Alternative versus conventional institutional settings for birth

Development and psychometric testing of the Perception of Childbirth Environment Scale in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Previous research has shown that women's perceptions of their childbirth environment are critical in ensuring that they feel supported and in facilitating physiological childbirth.

AIM

To develop and validate the Perception of Childbirth Environment Scale (PCES) for expectant mothers.

METHODS

The PCES was developed based on findings from a scoping review and a qualitative study on childbirth environments conducted by the authors. The scale underwent expert review to ensure relevance, clarity, and content validity, followed by face validity testing with five women. A total of 193 participants, recruited from two medical institutions, completed the PCES within 48 h after childbirth. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α for internal consistency. Construct validity was evaluated through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses.

RESULTS

The PCES comprised 10 items divided into two dimensions: comfort and control. "Comfort" factors included privacy, homeliness, familiarity, relaxation facilitation, and a sense of continuity in the room, while "Control" factors were reflected in elements like a birth companion, empowerment, and safety. The model demonstrated a good fit following exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, as well as adjustments based on modification indices.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCES displayed strong reliability and validity, making it a suitable tool for assessing women's perceptions of their labor and childbirth environment.

Birth environment interventions and outcomes: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The physical environments in which women give birth can contribute positively to meeting both physiologic and psychosocial needs during labor. Most studies on the labor and delivery processes have focused on mitigating pain and providing psychological support. Fewer have explored the influence of the physical birth environment. In this study, we performed a scoping review to compile and examine qualitative and quantitative studies related to the characteristics of physical birth environments and their effects on labor outcomes.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, CINHAL, Cochrane, Web of Science, and MEDLINE databases from inception to May 2022. A total of 13 studies met the criteria for inclusion in our review. Two reviewers screened the titles and full-text articles and extracted data from the included studies. We used summary statistics and narrative summaries to describe the study characteristics, intervention implementation guidelines, intervention selection and tailoring rationale, and intervention effects.

RESULTS

In previous research, several elements of birth environments have been shown to provide physical and psychological support to birthing people and to improve outcomes related to the experience of care and pain management. We identified five main themes in the included studies: (1) "hominess;" (2) whether spaces are comfortable for activity; (3) demedicalization of the birth environment; (4) accommodations for birth partners; and (5) providing women with a sense of control over their birth environment.

CONCLUSIONS

Birth environments should be designed to promote positive birthing experiences, both physiologically and psychologically. Facilities and those who manage them can improve the experiences and outcomes of service users by modifying or designing spaces that are "homey," comfortable for activity, demedicalized, and include natural elements. In addition, policies that allow the birthing person to control her own environment are key to promoting positive outcomes and satisfaction with the birth experience.

A mixed-design study on the development of birth unit assessment scale

INTRODUCTION

This is a mixed design study planned to determine the views of women, midwives, and physicians about the ideal birth unit and to develop a to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool for postpartum women's evaluation of the effect of birth units in terms of physical, emotional, and social aspects on their satisfaction with the birth environment.

METHODS

The exploratory sequential design, which is accepted as a mixed design, was used in the study. In the qualitative phase of the study, a content analysis was conducted by interviewing a total of 20 participants including 5 pregnant women, 5 postpartum women, 5 midwives and 5 obstetricians. In the quantitative phase, the Draft Birth Unit Satisfaction Assessment scale, which was developed in line with the data obtained as a result of the qualitative study, a literature review, and expert opinions, was used to evaluate postpartum women's (n = 435) satisfaction with the birth environment. Content validity, exploratory factor analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis were used for the validity analyses of the scale, and item analysis, internal consistency, and time-dependent invariance were evaluated for reliability.

RESULTS

In the qualitative phase of the study, the themes were grouped under 5 categories (physical features of the hospital, features of the birth room, privacy, aesthetics and support) according to the qualitative data on the factors that showed participants' views on the ideal birth unit. In the quantitative stage, the Birth Unit Satisfaction Assessment Scale, which consisted of 30 items and 5 sub-dimensions (communication and care, physical characteristics of the birth room, comfort, opportunities supporting birth, and decoration and aesthetics), was developed.

DISCUSSION

In conclusion, it was determined that the scale developed in this study was a valid and reliable measurement tool that could be used to evaluate postpartum women's satisfaction with the birth environment.

Planned hospital birth compared with planned home birth for pregnant women at low risk of complications

BACKGROUND

Observational studies of increasingly better quality and in different settings suggest that planned hospital birth in many places does not reduce mortality and morbidity but increases the frequency of interventions and complications. Euro-Peristat (part of the European Union's Health Monitoring Programme) has raised concerns about iatrogenic effects of obstetric interventions, and the World Health Organization (WHO) has raised concern that the increasing medicalisation of childbirth tends to undermine women's own capability to give birth and negatively impacts their childbirth experience. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1998, and previously updated in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of planned hospital birth with planned home birth attended by a midwife or others with midwifery skills and backed up by a modern hospital system in case a transfer to hospital should turn out to be necessary. The primary focus is on women with an uncomplicated pregnancy and low risk of medical intervention during birth.  SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (which includes trials from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, WHO ICTRP, and conference proceedings), ClinicalTrials.gov (16 July 2021), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing planned hospital birth with planned home birth in low-risk women as described in the objectives. Cluster-randomised trials, quasi-randomised trials, and trials published only as an abstract were also eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, and checked the data for accuracy. We contacted study authors for additional information. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.  MAIN RESULTS: We included one trial involving 11 participants. This was a small feasibility study to show that well-informed women - contrary to common beliefs - were prepared to be randomised. This update did not identify any additional studies for inclusion, but excluded one study that had been awaiting assessment. The included study was at high risk of bias for three out of seven risk of bias domains. The trial did not report on five of the seven primary outcomes, and reported zero events for one primary outcome (caesarean section), and non-zero events for the remaining primary outcome (baby not breastfed). Maternal mortality, perinatal mortality (non-malformed), Apgar < 7 at 5 minutes, transfer to neonatal intensive care unit, and maternal satisfaction were not reported. The overall certainty of the evidence for the two reported primary outcomes was very low according to our GRADE assessment (downgraded two levels for high overall risk of bias (due to high risk of bias arising from lack of blinding, high risk of selective reporting and lack of ability to check for publication bias) and two levels for very serious imprecision (single study with few events)).   AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review shows that for selected, low-risk pregnant women, the evidence from randomised trials to support that planned hospital birth reduces maternal or perinatal mortality, morbidity, or any other critical outcome is uncertain. As the quality of evidence in favour of home birth from observational studies seems to be steadily increasing, it might be just as important to prepare a regularly updated systematic review including observational studies as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions as to attempt to set up new RCTs. As women and healthcare practitioners may be aware of evidence from observational studies, and as the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics and the International Confederation of Midwives collaboratively conclude that there is strong evidence that out-of-hospital birth supported by a registered midwife is safe, equipoise may no longer exist, and randomised trials may now thus be considered unethical or hardly feasible.

The effect on the birth experience of women and partners of giving birth in a "birth environment room": A secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate women and partners' experience of birth in a "birth environment room" compared to a standard birth room.

DESIGN

A single centre parallel randomised controlled trial. Women and partners were enrolled during a 3-year period (May 2015 to March 2018).

SETTING

The Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at Herning Hospital, Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION

A total of 680 Danish speaking nulliparous women, more than 18 years old, with a singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation, and a spontaneous onset of labour, and their partners were randomly assigned to give birth in a "birth environment room" (n = 340) or in a standard birth room (n = 340) on arrival at the birth unit.

MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS

Outcomes were the overall birth experience and overall satisfaction with care, measured on a Likert scale, obtained in the postpartum questionnaire sent to the women 6 weeks after birth and to their partners 1/2 weeks after birth. Other outcomes were "staff support for partner", "undisturbed contact with new-born", "feeling of being listened to", "level of information", "attention to psychological needs", "suggestions for pain-relief", "participation in decision-making", "midwife present when wanted", "support from midwife", "birth wishes were met", "loss of internal control" (only women), "loss of external control", "support from partner" (partners: "being supportive for partner"), "importance of physical environment for birth" and "importance of physical environment for staff´s ability to involve the women" (only women). All outcomes were prespecified. We applied Mann Whitney U test for comparing the two groups. Data were collected from 326 women and 236 partners in the intervention group and from 315 women and 209 partners in the control group. The intention-to-treat analysis revealed no difference in the overall experience of birth for women or partners (p 0.81 and p 0.17, respectively). Partners in the intervention group reported more overall satisfaction with care compared to partners in the control group (p 0.048). In the intervention group, fewer women and partners responded they had not had the opportunity for undisturbed contact with their new-born in the first hours after birth (RR 0.19 (95% CI 0.04-0.87) and OR 0.00 CI (0.00-0.83), respectively). Otherwise, there were no differences between groups. The thematic analysis revealed that many women and partners felt they were not able to benefit from the features in "the birth environment room" in the most intense hours of birth.

KEY CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

"The birth environment room" did not improve the overall experience of birth for women and partners. Partners in the intervention group were overall more satisfied with care. These findings are of importance in the developing of physical birth environments that support the mental/emotional process of labour.

The birthing room and its influence on the promotion of a normal physiological childbirth - a qualitative interview study with midwives in Sweden

The birthing room is a major workplace for midwives but how it influences them in practice is not enough investigated.Purpose: This study aimed to explore midwives´ experiences of how the birthing room affects them in their work to promote a normal physiological birth.Methods: A phenomenological reflective lifeworld research approach was used and included individual interviews with 15 midwives working at four different hospitals in western Sweden, and of which two also assisted at homebirths. The analysis focused on the meanings of the study phenomenon.Results: A birthing room can by its design either support a normal physiological birth or support a risk approach to childbirth. Four opposing constituents complete the essential meaning of the birthing rooms, and to which the midwives need to relate in their roles as guardians for normal birth: i) a private or a public room; ii) a home-like or hospital-like room; iii) a room promoting activity or passivity; iv) a room promoting the midwife´s presence or absence.Conclusions: The birthing room mirrors a pathogenic-oriented care approach. A presupposition for the work to keep the birth bubble intact is to protect the mother from disturbing elements both inside and outside the room.

Association between Birth Plan Use and Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Southern Spain: A Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

Birth plans are used for pregnant women to express their wishes and expectations about childbirth. The aim of this study was to compare obstetric and neonatal outcomes between women with and without birth plans.

METHODS

A multicentre, retrospective case-control study at tertiary hospitals in southern Spain between 2009 and 2013 was conducted. A total of 457 pregnant women were included, 178 with and 279 without birth plans. Women with low-risk gestation, at full-term and having been in labour were included. Sociodemographic, obstetric and neonatal variables were analysed and comparisons were established.

RESULTS

Women with birth plans were older, more educated and more commonly primiparous. Caesarean sections were less common in primiparous women with birth plans (18% vs. 29%, p = 0.027); however, no significant differences were found in instrumented births, 3rd-4th-degree tears or episiotomy rates. Newborns of primiparous women with birth plans obtained better results on 1 min Apgar scores, umbilical cord pH and advanced neonatal resuscitation. No significant differences were found on 5 min Apgar scores or other variables for multiparous women.

CONCLUSIONS

Birth plans were related to less intervention, a more natural process of birth and better outcomes for mothers and newborns. Birth plans can improve the welfare of the mother and newborn, leading to birth in a more natural way.

Client Experience with the Ontario Birth Center Demonstration Project

INTRODUCTION

In 2014, 2 new freestanding midwifery-led birth centers opened in Ontario, Canada. As one part of a larger mixed-methods evaluation of the first year of operations of the centers, our primary objective was to compare the experiences of women receiving midwifery care who intended to give birth at the new birth centers with those intending to give birth at home or in hospital.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of women cared for by midwives with admitting privileges at one of the 2 birth centers. Consenting women received the survey 3 to 6 weeks after their due date. We stratified the analysis by intended place of birth at the beginning of labor, regardless of where the actual birth occurred. One composite indicator was created (Composite Satisfaction Score, out of 20), and statistical significance (P < .05) was assessed using one-way analysis of variance. Responses to the open-ended questions were reviewed and grouped into broader categories.

RESULTS

In total, 382 women completed the survey (response rate 54.6%). Half intended to give birth at a birth center (n = 191). There was a significant difference on the Composite Satisfaction Scores between the birth center (19.4), home (19.5), and hospital (18.9) groups (P < .001). Among women who intended to give birth in a birth center, scores were higher in the women admitted to the birth center compared with those who were not (P = .037). Overall, women giving birth at a birth center were satisfied with the learners present at their birth, the accessibility of the centers, and the physical amenities, and they had suggestions for minor improvements.

DISCUSSION

We found positive experiences and high satisfaction among women receiving midwifery care, regardless of intended place of birth. Women admitted to the birth centers had positive experiences with these new centers; however, future research should be planned to reassess and further understand women's experiences.

Healing architecture and Snoezelen in delivery room design: a qualitative study of women's birth experiences and patient-centeredness of care

BACKGROUND

The physical place and environment has a profound influence on experiences, health and wellbeing of birthing women. An alternatively designed delivery room, inspired by the principles of healing architecture and Snoezelen, was established in a Danish regional hospital. These principles provided knowledge of how building and interior design affects the senses, including users' pain experience and stress levels. The aim of the study was to explore women's experience of the environment and its ability to support the concept of patient-centeredness in the care of birthing women.

METHODS

Applying a hermeneutical-phenomenological methodology, fourteen semi-structured interviews with low-risk women giving birth in an alternative delivery room at an obstetric unit in Denmark were undertaken 3-7 weeks after birth.

RESULTS

Overall, women's experiences of given birth in the alternative delivery room were positive. Our analysis suggests that the environment was well adapted to the women's needs, as it offered a stress- and anxiety-reducing transition to the hospital setting, at the same time as it helped them obtain physical comfort. The environment also signaled respect for the family's needs as it supported physical and emotional interaction between the woman and her partner and helped relieve her concern for the partner's well-being. The psychosocial support provided by the midwives appeared inseparable from the alternative delivery room, as both affected, amplified, and occasionally restricted the women's experience of the physical environment.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the use of principles of healing architecture and Snoezelen in birth environments and add to the evidence on how the physical design of hospital environments influence on both social and physical aspects of the well-being of patients. The environment appeared to encompass several dimensions of the concept of patient-centered care.

Value based maternal and newborn care requires alignment of adequate resources with high value activities

Background

Evidence based practice has been associated with better quality of care in many situations, but it has not been able to address increasing need and demand in healthcare globally and stagnant or decreasing healthcare resources. Implementation of value-based healthcare could address many important challenges in health care systems worldwide. Scaling up exemplary high value care practices offers the potential to ensure values-driven maternal and newborn care for all women and babies.

Discussion

Increased use of healthcare interventions over the last century have been associated with reductions in maternal and newborn mortality and morbidity. However, over an optimum threshold, these are associated with increases in adverse effects and inappropriate use of scarce resources. The Quality Maternal and Newborn Care framework provides an example of what value based maternity care might look like. To deliver value based maternal and newborn care, a system-level shift is needed, ‘from fragmented care focused on identification and treatment of pathology for the minority to skilled care for all’.

Ideally, resources would be allocated at population and individual level to ensure care is woman-centred instead of institution/ profession centred but oftentimes, the drivers for spending resources are ‘the demands and beliefs of the acute sector’. We argue that decisions to allocate resources to high value activities, such as continuity of carer, need to be made at the macro level in the knowledge that these investments will relieve pressure on acute services while also ensuring the delivery of appropriate and high value care in the long run. To ensure that high value preventive and supportive care can be delivered, it is important that separate staff and money are allocated to, for example, models of continuity of carer to prevent shortages of resources due to rising demands of the acute services.

Summary

To achieve value based maternal and newborn care, mechanisms are needed to ensure adequate resource allocation to high value maternity care activities that should be separate from the resource demands of acute maternity services. Funding arrangements should support, where wanted and needed, seamless movement of women and neonates between systems of care.

Outcomes for the First Year of Ontario's Birth Center Demonstration Project

INTRODUCTION

In 2014, Ontario opened 2 stand-alone midwifery-led birth centers. Using mixed methods, we evaluated the first year of operations for quality and safety, client experience, and integration into the maternity care community. This article reports on our study of safety and quality of care.

METHODS

This descriptive evaluation focused on women admitted to a birth center at the beginning of labor. For context, we matched this cohort (on a 1:4 basis) with similar low-risk midwifery clients giving birth in a hospital. Data sources included Ontario's Better Outcomes Registry and Network (BORN) Information System, the Canadian Institute for Health Information, Ontario census data, and birth center records.

RESULTS

Of 495 women admitted to a birth center, 87.9% experienced a spontaneous vaginal birth, regardless of the eventual location of birth, and 7.7% had a cesarean birth. The transport rate to a hospital was 26.3%. When compared with midwifery clients with a planned hospital birth, rates of intervention (epidural analgesia, labor augmentation, assisted vaginal birth, and cesarean birth) were significantly lower in the planned birth center group, even when controlled for previous cesarean birth and body mass index. Markers of potential morbidity were identified in about 10% of birth center births; however, there were no short-term health impacts up to discharge from midwifery care at 6 weeks postpartum. Care was low in intervention and safe (minimal negative outcomes and transport rates comparable to the literature).

DISCUSSION

In the first year of operation, care was consistent with national guidelines, and morbidity and mortality rates and intervention rates were low for women with low-risk pregnancies seeking a low-intervention approach for labor and birth. Further evaluation to confirm these findings is required as the number of births grows.

The Integration of Ontario Birth Centers into Existing Maternal-Newborn Services: Health Care Provider Experiences

INTRODUCTION

In 2014, 2 freestanding, midwifery-led birth centers opened in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study was to qualitatively investigate the integration of the birth centers into the local, preexisting intrapartum systems from the perspective of health care providers and managerial staff.

METHODS

Focus groups or interviews were conducted with health care providers (paramedics, midwives, nurses, physicians) and managerial staff who had experienced urgent and/or nonurgent maternal or newborn transports from a birth center to one of 4 hospitals in Ottawa or Toronto. A descriptive qualitative approach to data analysis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Twenty-four health care providers and managerial staff participated in a focus group or interview. Participants described positive experiences transporting women and/or newborns from the birth centers to hospitals; these positive experiences were attributed to the collaborative planning, training, and communication that occurred prior to opening the birth centers. The degree of integration was dependent on hospital-specific characteristics such as history, culture, and the presence or absence of midwifery privileging. Participants described the need for only minor improvements to administrative processes as well as the challenge of keeping large numbers of staff updated with respect to urgent transport policies. Planning and opening of the birth centers was seen as a driving force in further integrating midwifery care and improving interprofessional practice.

DISCUSSION

The collaborative approach for the planning and implementation of the birth centers was a key factor in the successful integration into the existing maternal-newborn system and contributed to improving integrated professional practice among midwives, paramedics, nurses, and physicians. This approach may be used as a template for the integration of other new independent health care facilities and programs into the existing health care system.

[Introduction]

INTRODUCTION

This paper is based on two observations. First, despite multiple health programmes, access to services and quality of obstetric care remain inadequate in Africa. Secondly, although several qualitative studies have described the poor quality of admission facilities, violence during delivery and neglect of the poorest women, the reasons behind these behaviours have not been elucidated.This survey, conducted in Benin and Burkina Faso, examined midwives' experiences of their job, their obstetric practices and their lives.By including the emotional, sensorial, linguistic and social elements, this paper shows important discordances between the proposals made by programmes (installation in rural areas, strict financial management) and midwives' social and emotional duties and economic roles. It highlights the importance of gender relations in the careers of these professionals.The study also shows that the attitudes of midwives are related to the fact that childbirth is considered to be a moral act and their mistreatment behaviour corresponds to constant shifts between technical skills (fertility) and value judgements concerning expression of pain, sexuality and desire. On the other hand, midwives justify their violent practices by the urgency of the situation, especially during childbirth.The provision of care and effective implementation of programmes cannot be improved without taking into account these forms of justification and without constructing dialogues enabling midwives to develop a reflection about their social and emotional constraints, their relation to sexuality, and the reasons for their actions.

Perineal techniques during the second stage of labour for reducing perineal trauma

BACKGROUND

Most vaginal births are associated with trauma to the genital tract. The morbidity associated with perineal trauma can be significant, especially when it comes to third- and fourth-degree tears. Different interventions including perineal massage, warm or cold compresses, and perineal management techniques have been used to prevent trauma. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of perineal techniques during the second stage of labour on the incidence and morbidity associated with perineal trauma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (26 September 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published and unpublished randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating perineal techniques during the second stage of labour. Cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality. We checked data for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two trials were eligible for inclusion (with 20 trials involving 15,181 women providing data). Overall, trials were at moderate to high risk of bias; none had adequate blinding, and most were unclear for both allocation concealment and incomplete outcome data. Interventions compared included the use of perineal massage, warm and cold compresses, and other perineal management techniques.Most studies did not report data on our secondary outcomes. We downgraded evidence for risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision for all comparisons. Hands off (or poised) compared to hands onHands on or hands off the perineum made no clear difference in incidence of intact perineum (average risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.12, two studies, Tau² 0.00, I² 37%, 6547 women; moderate-quality evidence), first-degree perineal tears (average RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.77, two studies, 700 women; low-quality evidence), second-degree tears (average RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.28, two studies, 700 women; low-quality evidence), or third- or fourth-degree tears (average RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.26, five studies, Tau² 0.92, I² 72%, 7317 women; very low-quality evidence). Substantial heterogeneity for third- or fourth-degree tears means these data should be interpreted with caution. Episiotomy was more frequent in the hands-on group (average RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.79, Tau² 0.07, I² 74%, four studies, 7247 women; low-quality evidence), but there was considerable heterogeneity between the four included studies.There were no data for perineal trauma requiring suturing. Warm compresses versus control (hands off or no warm compress)A warm compress did not have any clear effect on the incidence of intact perineum (average RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.21; 1799 women; four studies; moderate-quality evidence), perineal trauma requiring suturing (average RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.66; 76 women; one study; very low-quality evidence), second-degree tears (average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.56; 274 women; two studies; very low-quality evidence), or episiotomy (average RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.23; 1799 women; four studies; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether warm compress increases or reduces the incidence of first-degree tears (average RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.38 to 3.79; 274 women; two studies; I² 88%; very low-quality evidence).Fewer third- or fourth-degree perineal tears were reported in the warm-compress group (average RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.79; 1799 women; four studies; moderate-quality evidence). Massage versus control (hands off or routine care)The incidence of intact perineum was increased in the perineal-massage group (average RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.73, six studies, 2618 women; I² 83% low-quality evidence) but there was substantial heterogeneity between studies). This group experienced fewer third- or fourth-degree tears (average RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.94, five studies, 2477 women; moderate-quality evidence).There were no clear differences between groups for perineal trauma requiring suturing (average RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.61, one study, 76 women; very low-quality evidence), first-degree tears (average RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.79 to 3.05, five studies, Tau² 0.47, I² 85%, 537 women; very low-quality evidence), or second-degree tears (average RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.12, five studies, Tau² 0.32, I² 62%, 537 women; very low-quality evidence). Perineal massage may reduce episiotomy although there was considerable uncertainty around the effect estimate (average RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.03, seven studies, Tau² 0.43, I² 92%, 2684 women; very low-quality evidence). Heterogeneity was high for first-degree tear, second-degree tear and for episiotomy - these data should be interpreted with caution. Ritgen's manoeuvre versus standard careOne study (66 women) found that women receiving Ritgen's manoeuvre were less likely to have a first-degree tear (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.69; very low-quality evidence), more likely to have a second-degree tear (RR 3.25, 95% CI 1.73 to 6.09; very low-quality evidence), and neither more nor less likely to have an intact perineum (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.31; very low-quality evidence). One larger study reported that Ritgen's manoeuvre did not have an effect on incidence of third- or fourth-degree tears (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.96,1423 women; low-quality evidence). Episiotomy was not clearly different between groups (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03, two studies, 1489 women; low-quality evidence). Other comparisonsThe delivery of posterior versus anterior shoulder first, use of a perineal protection device, different oils/wax, and cold compresses did not show any effects on perineal outcomes. Only one study contributed to each of these comparisons, so data were insufficient to draw conclusions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence suggests that warm compresses, and massage, may reduce third- and fourth-degree tears but the impact of these techniques on other outcomes was unclear or inconsistent. Poor-quality evidence suggests hands-off techniques may reduce episiotomy, but this technique had no clear impact on other outcomes. There were insufficient data to show whether other perineal techniques result in improved outcomes.Further research could be performed evaluating perineal techniques, warm compresses and massage, and how different types of oil used during massage affect women and their babies. It is important for any future research to collect information on women's views.

What influences birth place preferences, choices and decision-making amongst healthy women with straightforward pregnancies in the UK? A qualitative evidence synthesis using a 'best fit' framework approach

BACKGROUND

English maternity care policy has supported offering women choice of birth setting for over twenty years, but only 13% of women in England currently give birth in settings other than obstetric units (OUs). It is unclear why uptake of non-OU settings for birth remains relatively low. This paper presents a synthesis of qualitative evidence which explores influences on women's experiences of birth place choice, preference and decision-making from the perspectives of women using maternity services.

METHODS

Qualitative evidence synthesis of UK research published January 1992-March 2015, using a 'best-fit' framework approach. Searches were run in seven electronic data bases applying a comprehensive search strategy. Thematic framework analysis was used to synthesise extracted data from included studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-four papers drawing on twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. The synthesis identified support for the key framework themes. Women's experiences of choosing or deciding where to give birth were influenced by whether they received information about available options and about the right to choose, women's preferences for different services and their attributes, previous birth experiences, views of family, friends and health care professionals and women's beliefs about risk and safety. The synthesis additionally identified that women's access to choice of place of birth during the antenatal period varied. Planning to give birth in OU was straightforward, but although women considering birth in a setting other than hospital OU were sometimes well-supported, they also encountered obstacles and described needing to 'counter the negativity' surrounding home birth or birth in midwife-led settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the period covered by the review, it was straightforward for low risk women to opt for hospital birth in the UK. Accessing home birth was more complex and contested. The evidence on freestanding midwifery units (FMUs) is more limited, but suggests that women wanting to opt for an FMU birth experienced similar barriers. The extent to which women experienced similar problems accessing alongside midwifery units (AMUs) is unclear. Women's preferences for different birth options, particularly for 'hospital' vs non-hospital settings, are shaped by their pre-existing values, beliefs and experience, and not all women are open to all birth settings.

Washington State Childbearing Women's Experiences of Planned Home Births: A Heideggerian Phenomenological Investigation

The purpose of this interpretive study was to investigate planned home births that occurred in Washington State and to provide meaning. A Heideggerian phenomenological approach was chosen to investigate and interview a purposive sample of 9 childbearing women who experienced at least 1 home birth between 2010 and 2014 in Washington State. The results of this study suggest that childbirth education is an essential and valued aspect of birthing. Childbirth educators can use the findings from this investigation as a means to increase their awareness of birthing in the home. This interpretive investigation can give "voice" to the compelling evidence accumulating that is investigating planned home births as a sanctuary to allow physiological and low-intervention births to transpire.

A systematic review to examine the evidence regarding discussions by midwives, with women, around their options for where to give birth

BACKGROUND

Discussion of place of birth is important for women and maternity services, yet the detail, content and delivery of these discussions are unclear. The Birthplace Study found that for low risk, multiparous women, there was no significant difference in neonatal safety outcomes between women giving birth in obstetric units, midwifery-led units, or home. For low risk, nulliparous women giving birth in a midwifery-led unit was as safe as in hospital, whilst birth at home was associated with a small, increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. Intervention rates were reduced in all settings outside hospital. NICE guidelines recommend all women are supported in their choice of birth setting. Midwives have the opportunity to provide information to women about where they choose to give birth. However, research suggests women are sometimes unaware of all the options available. This systematic review will establish what is known about midwives' perspectives of discussions with women about their options for where to give birth and whether any interventions have been implemented to support these discussions.

METHODS

The systematic review was PROSPERO registered (registration number: CRD42015017334). The PRISMA statement was followed. Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Popline and EMBASE databases were searched between 2000-March 2015 and grey literature was searched. All identified studies were screened for inclusion. Qualitative data was thematically analysed, whilst quantitative data was summarised.

RESULTS

The themes identified relating to influences on midwives' place of birth discussions with women were organisational pressures and professional norms, inadequate knowledge and confidence of midwives, variation in what midwives told women and the influence of colleagues. None of the interventions identified provided sufficient evidence of effectiveness and were of poor quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The review has suggested the need for a pragmatic, understandable place of birth dialogue containing standard content to ensure midwives provide low risk women with adequate information about their place of birth options and the need to improve midwives knowledge about place of birth. A more robust, systematic evaluation of any interventions designed is required to improve the quality of place of birth discussions. By engaging with co-produced research, more effective interventions can be designed, implemented and sustained.

Women's experience of intrapartum transfer from a Western Australian birth centre co-located to a tertiary maternity hospital

BACKGROUND

The aim of this Western Australian study was to describe the overall labour and birth experience of women who were transferred during the first and second stages of labour from a low risk woman-centred, midwifery-led birth centre to a co-located tertiary maternity referral hospital.

METHODS

Using a descriptive phenomenological design, fifteen women were interviewed up to 8 weeks post birth (July to October, 2013) to explore their experience of the intrapartum transfer. Giorgi's method of analysis was used.

RESULTS

The following themes and subthemes emerged: 1) The midwife's voice with subthemes, a) The calming effect and b) Speaking up on my behalf; 2) In the zone with subthemes, a) Hanging in there and b) Post birth rationalizing; 3) Best of both worlds with subthemes a) The feeling of relief on transfer to tertiary birth suite and b) Returning back to the comfort and familiarity of the birth centre; 4) Lost sense of self; and 5) Lost birth dream with subthemes a) Narrowing of options and b) Feeling of panic. Women found the midwife's voice guided them through the transfer experience and were appreciative of continuity of care. There was a sense of disruption to expectations and disappointment in not achieving the labour and birth they had anticipated. There was however appreciation that the referral facility was nearby and experts were close at hand. The focus of care altered from woman to fetus, making women feel diminished. Women were glad to return to the familiar birth centre after the birth with the opportunity to talk through and fully understand their labour journey which helped them contextualise the transfer as one part of the whole experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings can inform midwives of the value of a continuity of care model within a birth centre, allowing women both familiarity and peace of mind. Maternity care providers should ensure that the woman remains the focus of care after transfer and understand the significance of effective communication to ensure women are included in all care discussions.

When choice becomes limited: Women's experiences of delay in labour

Choice and patient involvement in decision-making are strong aspirations of contemporary healthcare. One of the most striking areas in which this is played out is maternity care where recent policy has focused on choice and supporting normal birth. However, birth is sometimes not straightforward and unanticipated complications can rapidly reduce choice. We draw on the accounts of women who experienced delay during labour with their first child. This occurs when progress is slow, and syntocinon is administered to strengthen and regulate contractions. Once delay has been recognized, the clinical circumstances limit choice. Drawing on Mol’s work on the logics of choice and care, we explore how, although often upsetting, women accepted that their choices and plans were no longer feasible. The majority were happy to defer to professionals who they regarded as having the necessary technical expertise, while some adopted a more traditional medical model and actively rejected involvement in decision-making altogether. Only a minority wanted to continue active involvement in decision-making, although the extent to which the possibility existed for them to do so was questionable. Women appeared to accept that their ideals of choice and involvement had to be abandoned, and that clinical circumstances legitimately changed events.

The Dutch Birth Centre Study: study design of a programmatic evaluation of the effect of birth centre care in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Birth centres are regarded as settings where women with uncomplicated pregnancies can give birth, assisted by a midwife and a maternity care assistant. In case of (threatening) complications referral to a maternity unit of a hospital is necessary. In the last decade up to 20 different birth centres have been instituted in the Netherlands. This increase in birth centres is attributed to various reasons such as a safe and easy accessible place of birth, organizational efficiency in integration of care and direct access to obstetric hospital care if needed, and better use of maternity care assistance. Birth centres are assumed to offer increased integration and quality of care and thus to contribute to better perinatal and maternal outcomes. So far there is no evidence for this assumption as no previous studies of birth centres have been carried out in the Netherlands.

DESIGN

The aims are 1) Identification of birth centres and measuring integration of organization and care 2) Measuring the quality of birth centre care 3) Effects of introducing a birth centre on regional quality and provision of care 4) Cost-effectiveness analysis 5) In depth longitudinal analysis of the organization and processes in birth centres. Different qualitative and quantitative methods will be used in the different sub studies. The design is a multi-centre, multi-method study, including surveys, interviews, observations, and analysis of registration data and documents.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study will enable users of maternity care, professionals, policy makers and health care financers to make an informed choice about the kind of birth location that is appropriate for their needs and wishes.

An ethnographic organisational study of alongside midwifery units: a follow-on study from the Birthplace in England programme

Background

Alongside midwifery units (AMUs) were identified as a novel hybrid organisational form in the Birthplace in England Research Programme, to which this is a follow-on study. The number of such units (also known as hospital birth centres) has increased greatly in the UK since 2007. They provide midwife-led care to low-risk women adjacent to maternity units run by obstetricians, aiming to provide a homely environment to support normal childbirth. Women are transferred to the obstetric unit (OU) if they want an epidural or if complications occur.

Aims

This study aimed to investigate the ways that AMUs in England are organised, staffed and managed. It also aimed to look at the experiences of women receiving maternity care in an AMU and the views and experiences of maternity staff, including both those who work in an AMU and those in the adjacent OU.

Methods

An organisational ethnography approach was used, incorporating case studies of four AMUs, selected for maximum variation on the basis of geographical context, length of establishment of an AMU, size of unit, management, leadership and physical design. Interviews were conducted between December 2011 and October 2012 with service managers and key stakeholders (n = 35), with professionals working within and in relation to AMUs (n = 54) and with postnatal women and birth partners (n = 47). Observations were conducted of key decision-making points in the service (n = 20) and relevant service documents and guidelines were collected and reviewed.

Findings

Women and their families valued AMU care highly for its relaxed and comfortable environment, in which they felt cared for and valued, and for its support for normal birth. However, key points of transition for women could pose threats to equity of access and quality of their care, such as information and preparation for AMU care, and gaining admission in labour and transfer out of the unit. Midwives working in AMUs highly valued the environment, approach and the opportunity to exercise greater professional autonomy, but relations between units could also be experienced as problematic and as threats to professional autonomy as well as to quality and safety of care. We identified key themes that pose potential challenges for the quality, safety and sustainability of AMU care: boundary work and management, professional issues, staffing models and relationships, skills and confidence, and information and access for women.

Conclusions

AMUs have a role to play in contributing to service quality and safety. They provide care that is satisfying for women, their partners and families and for health professionals, and they facilitate appropriate care pathways and professional roles and skills. There is a potential for AMUs to provide equitable access to midwife-led care when midwifery unit care is the default option (opt-out) for all healthy women. The Birthplace in England study indicated that AMUs provide safe and cost-effective care. However, the opportunity to plan to birth in an AMU is not yet available to all eligible women, and is often an opt-in service, which may limit access. The alignment of physical, philosophical and professional boundaries is inherent in the rationale for AMU provision, but poses challenges for managing the service to ensure key safety features of quality and safety are maintained. We discuss some key issues that may be relevant to managers in seeking to respond to such challenges, including professional education, inter- and intraprofessional communication, relationships and teamwork, integrated models of midwifery and women’s care pathways. Further work is recommended to examine approaches to scaling up of midwifery unit provision, including staffing and support models. Research is also recommended on how to support women effectively in early labour and on provision of evidence-based and supportive information for women.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Preventable obstetrical interventions: how many caesarean sections can be prevented in Canada?

Public health authorities have been alarmed by the progressive rise in rates of Caesarean section in Canada, approaching one birth in three in several provinces. We aimed therefore to consider what were preventable obstetrical interventions in women with a low-risk pregnancy and to propose an analytic framework for the reduction of the rate of CS. We obtained statistical variations of CS rates over time, across regions, and within professional practices from MED-ÉCHO, the Quebec hospitalization database, from 1969 to 2009. Data were extracted from a recent systematic review of the cascade of obstetrical interventions to calculate the population-attributable fractions for each intervention associated with an increased probability of CS. We thereby identified expectant management (as an alternative to labour induction) and planned vaginal birth after CS as the leading strategies for potentially reducing rates of CS in women at low risk. For vaginal birth after CS, an increase to its 1995 level could lower the current CS rate of 23.2% (2009 to 2010) to 21.0%. Other alternatives to obstetrical interventions with a potential for lowering CS rates included non-pharmacological pain control methods (such as continuous support during childbirth) in addition to usual care, intermittent auscultation of the fetal heart (instead of electronic fetal monitoring), and multidisciplinary internal quality assessment audits. We believe, therefore, that the concept of preventable CS is supported by empirical evidence, and we identified realistic strategies to maintain a CS rate in Quebec near 20%.

Incidence of and risk factors for perineal trauma: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to describe the range of perineal trauma in women with a singleton vaginal birth and estimate the effect of maternal and obstetric characteristics on the incidence of perineal tears.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study on all women with a planned singleton vaginal delivery between May and September 2006 in one obstetric unit, three freestanding midwifery-led units and home settings in South East England. Data on maternal and obstetric characteristics were collected prospectively and analysed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression. The outcome measures were incidence of perineal trauma, type of perineal trauma and whether it was sutured or not.

RESULTS

The proportion of women with an intact perineum at delivery was 9.6% (125/1,302) in nulliparae, and 31.2% (453/1,452) in multiparae, with a higher incidence in the community (freestanding midwifery-led units and home settings). Multivariable analysis showed multiparity (OR 0.52; 95% CI: 0.30-0.90) was associated with reduced odds of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS), whilst forceps (OR 4.43; 95% CI: 2.02-9.71), longer duration of second stage of labour (OR 1.49; 95% CI: 1.13-1.98), and heavier birthweight (OR 1.001; 95% CI: 1.001-1.001), were associated with increased odds. Adjusted ORs for spontaneous perineal truama were: multiparity (OR 0.42; 95% CI: 0.32-0.56); hospital delivery (OR 1.48; 95% CI: 1.01-2.17); forceps delivery (OR 2.61; 95% CI: 1.22-5.56); longer duration of second stage labour (OR 1.45; 95% CI: 1.28-1.63); and heavier birthweight (OR 1.001; 95% CI: 1.000-1.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This large prospective study found no evidence for an association between many factors related to midwifery practice such as use of a birthing pool, digital perineal stretching in the second stage, hands off delivery technique, or maternal birth position with incidence of OASIS or spontaneous perineal trauma. We also found a low overall incidence of OASIS, and fewer second degree tears were sutured in the community than in the hospital settings. This study confirms previous findings of overall high incidence of perineal trauma following vaginal delivery, and a strong association between forceps delivery and perineal trauma.

Exploring Professional Support Offered by Midwives during Labour: An Observation and Interview Study

Support in labour has an impact on the childbirth experience as well as on childbirth outcomes. Both social and professional support is needed. The aim of this study was to explore professional support offered by midwives during labour in relation to the supportive needs of the childbearing woman and her partner. The study used a qualitative, inductive design using triangulation, with observation followed by interviews. Seven midwives were observed when caring for seven women/couples in labour. After the observations, individual interviews with midwives, women, and their partners were conducted. Data were analysed using hermeneutical text interpretation. The results are presented with three themes. (1) Support as a professional task seems unclear and less well defined than medical controls. (2) Midwives and parents express somewhat different supportive ideas about how to create a sense of security. (3) Partner and midwife interact in support of the childbearing woman. The main interpretation shows that midwives' supportive role during labour could be understood as them mainly adopting the "with institution" ideology in contrast to the "with woman" ideology. This may increase the risk of childbearing women and their partners perceiving lack of support during labour. There is a need to increase efficiency by providing support for professionals to adopt the "with woman" ideology.

Public health interventions in midwifery: a systematic review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Maternity care providers, particularly midwives, have a window of opportunity to influence pregnant women about positive health choices. This aim of this paper is to identify evidence of effective public health interventions from good quality systematic reviews that could be conducted by midwives.

METHODS

Relevant databases including MEDLINE, Pubmed, EBSCO, CRD, MIDIRS, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library and Econlit were searched to identify systematic reviews in October 2010. Quality assessment of all reviews was conducted.

RESULTS

Thirty-six good quality systematic reviews were identified which reported on effective interventions. The reviews were conducted on a diverse range of interventions across the reproductive continuum and were categorised under: screening; supplementation; support; education; mental health; birthing environment; clinical care in labour and breast feeding. The scope and strength of the review findings are discussed in relation to current practice. A logic model was developed to provide an overarching framework of midwifery public health roles to inform research policy and practice.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides a broad scope of high quality systematic review evidence and definitively highlights the challenge of knowledge transfer from research into practice. The review also identified gaps in knowledge around the impact of core midwifery practice on public health outcomes and the value of this contribution. This review provides evidence for researchers and funders as to the gaps in current knowledge and should be used to inform the strategic direction of the role of midwifery in public health in policy and practice.

Planned hospital birth versus planned home birth

BACKGROUND

Observational studies of increasingly better quality and in different settings suggest that planned home birth in many places can be as safe as planned hospital birth and with less intervention and fewer complications. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1998.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of planned hospital birth compared with planned home birth in selected low-risk women, assisted by an experienced midwife with collaborative medical back up in case transfer should be necessary.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 March 2012) and contacted editors and authors involved with possible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing planned hospital birth with planned home birth in low-risk women as described in the objectives.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The two review authors as independently as possible assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Two trials met the inclusion criteria but only one trial involving 11 women provided some outcome data and was included. The evidence from this trial was of moderate quality and too small to allow conclusions to be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no strong evidence from randomised trials to favour either planned hospital birth or planned home birth for low-risk pregnant women. However, the trials show that women living in areas where they are not well informed about home birth may welcome ethically well-designed trials that would ensure an informed choice. As the quality of evidence in favour of home birth from observational studies seems to be steadily increasing, it might be as important to prepare a regularly updated systematic review including observational studies as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions as to attempt to set up new randomised controlled trials.

Characteristics, interventions, and outcomes of women who used a birthing pool: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Birthing pools are integrated into maternity care in the United Kingdom and are a popular care option for women in midwifery-led units and at home. The objective of this study was to describe and compare maternal characteristics, intrapartum events, interventions, and maternal and neonatal outcomes by planned place of birth for women who used a birthing pool.

METHODS

A total of 8,924 women at low risk of childbirth complications were recruited from care settings in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Descriptive analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 7,915 (88.9%) women had a spontaneous birth (5,192, 58.3% water births), of whom 4,953 (55.5%) were nulliparas. Fewer nulliparas whose planned place of birth was the community (freestanding midwifery unit or home) had labor augmentation by artificial membrane rupture (149, 11.3% [95% CI: 9.6-13.1]), compared with an alongside midwifery unit (271, 22.7% [95% CI: 20.3-25.2]), or obstetric unit (639, 26.3% [95% CI: 24.5-28.1]). Results were similar for epidural analgesia and episiotomy. More community nulliparas had spontaneous birth (1,172, 88.9% [95% CI: 87.1-90.6]), compared with birth in an alongside midwifery unit (942, 79% [95% CI: 76.6-81.3]) and obstetric unit (1,923, 79.2% [95% CI: 77.5-80.8]); and fewer required hospital transfer (265, 20% [95% CI: 17-22.2]) compared with those in an alongside midwifery unit (370, 31% [95% CI: 28.3-33.7]). Results for multiparas and newborns were similar across care settings. Twenty babies had an umbilical cord snap, 18 (90%) of which occurred during water birth.

CONCLUSIONS

Birthing pool use was associated with a high frequency of spontaneous birth, particularly among nulliparas. Findings revealed differences in midwifery practice between obstetric units, alongside midwifery units, and the community, which may affect outcomes, particularly for nulliparas. No evidence was found for a difference across care settings in interventions or outcomes in multiparas or in outcomes for newborns. During water birth, it is important to prevent undue traction on the cord as the baby is guided to the surface.

Factors associated with maternal intrapartum transfers from a freestanding birth centre in São Paulo, Brazil: a case control study

OBJECTIVES

to identify factors associated with maternal intrapartum transfer from a freestanding birth centre to hospital.

DESIGN

case-control study with retrospective data collection.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTINGS

cases included all 111 women transferred from a freestanding birth centre in Sao Paulo to the referral hospital, from March 2002 to December 2009. The controls were 456 women who gave birth in the birth centre during the same period who were not transferred, randomly selected with four controls for each case.

METHODS

data were obtained from maternal records. Factors associated with maternal intrapartum transfers were initially analysed using a χ(2) test of association. Variables with p<0.20 were then included in multivariate analyses. A multiple logistic regression model was built using stepwise forward selection; variables which reached statistical significance at p<0.05 were considered to be independently associated with maternal transfer.

FINDINGS

during the study data collection period, 111 (4%) of 2,736 women admitted to the centre were transferred intrapartum. Variables identified as independently associated factors for intrapartum transfer included nulliparity (OR 5.1, 95% CI 2.7-9.8), maternal age ≥35 years (OR 5.4, 95% CI 2.1-13.4), not having a partner (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.5-5.3), cervical dilation ≤3 cm on admission to the birth centre (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2) and between 5 and 12 antenatal appointments at the birth centre (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.9-7.5). In contrast, a low correlation between fundal height and pregnancy gestation (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.6) appeared to be protective against transfer.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

identifying factors associated with maternal intrapartum transfer could support decision making by women considering options for place of birth, and support the content of appropriate information about criteria for admission to a birth centre. Findings add to the evidence base to support identification of women in early labour who may experience later complications and could support timely implementation of appropriate interventions associated with reducing transfer rates.

Alternative versus conventional institutional settings for birth

BACKGROUND

Alternative institutional settings have been established for the care of pregnant women who prefer little or no medical intervention. The settings may offer care throughout pregnancy and birth, or only during labour; they may be part of hospitals or freestanding entities. Specially designed labour rooms include bedroom-like rooms, ambient rooms, and Snoezelen rooms.

OBJECTIVES

Primary: to assess the effects of care in an alternative institutional birth environment compared to care in a conventional setting. Secondary: to determine if the effects of birth settings are influenced by staffing, architectural features, organizational models or geographical location.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 March 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials which compared the effects of an alternative institutional birth setting to a conventional setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methods of the Cochrane Collaboration Pregnancy and Childbirth Group. Two review authors evaluated methodological quality. We performed double data extraction and presented results using risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Ten trials involving 11,795 women met the inclusion criteria. We found no trials of freestanding birth centres or Snoezelen rooms. Allocation to an alternative setting increased the likelihood of: no intrapartum analgesia/anesthesia (six trials, n = 8953; RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.33); spontaneous vaginal birth (eight trials; n = 11,202; RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.05); breastfeeding at six to eight weeks (one trial, n = 1147; RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.06); and very positive views of care (two trials, n = 1207; RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.78 to 2.15). Allocation to an alternative setting decreased the likelihood of epidural analgesia (eight trials, n = 10.931; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.87); oxytocin augmentation of labour (eight trials, n = 11,131; RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.88); instrumental vaginal birth (eight trials, n = 11,202; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99), and episiotomy (eight trials, n = 11,055; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.90). There was no apparent effect on other adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes. Care by the same or separate staff had no apparent effects. No conclusions could be drawn regarding the effects of continuity of caregiver or architectural characteristics. In several of the trials included in this review, the design features of the alternative setting were confounded by important differences in the organizational models for care (separate staff for the alternative setting, offering more continuity of caregiver), and thus it is difficult to draw inferences about the independent effects of the physical birth environment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Hospital birth centres are associated with lower rates of medical interventions during labour and birth and higher levels of satisfaction, without increasing risk to mothers or babies.

A metasynthesis of midwife-led care

The purpose of this metasynthesis is to describe and interpret qualitative research relating to midwife-led care to see if it sheds light on why low-risk women experience fewer birth interventions within this model of care. Eleven articles were included in the review. Three themes emerged: (a) relationally mediated benefits for women that resulted in increased agency and empathic care; (b) the problematic interface of midwife-led units with host maternity units, stemming from a clash of models and culture; and (c) greater agency for midwives within midwife-led models of care though bounded by the relationship with the host maternity unit. This metasynthesis suggests that lower rates of interventions could be linked to the greater agency experienced by women and midwives within midwife-led models, and that these effects are mediated, in part, by the smallness of scale in these settings.

Freestanding midwifery units versus obstetric units: does the effect of place of birth differ with level of social disadvantage?

Background

Social inequity in perinatal and maternal health is a well-documented health problem even in countries with a high level of social equality. We aimed to study whether the effect of birthplace on perinatal and maternal morbidity, birth interventions and use of pain relief among low risk women intending to give birth in two freestanding midwifery units (FMU) versus two obstetric units in Denmark differed by level of social disadvantage.

Methods

The study was designed as a cohort study with a matched control group. It included 839 low-risk women intending to give birth in an FMU, who were prospectively and individually matched on nine selected obstetric/socio-economic factors to 839 low-risk women intending OU birth. Educational level was chosen as a proxy for social position. Analysis was by intention-to-treat.

Results

Women intending to give birth in an FMU had a significantly higher likelihood of uncomplicated, spontaneous birth with good outcomes for mother and infant compared to women intending to give birth in an OU. The likelihood of intact perineum, use of upright position for birth and water birth was also higher. No difference was found in perinatal morbidity or third/fourth degree tears, while birth interventions including caesarean section and epidural analgesia were significantly less frequent among women intending to give birth in an FMU. In our sample of healthy low-risk women with spontaneous onset of labour at term after an uncomplicated pregnancy, the positive results of intending to give birth in an FMU as compared to an OU were found to hold for both women with post-secondary education and the potentially vulnerable group of FMU women without post-secondary education. In all cases, women without post-secondary education intending to give birth in an FMU had comparable and, in some respects, more favourable outcomes when compared to women with the same level of education intending to give birth in an OU. In this sample of low-risk women, we found that the effect of intended place on birth outcomes did not differ with women’s level of education.

Conclusion

FMU care appears to offer important benefits for birthing women with no additional risk to the infant. Both for women with and without post-secondary education, intending to give birth in an FMU significantly increased the likelihood of a spontaneous, uncomplicated birth with good outcomes for mother and infant compared to women intending to give birth in an OU. All women should be provided with adequate information about different care models and supported in making an informed decision about the place of birth.

Satisfaction with a modified form of in-hospital birth center care compared with standard maternity care

BACKGROUND

For safety reasons an in-hospital birth center was replaced by a modified form of birth center care with the same medical guidelines and equipment as in standard care. The aim of this study was to investigate women's and men's satisfaction with modified care compared with standard care.

METHODS

Women in both groups gave birth from July 2007 to July 2008. The same medical low-risk criteria during pregnancy applied to both groups. Of those invited to the study, 547 (82.7%) women in modified birth center care and 445 (66.7%) men returned a questionnaire posted 2 months after the birth, and 786 (71.6%) women and 639 (58.2%) men in standard care. Odds ratios (ORs) for being satisfied were calculated with 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs) and adjusted for possible confounders. We also explored the effects of different components of care on overall satisfaction.

RESULTS

Adjusted ORs for being satisfied overall were approximately doubled in the modified birth center group compared with the standard care group: antenatal care-OR: 2.1 (95% CI: 1.6-2.7) in women and OR: 2.2 (95% CI: 1.5-2.8) in men; intrapartum care-OR: 2.2 (95% CI: 1.7-2.9) in women and OR: 1.7 (95% CI: 1.3-2.4) in men; and postpartum care-OR: 1.7 in women (95% CI: 1.4-2.2) and OR: 2.1 (95% CI: 1.6-2.8) in men. Important explanations of these differences included perception of the midwife as being more supportive, the presence of a calmer environment and atmosphere (intrapartum), and the option for fathers to stay overnight (postpartum).

CONCLUSION

In-hospital birth center with medical equipment on site increased overall satisfaction with all episodes of care compared with standard care. (BIRTH 39:2 June 2012).

Cost effectiveness of alternative planned places of birth in woman at low risk of complications: evidence from the Birthplace in England national prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the cost effectiveness of alternative planned places of birth.

DESIGN

Economic evaluation with individual level data from the Birthplace national prospective cohort study.

SETTING

142 of 147 trusts providing home birth services, 53 of 56 freestanding midwifery units, 43 of 51 alongside midwifery units, and a random sample of 36 of 180 obstetric units, stratified by unit size and geographical region, in England, over varying periods of time within the study period 1 April 2008 to 30 April 2010.

PARTICIPANTS

64,538 women at low risk of complications before the onset of labour.

INTERVENTIONS

Planned birth in four alternative settings: at home, in freestanding midwifery units, in alongside midwifery units, and in obstetric units.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost per adverse perinatal outcome avoided, adverse maternal morbidity avoided, and additional normal birth. The non-parametric bootstrap method was used to generate net monetary benefits and construct cost effectiveness acceptability curves at alternative thresholds for cost effectiveness.

RESULTS

The total unadjusted mean costs were £1066, £1435, £1461, and £1631 for births planned at home, in freestanding midwifery units, in alongside midwifery units, and in obstetric units, respectively (equivalent to about €1274, $1701; €1715, $2290; €1747, $2332; and €1950, $2603). Overall, and for multiparous women, planned birth at home generated the greatest mean net benefit with a 100% probability of being the optimal setting across all thresholds of cost effectiveness when perinatal outcomes were considered. There was, however, an increased incidence of adverse perinatal outcome associated with planned birth at home in nulliparous low risk women, resulting in the probability of it being the most cost effective option at a cost effectiveness threshold of £20 000 declining to 0.63. With regards to maternal outcomes in nulliparous and multiparous women, planned birth at home generated the greatest mean net benefit with a 100% probability of being the optimal setting across all thresholds of cost effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

For multiparous women at low risk of complications, planned birth at home was the most cost effective option. For nulliparous low risk women, planned birth at home is still likely to be the most cost effective option but is associated with an increase in adverse perinatal outcomes.

The impact of birthplace on women's birth experiences and perceptions of care

Overall birth experience is an important outcome of birth, and studies of psycho-social birth outcomes and women's perspectives on care are increasingly used to evaluate and develop maternity care services. We examined the influence of birthplace on women's birth experiences and perceptions of care in two freestanding midwifery units (FMU) and two obstetric units (OU) in north Denmark, all pursuing an ideal of high-quality, humanistic and patient-centred care. As part of a matched cohort study, a postal questionnaire survey was undertaken. Two hundred and eighteen low-risk women in FMU care, admitted between January-October 2006, and an obstetrically/socio-demographically matched control group of 218 low-risk women admitted to an OU were invited to participate. Three hundred and seventy-five women (86%) responded. Birth experience and satisfaction with care were rated significantly more positively by FMU than by OU women. Significantly better results for FMU care were also found for specific patient-centred care elements (support, participation in decision-making, attentiveness to psychological needs and to wishes for birth, information, and for women's feeling of being listened to). Adjustment for medical birth factors slightly increased the positive effect of FMU care. Subgroup analysis showed that a significant, negative effect of low education and employment level on birth experience was found only for the OU group. Our results provide strong support of FMU care and underline the big challenges in providing individual and supportive care for all women, especially in OUs. Policy-makers and professionals need to consider how the advantages provided by FMU care can support the effort to improve women's birth experience and possibly also the combat of the negative effect of social disadvantage on health.

Patient safety in midwifery-led care in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

to describe the incidence and characteristics of patient safety incidents in midwifery-led care for low-risk pregnant women.

DESIGN

multi-method study.

SETTING

20 midwifery practices in the Netherlands; 1,000 patient records.

POPULATION

low-risk pregnant women.

METHODS

prospective incident reporting by midwives during 2 weeks; questionnaire on safety culture and retrospective content analysis of 1,000 patient records in 2009.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

incidence, type, impact and causes of safety incidents.

RESULTS

in the 1,000 patient records involving 14,888 contacts, 86 safety incidents were found with 25 of these having a noticeable effect on the patient. Low-risk pregnant women in midwifery care had a probability of 8.6% for a safety incident (95% CI 4.8-14.4). In 9 safety incidents, temporary monitoring of the mother and/or child was necessary. In another 6 safety incidents, reviewers reported psychological distress for the patient. Hospital admission followed from 1 incident. No safety incidents were associated with mortality or permanent harm. The majority of incidents found in the patient records concerned treatment and organisational factors.

CONCLUSIONS

a low prevalence of patient safety incidents was found in midwifery care for low-risk pregnant women. This first systematic study of patient safety in midwifery adds to the base of evidence regarding the safety of midwifery-led care for low-risk women. Nevertheless, some areas for improvement were found. Improvement of patient safety should address the better adherence to practice guidelines for patient risk assessment, better implementation of interventions for known lifestyle risk factors and better availability of midwives during birthing care.

Perineal techniques during the second stage of labour for reducing perineal trauma

BACKGROUND

Most vaginal births are associated with some form of trauma to the genital tract. The morbidity associated with perineal trauma is significant, especially when it comes to third- and fourth-degree tears. Different perineal techniques and interventions are being used to prevent perineal trauma. These interventions include perineal massage, warm compresses and perineal management techniques.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effect of perineal techniques during the second stage of labour on the incidence of perineal trauma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (20 May 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of ControlledTrials (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2 of 4), MEDLINE (January 1966 to 20 May 2011) and CINAHL (January 1983 to 20 May 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published and unpublished randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating any described perineal techniques during the second stage.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trails for inclusion, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality. Data were checked for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials involving 11,651 randomised women. There was a significant effect of warm compresses on reduction of third- and fourth-degree tears (risk ratio (RR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 0.84 (two studies, 1525 women)). There was also a significant effect towards favouring massage versus hands off to reduce third- and fourth-degree tears (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.94 (two studies, 2147 women)). Hands off (or poised) versus hand on showed no effect on third- and fourth-degree tears, but we observed a significant effect of hands off on reduced rate of episiotomy (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.96 (two studies, 6547 women)).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of warm compresses on the perineum is associated with a decreased occurrence of perineal trauma. The procedure has shown to be acceptable to women and midwives. This procedure may therefore be offered to women.

Perinatal and maternal outcomes by planned place of birth for healthy women with low risk pregnancies: the Birthplace in England national prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare perinatal outcomes, maternal outcomes, and interventions in labour by planned place of birth at the start of care in labour for women with low risk pregnancies.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

England: all NHS trusts providing intrapartum care at home, all freestanding midwifery units, all alongside midwifery units (midwife led units on a hospital site with an obstetric unit), and a stratified random sample of obstetric units.

PARTICIPANTS

64,538 eligible women with a singleton, term (≥37 weeks gestation), and "booked" pregnancy who gave birth between April 2008 and April 2010. Planned caesarean sections and caesarean sections before the onset of labour and unplanned home births were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

A composite primary outcome of perinatal mortality and intrapartum related neonatal morbidities (stillbirth after start of care in labour, early neonatal death, neonatal encephalopathy, meconium aspiration syndrome, brachial plexus injury, fractured humerus, or fractured clavicle) was used to compare outcomes by planned place of birth at the start of care in labour (at home, freestanding midwifery units, alongside midwifery units, and obstetric units).

RESULTS

There were 250 primary outcome events and an overall weighted incidence of 4.3 per 1000 births (95% CI 3.3 to 5.5). Overall, there were no significant differences in the adjusted odds of the primary outcome for any of the non-obstetric unit settings compared with obstetric units. For nulliparous women, the odds of the primary outcome were higher for planned home births (adjusted odds ratio 1.75, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.86) but not for either midwifery unit setting. For multiparous women, there were no significant differences in the incidence of the primary outcome by planned place of birth. Interventions during labour were substantially lower in all non-obstetric unit settings. Transfers from non-obstetric unit settings were more frequent for nulliparous women (36% to 45%) than for multiparous women (9% to 13%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results support a policy of offering healthy women with low risk pregnancies a choice of birth setting. Women planning birth in a midwifery unit and multiparous women planning birth at home experience fewer interventions than those planning birth in an obstetric unit with no impact on perinatal outcomes. For nulliparous women, planned home births also have fewer interventions but have poorer perinatal outcomes.

Childbirth experience according to a group of Brazilian primiparas

OBJECTIVE

to understand the meaning of the childbirth experience for Brazilian primiparas in the postpartum period.

DESIGN

a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews. Content analysis was used to derive the two themes that emerged from the discourses.

SETTING

participants were recruited at four primary-level health-care units in Ribeirão Preto, Brazil. After providing written informed consent, an appointment was made for an interview at the participants' homes.

PARTICIPANTS

20 primiparas in the postpartum period, aged 15-26 years old, who attended the health-care units to vaccinate their infants and test for phenylketonuria.

FINDINGS

two thematic categories emerged from the interviews: the meaning attributed to childbirth (with four subcategories) and perceptions of care. Among the participants, the childbirth experience was marked by the 'fear of death' and 'losing the child'. The pain of giving birth was expected, and the moment of childbirth was associated with pain of high intensity.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

childbirth is considered synonymous with physical and emotional suffering, pain, fear and risk of death.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

this research indicates the need to break the current mechanistic model of care on which health professionals' actions are based. Care during childbirth must be guided by the foundation that women are the subjects of childbirth actions, in an attempt to emphasise actions that grant them with the autonomy and empowerment needed to experience the situation.

Comparison of midwife-led and consultant-led care of healthy women at low risk of childbirth complications in the Republic of Ireland: a randomised trial

BACKGROUND

No midwifery-led units existed in Ireland before 2004. The aim of this study was to compare midwife-led (MLU) versus consultant-led (CLU) care for healthy, pregnant women without risk factors for labour and delivery.

METHODS

An unblinded, pragmatic randomised trial was designed, funded by the Health Service Executive (Dublin North-East). Following ethical approval, all women booking prior to 24 weeks of pregnancy at two maternity hospitals with 1,300-3,200 births annually in Ireland were assessed for trial eligibility.1,653 consenting women were centrally randomised on a 2:1 ratio to MLU or CLU care, (1101:552). 'Intention-to-treat' analysis was used to compare 9 key neonatal and maternal outcomes.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was found between MLU and CLU in the seven key outcomes: caesarean birth (163 [14.8%] vs 84 [15.2%]; relative risk (RR) 0.97 [95% CI 0.76 to 1.24]), induction (248 [22.5%] vs 138 [25.0%]; RR 0.90 [0.75 to 1.08]), episiotomy (126 [11.4%] vs 68 [12.3%]; RR 0.93 [0.70 to 1.23]), instrumental birth (139 [12.6%] vs 79 [14.3%]; RR 0.88 [0.68 to 1.14]), Apgar scores < 8 (10 [0.9%] vs 9 [1.6%]; RR 0.56 [0.23 to 1.36]), postpartum haemorrhage (144 [13.1%] vs 75 [13.6%]; RR 0.96 [0.74 to 1.25]); breastfeeding initiation (616 [55.9%] vs 317 [57.4%]; RR 0.97 [0.89 to 1.06]). MLU women were significantly less likely to have continuous electronic fetal monitoring (397 [36.1%] vs 313 [56.7%]; RR 0.64 [0.57 to 0.71]), or augmentation of labour (436 [39.6%] vs 314 [56.9%]; RR 0.50 [0.40 to 0.61]).

CONCLUSIONS

Midwife-led care, as practised in this study, is as safe as consultant-led care and is associated with less intervention during labour and delivery.

Is the operative delivery rate in low-risk women dependent on the level of birth care? A randomised controlled trial

Objective

To investigate possible differences in operative delivery rate among low-risk women, randomised to an alongside midwifery-led unit or to standard obstetric units within the same hospital.

Design

Randomised controlled trial.

Setting

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Østfold Hospital Trust, Tromsø, Norway.

Population

A total of 1111 women assessed to be at low risk at onset of spontaneous labour.

Methods

Randomisation into one of three birth units: the special unit; the normal unit; or the midwife-led unit.

Main outcome measures

Total operative delivery rate, augmentation, pain relief, postpartum haemorrhage, sphincter injuries and intrapartum transfer, Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes, metabolic acidosis and transfer to neonatal intensive care unit.

Results

There were no significant differences in total operative deliveries between the three units: 16.3% in the midwife-led unit; 18.0% in the normal unit; and 18.8% in the special unit. There were no significant differences in postpartum haemorrhage, sphincter injuries or in neonatal outcomes. There were statistically significant differences in augmentation (midwife-led unit versus normal unit RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59–0.89; midwife-led unit versus special unit RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.56–0.86), in epidural analgesia (midwife-led unit versus normal unit RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52–0.90; midwife-led unit versus special unit RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.47–0.86) and in acupuncture (midwife-led unit versus normal unit RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.25–1.69; midwife-led unit versus special unit RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22–1.73).

Conclusions

The level of birth care does not significantly affect the rate of operative deliveries in low-risk women without any expressed preference for level of birth care.

Planned place of birth in New Zealand: does it affect mode of birth and intervention rates among low-risk women?

BACKGROUND

Midwives providing care as lead maternity caregivers in New Zealand provide continuity of care to women who may give birth in a variety of settings, including home, primary units, and secondary and tertiary level hospitals. The purpose of this study was to compare mode of birth and intrapartum intervention rates for low-risk women planning to give birth in these settings under the care of midwives.

METHODS

Data for a cohort of low-risk women giving birth in 2006 and 2007 were extracted from the Midwifery Maternity Provider Organisation database. Mode of birth, intrapartum interventions, and neonatal outcomes were compared with results adjusted for age, parity, ethnicity, and smoking.

RESULTS

Women planning to give birth in secondary and tertiary hospitals had a higher risk of cesarean section, assisted modes of birth, and intrapartum interventions than similar women planning to give birth at home and in primary units. The risk of emergency cesarean section for women planning to give birth in a tertiary unit was 4.62 (95% CI: 3.66-5.84) times that of a woman planning to give birth in a primary unit. Newborns of women planning to give birth in secondary and tertiary hospitals also had a higher risk of admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (RR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.05-1.87; RR: 1.78, 95% CI: 1.31-2.42) than women planning to give birth in a primary unit.

CONCLUSIONS

Planned place of birth has a significant influence on mode of birth and rates of intrapartum intervention in childbirth.

The International Confederation of Midwives essential competencies for basic midwifery practice. an update study: 2009-2010

OBJECTIVE

a 2-year study was conducted to update the core competencies for basic midwifery practice, first delineated by the International Confederation of Midwives in 2002. A competency domain related to abortion-related care services was newly developed.

DESIGN

a modified Delphi survey process was conducted in two phases: a pilot item affirmation study, and a global field survey.

SETTING

a global survey conducted in 90 countries.

PARTICIPANTS

midwifery educators or clinicians associated with midwifery education schools and programmes located in any of the ICM member association countries. Additional participants represented the fields of nursing, medicine, and midwifery regulatory authorities. A total of 232 individuals from 63 member association and five non-member countries responded to one or both of the surveys. The achieved sample represented 42% of member association countries, which was less than the 51% target. However, the sample was proportionally representative of ICM's nine global regions.

MEASUREMENTS

survey respondents expressed an opinion whether to retain or to delete any of 255 statements of midwifery knowledge, skill, or professional behaviour. They also indicated whether the item should be a basic (core) item of midwifery knowledge or skill that would be included as mandatory content in a programme of midwifery pre-service education, or whether the item could be added to the fund of knowledge or acquired as an additional skill by those who would need or wish to include the item within the scope of their clinical practice.

FINDINGS

a majority consensus of .85 was required to accept the item without further deliberation. An expert panel made final decisions in all instances where consensus was not achieved. The panel also amended the wording of selected items, or added new items based on feedback received from survey respondents. The final document contains 268 items organised within seven competency domains.

Infection control in delivery care units, Gujarat state, India: a needs assessment

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, women in India attend health facilities for childbirth, partly due to incentives paid under government programs. Increased use of health facilities can alleviate the risks of infections contracted in unhygienic home deliveries, but poor infection control practices in labour and delivery units also cause puerperal sepsis and other infections of childbirth. A needs assessment was conducted to provide information on procedures and practices related to infection control in labour and delivery units in Gujarat state, India.

METHODS

Twenty health care facilities, including private and public primary health centres and referral hospitals, were sampled from two districts in Gujarat state, India. Three pre-tested tools for interviewing and for observation were used. Data collection was based on existing infection control guidelines for clean practices, clean equipment, clean environment and availability of diagnostics and treatment. The study was carried out from April to May 2009.

RESULTS

Seventy percent of respondents said that standard infection control procedures were followed, but a written procedure was only available in 5% of facilities. Alcohol rubs were not used for hand cleaning and surgical gloves were reused in over 70% of facilities, especially for vaginal examinations in the labour room. Most types of equipment and supplies were available but a third of facilities did not have wash basins with "hands-free" taps. Only 15% of facilities reported that wiping of surfaces was done immediately after each delivery in labour rooms. Blood culture services were available in 25% of facilities and antibiotics are widely given to women after normal delivery. A few facilities had data on infections and reported rates of 3% to 5%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study of current infection control procedures and practices during labour and delivery in health facilities in Gujarat revealed a need for improved information systems, protocols and procedures, and for training and research. Simply incentivizing the behaviour of women to use health facilities for childbirth via government schemes may not guarantee safe delivery.

Freestanding midwifery unit versus obstetric unit: a matched cohort study of outcomes in low-risk women

OBJECTIVE

To compare perinatal and maternal morbidity and birth interventions in low-risk women giving birth in two freestanding midwifery units (FMUs) and two obstetric units (OUs).

DESIGN

A cohort study with a matched control group.

SETTING

The region of North Jutland, Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS

839 low-risk women intending FMU birth and a matched control group of 839 low-risk women intending OU birth were included at the start of care in labour. OU women were individually chosen to match selected obstetric/socio-economic characteristics of FMU women. Analysis was by intention to treat.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Perinatal and maternal morbidity and interventions.

RESULTS

No significant differences in perinatal morbidity were observed between groups (Apgar scores <7/5, <9/5 or <7/1, admittance to neonatal unit, asphyxia or readmission). Adverse outcomes were rare and occurred in both groups. FMU women were significantly less likely to experience an abnormal fetal heart rate (RR: 0.3, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.5), fetal-pelvic complications (0.2, 0.05 to 0.6), shoulder dystocia (0.3, 0.1 to 0.9), occipital-posterior presentation (0.5, 0.3 to 0.9) and postpartum haemorrhage >500 ml (0.4, 0.3 to 0.6) compared with OU women. Significant reductions were found for the FMU group's use of caesarean section (0.6, 0.3 to 0.9), instrumental delivery (0.4, 0.3 to 0.6), and oxytocin augmentation (0.5, 0.3 to 0.6) and epidural analgesia (0.4, 0.3 to 0.6). Transfer during or <2 h after birth occurred in 14.8% of all FMU births but more frequently in primiparas than in multiparas (36.7% vs 7.2%).

CONCLUSION

Comparing FMU and OU groups, there was no increase in perinatal morbidity, but there were significantly reduced incidences of maternal morbidity, birth interventions including caesarean section, and increased likelihood of spontaneous vaginal birth. FMU care may be considered as an adequate alternative to OU care for low-risk women. Pregnant prospective mothers should be given an informed choice of place of birth, including information on transfer.

The best of both worlds--parents' motivations for using an alongside birth centre from an ethnographic study

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN

An ethnographic study was undertaken in a birth centre to explore the model of care provided there from the perspectives of midwives and parents.

SETTING

A five birthing-room, alongside, inner-city, birth centre in England, situated one floor below the hospital labour ward, separately staffed by purposively recruited midwives.

PARTICIPANTS

Around 114 hours were spent at the birth centre observing antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal care; 11 in-depth interviews were recorded with parents after their baby's birth (four with women; seven with women and men together), including three interviews with women who transferred to the labour ward, and 11 with staff (nine midwives and two maternity assistants).

FINDINGS

Most women and men using the birth centre perceived it as offering the 'best of both worlds' based on its proximity to and separation from the labour ward. It seemed to offer a combination of biopsychosocial safety, made evident by the calm, welcoming atmosphere, the facilities, engaging, respectful care from known midwives and a clear commitment to normal birth, and obstetric safety particularly because of its close proximity to the labour ward.

KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This alongside birth centre provided a social model of care and appealed strongly to a group of parents; similar birth centres should be widely available throughout the NHS.