Cargando…

The “Cocoon,” first alongside midwifery‐led unit within a Belgian hospital: Comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes with the standard obstetric unit over 2 years

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes of women with a low‐risk pregnancy attending the “Cocoon,” an alongside midwifery‐led birth center and care pathway, with women with a low‐risk pregnancy attending the traditional care pathway in a tertiary care hospital in Belgium. M...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Welffens, Karine, Derisbourg, Sara, Costa, Elena, Englert, Yvon, Pintiaux, Axelle, Warnimont, Michèle, Kirkpatrick, Christine, Buekens, Pierre, Daelemans, Caroline
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7065252/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31746028
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/birt.12466
_version_ 1783505031219118080
author Welffens, Karine
Derisbourg, Sara
Costa, Elena
Englert, Yvon
Pintiaux, Axelle
Warnimont, Michèle
Kirkpatrick, Christine
Buekens, Pierre
Daelemans, Caroline
author_facet Welffens, Karine
Derisbourg, Sara
Costa, Elena
Englert, Yvon
Pintiaux, Axelle
Warnimont, Michèle
Kirkpatrick, Christine
Buekens, Pierre
Daelemans, Caroline
author_sort Welffens, Karine
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes of women with a low‐risk pregnancy attending the “Cocoon,” an alongside midwifery‐led birth center and care pathway, with women with a low‐risk pregnancy attending the traditional care pathway in a tertiary care hospital in Belgium. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of maternal and neonatal outcomes of women with a low‐risk pregnancy who chose to adhere to the Cocoon pathway of care (n = 590) and women with a low‐risk pregnancy who chose the traditional pathway of care (n = 394) from March 1, 2014, to February 29, 2016. We performed all analyses using an intention‐to‐treat approach. RESULTS: In this setting, the cesarean birth rate was 10.3% compared with 16.0% in the traditional care pathway (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] 0.42 [95% CI 0.25‐0.69]), the induction rate was 16.3% compared with 30.5% (0.46 [0.30‐0.69]), the epidural analgesia rate was 24.9% compared with 59.1% (0.15 [0.09‐0.22]), and the episiotomy rate was 6.8% compared with 14.5% (0.31 [0.17‐0.56]). There was no increase in adverse neonatal outcomes. Intrapartum and postpartum transfer rates to the traditional pathway of care were 21.1% and 7.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Women planning their births in the midwifery‐led unit, the Cocoon, experienced fewer interventions with no increase in adverse neonatal outcomes. Our study gives initial support for the introduction of similar midwifery‐led care pathways in other hospitals in Belgium.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7065252
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70652522020-03-16 The “Cocoon,” first alongside midwifery‐led unit within a Belgian hospital: Comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes with the standard obstetric unit over 2 years Welffens, Karine Derisbourg, Sara Costa, Elena Englert, Yvon Pintiaux, Axelle Warnimont, Michèle Kirkpatrick, Christine Buekens, Pierre Daelemans, Caroline Birth Original Articles OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes of women with a low‐risk pregnancy attending the “Cocoon,” an alongside midwifery‐led birth center and care pathway, with women with a low‐risk pregnancy attending the traditional care pathway in a tertiary care hospital in Belgium. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of maternal and neonatal outcomes of women with a low‐risk pregnancy who chose to adhere to the Cocoon pathway of care (n = 590) and women with a low‐risk pregnancy who chose the traditional pathway of care (n = 394) from March 1, 2014, to February 29, 2016. We performed all analyses using an intention‐to‐treat approach. RESULTS: In this setting, the cesarean birth rate was 10.3% compared with 16.0% in the traditional care pathway (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] 0.42 [95% CI 0.25‐0.69]), the induction rate was 16.3% compared with 30.5% (0.46 [0.30‐0.69]), the epidural analgesia rate was 24.9% compared with 59.1% (0.15 [0.09‐0.22]), and the episiotomy rate was 6.8% compared with 14.5% (0.31 [0.17‐0.56]). There was no increase in adverse neonatal outcomes. Intrapartum and postpartum transfer rates to the traditional pathway of care were 21.1% and 7.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Women planning their births in the midwifery‐led unit, the Cocoon, experienced fewer interventions with no increase in adverse neonatal outcomes. Our study gives initial support for the introduction of similar midwifery‐led care pathways in other hospitals in Belgium. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-11-19 2020-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7065252/ /pubmed/31746028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/birt.12466 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Birth published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Welffens, Karine
Derisbourg, Sara
Costa, Elena
Englert, Yvon
Pintiaux, Axelle
Warnimont, Michèle
Kirkpatrick, Christine
Buekens, Pierre
Daelemans, Caroline
The “Cocoon,” first alongside midwifery‐led unit within a Belgian hospital: Comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes with the standard obstetric unit over 2 years
title The “Cocoon,” first alongside midwifery‐led unit within a Belgian hospital: Comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes with the standard obstetric unit over 2 years
title_full The “Cocoon,” first alongside midwifery‐led unit within a Belgian hospital: Comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes with the standard obstetric unit over 2 years
title_fullStr The “Cocoon,” first alongside midwifery‐led unit within a Belgian hospital: Comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes with the standard obstetric unit over 2 years
title_full_unstemmed The “Cocoon,” first alongside midwifery‐led unit within a Belgian hospital: Comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes with the standard obstetric unit over 2 years
title_short The “Cocoon,” first alongside midwifery‐led unit within a Belgian hospital: Comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes with the standard obstetric unit over 2 years
title_sort “cocoon,” first alongside midwifery‐led unit within a belgian hospital: comparison of the maternal and neonatal outcomes with the standard obstetric unit over 2 years
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7065252/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31746028
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/birt.12466
work_keys_str_mv AT welffenskarine thecocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT derisbourgsara thecocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT costaelena thecocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT englertyvon thecocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT pintiauxaxelle thecocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT warnimontmichele thecocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT kirkpatrickchristine thecocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT buekenspierre thecocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT daelemanscaroline thecocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT welffenskarine cocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT derisbourgsara cocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT costaelena cocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT englertyvon cocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT pintiauxaxelle cocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT warnimontmichele cocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT kirkpatrickchristine cocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT buekenspierre cocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years
AT daelemanscaroline cocoonfirstalongsidemidwiferyledunitwithinabelgianhospitalcomparisonofthematernalandneonataloutcomeswiththestandardobstetricunitover2years