Cargando…

Comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: A propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND: Experts in many countries are recommending a scaling up midwifery-led care as a model to improve maternal and newborn outcomes, reduce rates of unnecessary interventions, realise cost savings, and facilitate normal spontaneous vaginal birth. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Poškienė, Ingrida, Vanagas, Giedrius, Kirkilytė, Asta, Nadišauskienė, Rūta Jolanta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: De Gruyter 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8520123/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34722889
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/med-2021-0373
_version_ 1784584600667815936
author Poškienė, Ingrida
Vanagas, Giedrius
Kirkilytė, Asta
Nadišauskienė, Rūta Jolanta
author_facet Poškienė, Ingrida
Vanagas, Giedrius
Kirkilytė, Asta
Nadišauskienė, Rūta Jolanta
author_sort Poškienė, Ingrida
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Experts in many countries are recommending a scaling up midwifery-led care as a model to improve maternal and newborn outcomes, reduce rates of unnecessary interventions, realise cost savings, and facilitate normal spontaneous vaginal birth. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare midwifery-led and obstetrician-gynaecologist-led care-related vaginal birth outcomes. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women in Kaunas city maternity care facilities. METHODS: A propensity score-matched case–control study of midwifery-led versus physician-led low-risk birth outcomes. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between the groups. Continuous variables are presented as mean ± standard deviation and analysed using the Mann–Whitney U test. Categorical and binary variables are presented as frequency (percentage), and differences were analysed using the chi-square test. Analyses were conducted separately for the unmatched (before propensity score matched [PSM]) and matched (after PSM) groups. RESULTS: After adjusting groups for propensity score, postpartum haemorrhage differences between physician-led and midwifery-led labours were significantly different (169.5 and 152.6 mL; p = 0.026), same for hospital stay duration (3.3 and 3.1 days, p = 0.042). Also, in matched population, significant differences were seen for episiotomy rates (chi(2) = 4.8; p = 0.029), newborn Apgar 5 min score (9.58 and 9.76; p = 0.002), and pain relief (chi(2) = 14.9; p = 0.002). Significant differences were seen in unmatched but not confirmed in matched population for obstetrical procedures used during labour, breastfeeding, birth induction, newborn Apgar 1 min scores, and successful vaginal birth as an overall spontaneous vaginal birth success measure. CONCLUSION: The midwifery-led care model showed significant differences from the physician-led care model in episiotomy rates, hospital stay duration and postpartum haemorrhage, and newborn Apgar 5 min scores. Midwifery-led care is as safe as physician-led care and does not influence the rate of successful spontaneous vaginal births.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8520123
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher De Gruyter
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85201232021-10-28 Comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: A propensity score-matched analysis Poškienė, Ingrida Vanagas, Giedrius Kirkilytė, Asta Nadišauskienė, Rūta Jolanta Open Med (Wars) Research Article BACKGROUND: Experts in many countries are recommending a scaling up midwifery-led care as a model to improve maternal and newborn outcomes, reduce rates of unnecessary interventions, realise cost savings, and facilitate normal spontaneous vaginal birth. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare midwifery-led and obstetrician-gynaecologist-led care-related vaginal birth outcomes. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women in Kaunas city maternity care facilities. METHODS: A propensity score-matched case–control study of midwifery-led versus physician-led low-risk birth outcomes. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between the groups. Continuous variables are presented as mean ± standard deviation and analysed using the Mann–Whitney U test. Categorical and binary variables are presented as frequency (percentage), and differences were analysed using the chi-square test. Analyses were conducted separately for the unmatched (before propensity score matched [PSM]) and matched (after PSM) groups. RESULTS: After adjusting groups for propensity score, postpartum haemorrhage differences between physician-led and midwifery-led labours were significantly different (169.5 and 152.6 mL; p = 0.026), same for hospital stay duration (3.3 and 3.1 days, p = 0.042). Also, in matched population, significant differences were seen for episiotomy rates (chi(2) = 4.8; p = 0.029), newborn Apgar 5 min score (9.58 and 9.76; p = 0.002), and pain relief (chi(2) = 14.9; p = 0.002). Significant differences were seen in unmatched but not confirmed in matched population for obstetrical procedures used during labour, breastfeeding, birth induction, newborn Apgar 1 min scores, and successful vaginal birth as an overall spontaneous vaginal birth success measure. CONCLUSION: The midwifery-led care model showed significant differences from the physician-led care model in episiotomy rates, hospital stay duration and postpartum haemorrhage, and newborn Apgar 5 min scores. Midwifery-led care is as safe as physician-led care and does not influence the rate of successful spontaneous vaginal births. De Gruyter 2021-10-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8520123/ /pubmed/34722889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/med-2021-0373 Text en © 2021 Ingrida Poškienė et al., published by De Gruyter https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Research Article
Poškienė, Ingrida
Vanagas, Giedrius
Kirkilytė, Asta
Nadišauskienė, Rūta Jolanta
Comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: A propensity score-matched analysis
title Comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: A propensity score-matched analysis
title_full Comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: A propensity score-matched analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: A propensity score-matched analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: A propensity score-matched analysis
title_short Comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: A propensity score-matched analysis
title_sort comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: a propensity score-matched analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8520123/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34722889
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/med-2021-0373
work_keys_str_mv AT poskieneingrida comparisonofvaginalbirthoutcomesinmidwiferyledversusphysicianledsettingapropensityscorematchedanalysis
AT vanagasgiedrius comparisonofvaginalbirthoutcomesinmidwiferyledversusphysicianledsettingapropensityscorematchedanalysis
AT kirkilyteasta comparisonofvaginalbirthoutcomesinmidwiferyledversusphysicianledsettingapropensityscorematchedanalysis
AT nadisauskienerutajolanta comparisonofvaginalbirthoutcomesinmidwiferyledversusphysicianledsettingapropensityscorematchedanalysis