Maternal and neonatal outcome of births planned in alongside midwifery units: a cohort study from a tertiary center in Germany.
Adult
Birth Weight
Case-Control Studies
Cohort Studies
Delivery Rooms
/ statistics & numerical data
Delivery, Obstetric
/ statistics & numerical data
Episiotomy
/ statistics & numerical data
Female
Germany
/ epidemiology
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Labor, Obstetric
Lacerations
/ epidemiology
Midwifery
/ statistics & numerical data
Obstetric Labor Complications
/ epidemiology
Parity
Parturition
Patient Transfer
/ statistics & numerical data
Postpartum Hemorrhage
/ epidemiology
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Complications
/ epidemiology
Pregnancy Outcome
/ epidemiology
Retrospective Studies
Tertiary Care Centers
Young Adult
Alongside midwifery unit
Low-risk pregnancy
Maternal healthcare provision
Midwife-led care
Mode of birth
Obstetric intervention
Obstetric service
Transfer rate
Journal
BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 May 2020
06 May 2020
Historique:
received:
22
09
2019
accepted:
21
04
2020
entrez:
8
5
2020
pubmed:
8
5
2020
medline:
26
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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. 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.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
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
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
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
CONCLUSIONS
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32375692
doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-02962-4
pii: 10.1186/s12884-020-02962-4
pmc: PMC7201515
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
267Références
Midwifery. 2018 Oct;65:67-71
pubmed: 29980361
BMJ. 2011 Nov 23;343:d7400
pubmed: 22117057
Midwifery. 2018 Jul;62:240-255
pubmed: 29727829
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 28;4:CD004667
pubmed: 27121907
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 06;7:CD003766
pubmed: 28681500
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018 Dec 6;18(1):481
pubmed: 30522453
BJOG. 2012 Nov;119(12):1483-92
pubmed: 22830446
Midwifery. 2019 Feb;69:10-16
pubmed: 30390462
BJOG. 2018 Jul;125(8):918-922
pubmed: 29637727
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Oct 16;17(1):357
pubmed: 29037175