US midwife-attended hospital births are increasing while physician-attended hospital births are decreasing: 2003-2018

Retaining the perinatal care workforce: Lessons learned from experienced physicians who no longer attend deliveries

OBJECTIVE

To inform policy supporting the retention of family physicians (FPs) in the perinatal care workforce by identifying physician characteristics that are associated with retention.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

We surveyed FPs who had been in practice for at least 11 years and reported attending deliveries as part of their practice.

STUDY DESIGN

We compared the characteristics of FPs who continue to provide perinatal care to those who have ceased and explored their reasons for no longer attending deliveries.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We estimated a probit regression with the dependent variable: whether the physician currently delivers babies. Open-ended survey responses were analyzed and close-coded using a conceptual content analysis approach.

PRINCIPLE FINDINGS

Of the FPs who received a survey, 1505 (37%) responded. Those who continue attending deliveries were more likely to receive a stipend or be paid per hour/shift in addition to their salary versus those paid a salary (percentage point difference = 13), and less likely to work part-time versus full-time (percentage point difference = -20). Those who ceased attending deliveries cite lifestyle (n = 208), call structure (n = 113), and delivery volume (n = 89) among the reasons for doing so.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence-based policies aimed at preventing attrition from the perinatal care workforce, which might include targeting compensation models and work-life balance.

American Midwifery Certification Board Certification Demographic and Employment Data, 2016 to 2020: The Certified Nurse-Midwife and Certified Midwife Workforce

INTRODUCTION

Expansion and diversification of the midwifery workforce is a federal strategy to address the maternal health crisis in the United States. Understanding characteristics of the current midwifery workforce is essential to creating approaches to its development. Certified nurse-midwives and certified midwives (CNMs/CMs) certified by the American Midwifery Certification Board (AMCB) constitute the largest portion of the US midwifery workforce. This article aims to describe the current midwifery workforce based on data collected from all AMCB-certified midwives at the time of certification.

METHODS

Midwife initial certificants and recertificants were administered an electronic survey about personal and practice characteristics at the time of certification by AMCB between 2016 and 2020 for administrative purposes. Given the standard 5-year certification cycle, every midwife certified during this period completed the survey once. The AMCB Research Committee conducted a secondary data analysis of deidentified data to describe the CNM/CM workforce.

RESULTS

In 2020 there were 12,997 CNMs/CMs in the United States. The workforce was largely White and female with an average age of 49. There has been a slow increase (15% to 21%) of initial certificants identifying as midwives of color. The proportion of CMs to all AMCB-certified midwives remained less than 2%. Physician-owned practices were the most common employer. Approximately 60% of midwives attend births, and hospitals were the most common birth setting. Over 10% of those certified to practice reported not working within the discipline of midwifery.

DISCUSSION

Targeted recruitment and retention of midwives must take into consideration not just expansion but dispersion, scope of practice, and diversification. The proportion of midwives attending births was lower than reported in previous years. Expansion of the CM credential and accessible educational pathways are 2 potential solutions to workforce growth. Developing strategies to retain those who are trained but not practicing presents an opportunity for workforce maintenance.

Midwifery care during labor and birth in the United States

The intrapartum period is a crucial time in the continuum of pregnancy and parenting. Events during this time are shaped by individuals' unique sociocultural and health characteristics and by their healthcare providers, practice protocols, and the physical environment in which care is delivered. Childbearing people in the United States have less opportunity for midwifery care than in other high-income countries. In the United States, there are 4 midwives for every 1000 live births, whereas, in most other high-income countries, there are between 30 and 70 midwives. Furthermore, these countries have lower maternal and neonatal mortality rates and have consistently lower costs of care. National and international evidences consistently report that births attended by midwives have fewer interventions, cesarean deliveries, preterm births, inductions of labor, and more vaginal births after cesarean delivery. In addition, midwifery care is consistently associated with respectful care and high patient satisfaction. Midwife-physician collaboration exists along a continuum, including births attended independently by midwives, births managed in consultation with a physician, and births attended primarily by a physician with a midwife acting as consultant on the normal aspects of care. This expert review defined midwifery care and provided an overview of midwifery in the United States with an emphasis on the intrapartum setting. Health outcomes associated with midwifery care, specific models of intrapartum care, and workforce issues have been presented within national and international contexts. Recommendations that align with the integration of midwifery have been suggested to improve national outcomes and reduce pregnancy-related disparities.

Neonatal outcomes of births in freestanding birth centers and hospitals in the United States, 2016-2019

BACKGROUND

Births in freestanding birth centers have more than doubled between 2007 and 2019. Although birthing centers, which are defined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists as ". . . freestanding facilities that are not hospitals," are being promoted as offering women fewer interventions than hospitals, there are limited recent data available on neonatal outcomes in these settings.

OBJECTIVE

To compare several important measures of neonatal safety between 2 United States birth settings and birth attendants: deliveries in freestanding birth centers and hospital deliveries by midwives and physicians.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study using the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, and Division of Vital Statistics natality online database for the years 2016 to 2019. All term, singleton, low-risk births were eligible for inclusion. The study outcomes were several neonatal outcomes including neonatal death, neonatal seizures, 5-minute Apgar scores of <4 and <7, and neonatal death in nulliparous and in multiparous women. Outcomes were compared between the following 3 groups: births in freestanding birth centers, in-hospital births by a physician, and in-hospital births by a midwife. The prevalence of each neonatal outcome among the different groups was compared using Pearson chi-squared test, with the in-hospital midwife births being the reference group. Multivariate logistic regression models were performed to account for several potential confounding factors such as maternal prepregnancy body mass index, maternal weight gain, parity, gestational weeks, and neonatal birthweight and calculated as adjusted odds ratio.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 9,894,978 births; 8,689,467 births (87.82%) were in-hospital births by MDs and DOs, 1,131,398 (11.43%) were in-hospital births by midwives, and 74,113 (0.75%) were births in freestanding birth centers. Freestanding birth center deliveries were less likely to be to non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic, less likely to women with public insurance, less likely to be women with their first pregnancy, and more likely to be women with advanced education and to have pregnancies at ≥40 weeks' gestation. Births in freestanding birth center had a 4-fold increase in neonatal deaths (3.64 vs 0.95 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 4.00; 95% confidence interval, 2.62-6.1), a more than 7-fold increase in neonatal deaths for nulliparous patients (6.8 vs 0.92 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 7.7; 95% confidence interval, 4.42-13.76), a more than 2-fold increase in neonatal seizures (3.91 vs 1.94 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 2.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.48-3.22), and a more than 7-fold increase of a 5-minute Apgar score of <4 (194.84 vs 28.5 per 10,000 births: adjusted odds ratio, 7.46; 95% confidence interval, 7-7.95). Compared with hospital midwife deliveries, hospital physician deliveries had significantly higher adverse neonatal outcomes (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Births in United States freestanding birth centers are associated with an increased risk of adverse neonatal outcomes such as neonatal deaths, seizures, and low 5-minute Apgar scores. Therefore, when counseling women about the location of birth, it should be conveyed that births in freestanding birth centers are not among the safest birth settings for neonates compared with hospital births attended by either midwives or physicians.