.