Cargando…
Evaluating Maternity Units: a prospective cohort study of freestanding midwife-led primary maternity units in New Zealand—clinical outcomes
OBJECTIVE: To compare maternal and neonatal birth outcomes and morbidities associated with the intention to give birth in a freestanding primary level midwife-led maternity unit (PMU) or tertiary level obstetric-led maternity hospital (TMH) in Canterbury, Aotearoa/New Zealand. DESIGN: Prospective co...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5634452/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28851782 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016288 |
_version_ | 1783270094106787840 |
---|---|
author | Grigg, Celia P Tracy, Sally K Tracy, Mark Daellenbach, Rea Kensington, Mary Monk, Amy Schmied, Virginia |
author_facet | Grigg, Celia P Tracy, Sally K Tracy, Mark Daellenbach, Rea Kensington, Mary Monk, Amy Schmied, Virginia |
author_sort | Grigg, Celia P |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To compare maternal and neonatal birth outcomes and morbidities associated with the intention to give birth in a freestanding primary level midwife-led maternity unit (PMU) or tertiary level obstetric-led maternity hospital (TMH) in Canterbury, Aotearoa/New Zealand. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: 407 women who intended to give birth in a PMU and 285 women who intended to give birth at the TMH in 2010–2011. All of the women planning a TMH birth were ‘low risk’, and 29 of the PMU cohort had identified risk factors. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: Mode of birth, Apgar score of less than 7 at 5 min and neonatal unit admission. Secondary outcomes: labour onset, analgesia, blood loss, third stage of labour management, perineal trauma, non-pharmacological pain relief, neonatal resuscitation, breastfeeding, gestational age at birth, birth weight, severe morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Women who planned a PMU birth were significantly more likely to have a spontaneous vaginal birth (77.9%vs62.3%, adjusted OR (AOR) 1.61, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.39), and significantly less likely to have an instrumental assisted vaginal birth (10.3%vs20.4%, AOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.93). The emergency and elective caesarean section rates were not significantly different (emergency: PMU 11.6% vs TMH 17.5%, AOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.40; elective: PMU 0.7% vs TMH 2.1%, AOR 0.34, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.41). There were no significant differences between the cohorts in rates of 5 min Apgar score of <7 (2.0%vs2.1%, AOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.52) and neonatal unit admission (5.9%vs4.9%, AOR 1.44, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.96). Planning to give birth in a primary unit was associated with similar or reduced odds of intrapartum interventions and similar odds of all measured neonatal well-being indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study support freestanding midwife-led primary-level maternity units as physically safe places for well women to plan to give birth, with these women having higher rates of spontaneous vaginal births and lower rates of interventions and their associated morbidities than those who planned a tertiary hospital birth, with no differences in neonatal outcomes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5634452 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56344522017-10-11 Evaluating Maternity Units: a prospective cohort study of freestanding midwife-led primary maternity units in New Zealand—clinical outcomes Grigg, Celia P Tracy, Sally K Tracy, Mark Daellenbach, Rea Kensington, Mary Monk, Amy Schmied, Virginia BMJ Open Obstetrics and Gynaecology OBJECTIVE: To compare maternal and neonatal birth outcomes and morbidities associated with the intention to give birth in a freestanding primary level midwife-led maternity unit (PMU) or tertiary level obstetric-led maternity hospital (TMH) in Canterbury, Aotearoa/New Zealand. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: 407 women who intended to give birth in a PMU and 285 women who intended to give birth at the TMH in 2010–2011. All of the women planning a TMH birth were ‘low risk’, and 29 of the PMU cohort had identified risk factors. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: Mode of birth, Apgar score of less than 7 at 5 min and neonatal unit admission. Secondary outcomes: labour onset, analgesia, blood loss, third stage of labour management, perineal trauma, non-pharmacological pain relief, neonatal resuscitation, breastfeeding, gestational age at birth, birth weight, severe morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Women who planned a PMU birth were significantly more likely to have a spontaneous vaginal birth (77.9%vs62.3%, adjusted OR (AOR) 1.61, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.39), and significantly less likely to have an instrumental assisted vaginal birth (10.3%vs20.4%, AOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.93). The emergency and elective caesarean section rates were not significantly different (emergency: PMU 11.6% vs TMH 17.5%, AOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.40; elective: PMU 0.7% vs TMH 2.1%, AOR 0.34, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.41). There were no significant differences between the cohorts in rates of 5 min Apgar score of <7 (2.0%vs2.1%, AOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.52) and neonatal unit admission (5.9%vs4.9%, AOR 1.44, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.96). Planning to give birth in a primary unit was associated with similar or reduced odds of intrapartum interventions and similar odds of all measured neonatal well-being indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study support freestanding midwife-led primary-level maternity units as physically safe places for well women to plan to give birth, with these women having higher rates of spontaneous vaginal births and lower rates of interventions and their associated morbidities than those who planned a tertiary hospital birth, with no differences in neonatal outcomes. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-08-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5634452/ /pubmed/28851782 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016288 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Obstetrics and Gynaecology Grigg, Celia P Tracy, Sally K Tracy, Mark Daellenbach, Rea Kensington, Mary Monk, Amy Schmied, Virginia Evaluating Maternity Units: a prospective cohort study of freestanding midwife-led primary maternity units in New Zealand—clinical outcomes |
title | Evaluating Maternity Units: a prospective cohort study of freestanding midwife-led primary maternity units in New Zealand—clinical outcomes |
title_full | Evaluating Maternity Units: a prospective cohort study of freestanding midwife-led primary maternity units in New Zealand—clinical outcomes |
title_fullStr | Evaluating Maternity Units: a prospective cohort study of freestanding midwife-led primary maternity units in New Zealand—clinical outcomes |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating Maternity Units: a prospective cohort study of freestanding midwife-led primary maternity units in New Zealand—clinical outcomes |
title_short | Evaluating Maternity Units: a prospective cohort study of freestanding midwife-led primary maternity units in New Zealand—clinical outcomes |
title_sort | evaluating maternity units: a prospective cohort study of freestanding midwife-led primary maternity units in new zealand—clinical outcomes |
topic | Obstetrics and Gynaecology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5634452/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28851782 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016288 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT griggceliap evaluatingmaternityunitsaprospectivecohortstudyoffreestandingmidwifeledprimarymaternityunitsinnewzealandclinicaloutcomes AT tracysallyk evaluatingmaternityunitsaprospectivecohortstudyoffreestandingmidwifeledprimarymaternityunitsinnewzealandclinicaloutcomes AT tracymark evaluatingmaternityunitsaprospectivecohortstudyoffreestandingmidwifeledprimarymaternityunitsinnewzealandclinicaloutcomes AT daellenbachrea evaluatingmaternityunitsaprospectivecohortstudyoffreestandingmidwifeledprimarymaternityunitsinnewzealandclinicaloutcomes AT kensingtonmary evaluatingmaternityunitsaprospectivecohortstudyoffreestandingmidwifeledprimarymaternityunitsinnewzealandclinicaloutcomes AT monkamy evaluatingmaternityunitsaprospectivecohortstudyoffreestandingmidwifeledprimarymaternityunitsinnewzealandclinicaloutcomes AT schmiedvirginia evaluatingmaternityunitsaprospectivecohortstudyoffreestandingmidwifeledprimarymaternityunitsinnewzealandclinicaloutcomes |