Influence of timing of admission in labour and management of labour on method of birth: Results from a randomised controlled trial of caseload midwifery (COSMOS trial)

Midwife continuity of care models versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women globally and there is a need to establish whether there are differences in effectiveness between midwife continuity of care models and other models of care. This is an update of a review published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of midwife continuity of care models with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (17 August 2022), as well as the reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife continuity of care models or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion criteria, scientific integrity, and risk of bias, and carried out data extraction and entry. Primary outcomes were spontaneous vaginal birth, caesarean section, regional anaesthesia, intact perineum, fetal loss after 24 weeks gestation, preterm birth, and neonatal death. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies involving 18,533 randomised women. We assessed all studies as being at low risk of scientific integrity/trustworthiness concerns. Studies were conducted in Australia, Canada, China, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. The majority of the included studies did not include women at high risk of complications. There are three ongoing studies targeting disadvantaged women. Primary outcomes Based on control group risks observed in the studies, midwife continuity of care models, as compared to other models of care, likely increase spontaneous vaginal birth from 66% to 70% (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.07; 15 studies, 17,864 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), likelyreduce caesarean sections from 16% to 15% (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99; 16 studies, 18,037 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and likely result in little to no difference in intact perineum (29% in other care models and 31% in midwife continuity of care models, average RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.12; 12 studies, 14,268 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may belittle or no difference in preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (6% under both care models, average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.16; 10 studies, 13,850 participants; low-certainty evidence). We arevery uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models on regional analgesia (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.92; 15 studies, 17,754 participants, very low-certainty evidence), fetal loss at or after 24 weeks gestation (average RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.13; 12 studies, 16,122 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and neonatal death (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.71; 10 studies, 14,718 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likely reduce instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum) from 14% to 13% (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.96; 14 studies, 17,769 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduceepisiotomy 23% to 19% (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91; 15 studies, 17,839 participants; low-certainty evidence). When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likelyresult in little to no difference inpostpartum haemorrhage (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.03; 11 studies, 14,407 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and admission to special care nursery/neonatal intensive care unit (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 13 studies, 16,260 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in induction of labour (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; 14 studies, 17,666 participants; low-certainty evidence), breastfeeding initiation (average RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12; 8 studies, 8575 participants; low-certainty evidence), and birth weight less than 2500 g (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 9 studies, 12,420 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models compared to other models of care onthird or fourth-degree tear (average RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.49; 7 studies, 9437 participants; very low-certainty evidence), maternal readmission within 28 days (average RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.96; 1 study, 1195 participants; very low-certainty evidence), attendance at birth by a known midwife (average RR 9.13, 95% CI 5.87 to 14.21; 11 studies, 9273 participants; very low-certainty evidence), Apgar score less than or equal to seven at five minutes (average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24; 13 studies, 12,806 participants; very low-certainty evidence) andfetal loss before 24 weeks gestation (average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.01; 12 studies, 15,913 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No maternal deaths were reported across three studies. Although the observed risk of adverse events was similar between midwifery continuity of care models and other models, our confidence in the findings was limited. Our confidence in the findings was lowered by possible risks of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision of some estimates. There were no available data for the outcomes: maternal health status, neonatal readmission within 28 days, infant health status, and birth weight of 4000 g or more. Maternal experiences and cost implications are described narratively. Women receiving care from midwife continuity of care models, as opposed to other care models, generally reported more positive experiences during pregnancy, labour, and postpartum. Cost savings were noted in the antenatal and intrapartum periods in midwife continuity of care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Women receiving midwife continuity of care models were less likely to experience a caesarean section and instrumental birth, and may be less likely to experience episiotomy. They were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth and report a positive experience. The certainty of some findings varies due to possible risks of bias, inconsistencies, and imprecision of some estimates. Future research should focus on the impact on women with social risk factors, and those at higher risk of complications, and implementation and scaling up of midwife continuity of care models, with emphasis on low- and middle-income countries.

Using a birth ball to reduce pain perception in the latent phase of labour: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Admission in the latent phase of labour is associated with higher rates of obstetric intervention. Women are frequently admitted due to pain. This study aimed to determine whether using a birth ball at home in the latent phase of labour reduces pain perception on admission.

METHOD

A prospective, pragmatic randomised controlled trial of 294 low risk pregnant women aged 18 and over planning a hospital birth. An animated educational video was offered at 36 weeks' gestation along with a birth ball. The primary outcome was pain on a Visual Analogue Scale on admission in labour. Participants who experienced a spontaneous labour were invited to respond to an online questionnaire 6 weeks' postpartum.

RESULTS

There were no differences in the mean pain scores; (6.3 versus 6.5; 90%CI -0.72 to 0.37 p = 0.6) or mean cervical dilatation on admission (4.7 cm versus 5.0 cm; 95% CI -1.1 to 0.5 p = 0.58). More Intervention participants were admitted in active labour (63.6% versus 55.7%; p = 0.28) and experienced an unassisted vaginal birth (70.3% v. 65.8%; p = 0.07) with fewer intrapartum caesarean sections (7.5% v. 17.9%; p = 0.07) although the trial was not powered to detect these differences in secondary outcomes. Most participants found the birth ball helpful (89.2%) and would use it in a future labour (92.5%).

CONCLUSION

Using the birth ball at home in the latent phase is a safe and acceptable strategy for labouring women to manage their labour, potentially postpone admission and reduce caesarean section. Further research is warranted.

Let's talk early labour: The L-TEL randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Women without complications have lower obstetric intervention if they remain at home in early labour but many women report dissatisfaction in doing this. Using self-efficacy theory as an underpinning framework, a web-based intervention was co-created with women who had previously used maternity services. The intervention provides early labour advice, alongside the videoed, real experiences of women.

METHOD

The pragmatic, randomised control trial aimed to evaluate the impact of the web-based intervention on women's self-reported experiences of early labour. Low-risk, nulliparous, pregnant women (140) were randomised. The intervention group (69) received the web-based intervention antenatally to use at their own convenience and the control group (71) received usual care. Data were collected at 7-28 days postnatally using an online version of the Early Labour Experience Questionnaire (ELEQ). The primary outcome was the ELEQ score. Secondary, clinical outcomes such as labour onset, augmentation and mode of birth were collected from the existing hospital system.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the ELEQ scores between trial arms. Women in the intervention group were significantly more likely to progress spontaneously in labour without the need for labour augmentation (39.1 %) compared to the control group (21.1 %) (OR 2.41, CI 95 %; 1.14-5.11).

CONCLUSION

Although the L-TEL Trial found no statistically significant differences in the primary outcome, the innovative intervention to support women during latent phase labour was positively received by women. Web-based resources are a cost effective, user-friendly and accessible way to provide women with education. A larger trial is needed to detect differences in clinical outcomes.

Timing of hospital admission at first childbirth: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

It is difficult for women in labor to determine when best to present for hospital admission, particularly at first childbirth. While it is often recommended that women labor at home until their contractions have become regular and ≤ 5-minutes apart, little research has investigated the utility of this recommendation. This study investigated the relationship between timing of hospital admission, in terms of whether women's labor contractions had become regular and ≤ 5-minutes apart before admission, and labor progress.

METHODS

This was a cohort study of 1,656 primiparous women aged 18-35 years with singleton pregnancies who began labor spontaneously at home and delivered at 52 hospitals in Pennsylvania, USA. Women who were admitted before their contractions had become regular and ≤ 5-minutes apart (early admits) were compared to those who were admitted after (later admits). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess associations between timing of hospital admission and active labor status on admission (cervical dilation 6-10 cm), oxytocin augmentation, epidural analgesia and cesarean birth.

RESULTS

Nearly two-thirds of the participants (65.3%) were later admits. These women had labored for a longer time period before admission (median, interquartile range [IQR] 5 hours (3-12 hours)) than the early admits (median, (IQR) 2 hours (1-8 hours), p < 0.001); were more likely to be in active labor on admission (adjusted OR [aOR] 3.78, 95% CI 2.47-5.81); and were less likely to experience labor augmentation with oxytocin (aOR 0.44, 95% CI 0.35-0.55); epidural analgesia (aOR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38-0.72); and cesarean birth (aOR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Among primiparous women, those who labor at home until their contractions have become regular and ≤ 5-minutes apart are more likely to be in active labor on hospital admission and less likely to experience oxytocin augmentation, epidural analgesia and cesarean birth.

'Labour Hopscotch': Women's evaluation of using the steps during labor

INTRODUCTION

Concerns have been expressed globally about the decline in rates of physiological birth and rising intervention rates during labor and birth. The 'Labour Hopscotch' Framework, a visual depiction of steps required to remain active during labor was implemented in a large tertiary maternity hospital in Ireland. The aim of this study was to evaluate the steps of the Labour Hopscotch women found most useful, examine the use of non-pharmacological and pharmacological methods of pain relief used during labor and finally to investigate the labor and birth outcomes of women who used 'Labour Hopscotch' during labor.

METHODS

A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using a study specific questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 809 women completed the questionnaire. The Labour Hopscotch Framework was positively evaluated. Mobilizing, the birthing ball, birthing stool, and water therapy were found to be the most useful steps. Primiparous women were more likely to use non-pharmacological methods of pain relief. Pharmacological methods used by women were entonox (67.5%), pethidine (8%) and epidural analgesia (38.5%). Primiparous women were more likely to have epidural analgesia than multiparous women (p<0.00001). Women that attended either private (p=0.004) or public-led obstetric (p=0.005) antenatal care were more likely to have epidural analgesia in labor. Women attending the community midwives were least likely to receive epidural analgesia during labor. The rates of spontaneous vaginal birth, assisted birth and cesarean section, were 77.1%, 14% and 8.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study findings contribute to the increasing national and international evidence that initiatives such as Labour Hopscotch can promote and advocate for women to be active and mobile during labor to support physiological birth.

Development and validation of a predictive model to identify the active phase of labor

Background

The diagnosis of the active phase of labor is a crucial clinical decision, thus requiring an accurate assessment. This study aimed to build and to validate a predictive model, based on maternal signs and symptoms to identify a cervical dilatation ≥4 cm.

Methods

A prospective study was conducted from May to September 2018 in a II Level Maternity Unit (development data), and from May to September 2019 in a I Level Maternity Unit (validation data). Women with singleton, term pregnancy, cephalic presentation and presence of contractions were consecutively enrolled during the initial assessment to diagnose the stage of labor. Women < 18 years old, with language barrier or induction of labor were excluded. A nomogram for the calculation of the predictions of cervical dilatation ≥4 cm on the ground of 11 maternal signs and symptoms was obtained from a multivariate logistic model. The predictive performance of the model was investigated by internal and external validation.

Results

A total of 288 assessments were analyzed. All maternal signs and symptoms showed a significant impact on increasing the probability of cervical dilatation ≥4 cm. In the final logistic model, “Rhythm” (OR 6.26), “Duration” (OR 8.15) of contractions and “Show” (OR 4.29) confirmed their significance while, unexpectedly, “Frequency” of contractions had no impact. The area under the ROC curve in the model of the uterine activity was 0.865 (development data) and 0.927 (validation data), with an increment to 0.905 and 0.956, respectively, when adding maternal signs.

The Brier Score error in the model of the uterine activity was 0.140 (development data) and 0.097 (validation data), with a decrement to 0.121 and 0.092, respectively, when adding maternal signs.

Conclusion

Our predictive model showed a good performance. The introduction of a non-invasive tool might assist midwives in the decision-making process, avoiding interventions and thus offering an evidenced-base care.

Development and validation of a tool for advising primiparous women during early labour: study protocol for the GebStart Study

INTRODUCTION

Pregnant women experience early labour with different physical and emotional symptoms. Early admission to hospital has been found to be associated with increased intervention and caesarean section rates. However, primiparous women often contact the hospital before labour progresses because they encounter difficulties coping with symptoms of onset of labour on their own. An evidence-based instrument for assessing the individual needs to advise primiparous women during early labour is currently missing. The study aims to develop and validate a tool to inform the joint decision for or against hospital admission.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A scale development and validation study will be conducted including following steps: (1) Generation of a pool with 99 items based on a scoping review and focus group discussions with primiparous women, (2) Assessment of content and face validity by an expert panel and item reduction to 32 items, (3) Multicentre data collection in six study sites in Switzerland, with application of the preliminary tool and the validation items with a target sample size of approximately n=400 women and (4), item reduction using exploratory factor analysis, factor loading and item-to-item correlation. Internal consistency of the tool will be assessed using Cronbach's alpha and convergent validity computing correlations of items of the tool with the German versions of the Childbirth Self-Efficacy Inventory and the Cambridge-Worry Scale. Analyses will be performed using Stata V.17.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained by the Ethics Committees Zurich and Northwestern and Central Switzerland (BASEC-Nr. 2021-00687). Results will be disseminated at the final study conference, at national and international congresses and by peer reviewed and not peer-reviewed articles in scientific and professional journals. Approved and anonymised data will be shared. The dissemination of the findings will have a contributable impact on clinical practice, scientific discussions and future research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00025572, SNCTP000004555.

Shared Decision-Making During Labor and Birth Among Low-Risk, Active Duty Women in the U.S. Military

INTRODUCTION

The cesarean birth rate of 24.7% in the Military Health System (MHS) is lower than the national rate of 31.7%. However, the MHS rate remains higher than the 15-19% threshold associated with optimal maternal and neonatal outcomes. For active duty servicewomen, increased morbidity associated with cesarean birth is likely to affect the ability to meet the demands of assigned missions. Several decision-points occur during pregnancy and after the onset of labor that can affect the likelihood of cesarean birth including choice of provider, choice of hospital, timing of admission, and type of fetal monitoring. Evidence suggests the overuse of labor interventions may be associated with cesarean birth. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a strategy that can be used to carefully consider the risks, benefits, and alternatives of each labor intervention and is shown to be associated with positive patient outcomes. Most existing evidence explores SDM as an interaction that occurs between women and their providers. Few studies have explored the role of stakeholders such as spouses, family members, friends, labor and delivery nurses, and doulas. Furthermore, little is known about the process of SDM during labor and childbirth in the hospital setting, particularly for active duty women in the U.S. military. The purpose of this study was to propose a framework that explains the process of SDM during labor and childbirth in the hospital setting for active duty women in the U.S. military.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A qualitatively driven mixed-methods approach was conducted to propose a framework that explains the process of SDM during labor and childbirth in the hospital setting for active duty women in the U.S. military. Servicewomen were recruited from September 2019 to April 2020. Semi-structured interviews were analyzed using a constructivist grounded theory approach. Participants also completed the SDM Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9).

RESULTS

Interviews were conducted with 14 participants. The sample included servicewomen from the Air Force (n = 7), Army (n = 4), and Navy (n = 3). Two participants were enlisted and the remainder were officers. Ten births occurred at military treatment facilities (MTFs) and six births took place at civilian facilities. The mean score on the SDM Questionnaire was 86.7 (±11.6), indicating a high level of SDM. Various stakeholders (e.g., providers, labor and delivery nurses, doulas, spouses, family members, and friends) were involved in SDM at different points during labor and birth. The four stages of SDM included gathering information, identifying preferences, discussing options, and making decisions. Events that most often involved SDM were deciding when to travel to the hospital, deciding when to be admitted, and selecting a strategy for pain management. Military factors involved in SDM included sources of information, selecting and working with civilian providers, and delaying labor interventions to allow time for an active duty spouse to travel to the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

SDM during labor and birth in the hospital setting is a multi-stage process that involves a variety of stakeholders, including the woman, members of her social and support network, and healthcare professionals. Future research is needed to explore perspectives of other stakeholders involved in SDM.

Association between early pregnant hospitalization and use of obstetric interventions and cesarean: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the association between early pregnant hospitalization and the use of obstetric interventions and cesarean delivery route.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study, with 758 women selected at the time of childbirth. It was assumed as early hospitalization when the woman was admitted to the hospital having less than 6 cm of cervical dilation. Logistic regression models were constructed in order to estimate the odds ratio for each obstetric intervention, adjusted by sociodemographic and obstetric variables.

RESULTS

73.22% of women were early hospitalized. On average, they had 1.97 times the chance to undergo Kristeller's maneuver, 2.59 and 1.80 times the chance to receive oxytocin infusion and analgesia, respectively, and 8 times more chances to having their children by cesarean delivery when compared to women that had timely hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Early hospitalized women were submitted to a higher number of obstetric intervention and had increased chances of undergoing cesarean sections.

Variations in outcomes for women admitted to hospital in early versus active labour: an observational study

Background

There is no available evidence for the prevalence of early labour admission to hospital or its association with rates of intervention and clinical outcomes in Australia. The objectives of this study were to: estimate the prevalence of early labour admission in one hospital in Australia; compare rates of clinical intervention, length of hospital stay and clinical outcomes for women admitted in early (< 4 cm cervical dilatation) or active (≥4 cm) labour; and determine the impact of recent recommendations to define early labour as < 5 cm on the findings.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using medical record data from a random sample of 1223 women from live singleton births recorded between July 2013 and December 2015. Analyses included women who had spontaneous onset of labour at ≥37 weeks gestation whilst not a hospital inpatient, who had not scheduled a caesarean section before labour onset or delivered prior to hospital admission. Associations between timing of hospital admission in labour and clinical intervention, outcomes and hospital stay were assessed using logistic regression.

Results

Between 32.4% (< 4 cm) and 52.9% (< 5 cm) of eligible women (N = 697) were admitted to hospital in early labour. After adjustment for potential confounders, women admitted in early labour (< 4 cm) were more likely to have their labour augmented by oxytocin (AOR = 3.57, 95% CI 2.39–5.34), an epidural (AOR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.51–3.41), a caesarean birth (AOR = 3.50, 95% CI 2.10–5.83), more vaginal examinations (AOR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.53–1.95), and their baby admitted to special care nursery (AOR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.01–2.35). Defining early labour as < 5 cm cervical dilatation produced additional significant associations with artificial rupture of membranes (AOR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.02–1.95), assisted vaginal birth (AOR = 1.96, 95% CI = 1.12–3.41) neonatal resuscitation (AOR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.01–2.99) and longer maternal hospital stay (AOR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.04–1.40).

Conclusions

Findings provide preliminary evidence that a notable proportion of labouring women are admitted in early labour and are more likely to experience several medical procedures, neonatal resuscitation and admission to special care nursery, and longer hospital stay.

Women's unmet needs in early labour: Qualitative analysis of free-text survey responses in the M@NGO trial of caseload midwifery

OBJECTIVE

to analyse women's experiences of early labour care in caseload midwifery in Australia.

DESIGN

this study sits within a multi-site randomised controlled trial of caseload midwifery versus standard care. Participant surveys were conducted at 6-weeks and 6-months after birth. Free-text responses about experiences of care were subject to critical thematic analysis in NVivo 11 software.

SETTING

two urban Australian hospitals in different states.

PARTICIPANTS

women 18 years and over, with a singleton pregnancy, less than 24 weeks' pregnant, not planning a caesarean section or already booked with a care provider; were eligible to participate in the trial.

INTERVENTIONS

participants were randomised to caseload midwifery or standard care for antenatal, labour and birth and postpartum care.

MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS

The 6-week survey response rate was 58% (n = 1,019). The survey included five open questions about women's experiences of pregnancy, labour and birth, and postnatal care. Nine-hundred and one respondents (88%) provided free text comments which were coded to generate 10 categories. The category of early labour contained data from 84 individual participants (caseload care n = 44; standard care n = 40). Descriptive themes were: (1) needing permission; (2) doing the 'wrong' thing; and (3) being dismissed. Analytic themes were: (1) Seeking: women wanting to be "close to those who know what's going on"; and (2) Shielding: midwives defending resources and normal birth.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of model of care, early labour care was primarily described in negative terms. This could be attributed to reporting bias, because women who were neutral about early labour care may not comment. Nevertheless, the findings demonstrate a gap in knowledge about early labour care in caseload midwifery models.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Maternity services that offer caseload midwifery are ideally placed to evaluate how early labour home visiting impacts women's experiences of early labour.

Birth outcome in a caseload study conducted in a rural area of Sweden-a register based study

BACKGROUND

Continuity models of midwifery care are rare in Sweden, despite its well-known positive effects. The aim was to describe pregnancy and birth outcome in women participating in a continuity of care project in a rural area of Sweden.

METHOD

A register-based study of 266 women recruited to the project and a control group of 125 women from the same catchment area. Midwives provided antenatal care and were on-call 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. for birth. Data were collected from the antenatal and birth records. Crude and adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated between women in the project and the control group.

RESULTS

There were more primiparous women and highly educated women recruited to the project, and fewer foreign-born and single women, compared to the control group. Women in the project met more midwives and were less likely to have a pregnancy complication. During intrapartum care, women recruited to the project were less likely to need labour augmentation and less likely to have an instrumental vaginal birth and elective caesarean section. They had fewer second degree perineal tears and were more likely to fully breastfeed at discharge. No differences were found in neonatal outcome. The continuity of a known midwife at birth was quite low.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that women self-recruited to a continuity of care project in a rural area of Sweden had a higher rate of normal births. There were few differences if having a known midwife or not. Long distances to hospital and lack of staff affected the level of continuity.

Admitting women in active labour: A randomised controlled trial about the effects of protocol use on childbirth method and interventions

AIM

To determine the effects of protocol of admitting women in active labour on childbirth method and interventions during labour and childbirth.

METHODS

This single-blind randomised clinical trial was conducted in a public hospital in Mazandaran province (Iran) in 2017. Two hundred nulliparous low-risk women were randomly assigned into intervention and control groups. The participant women were admitted in the intervention group using the admission protocol and to the group control by staff midwives and doctors. The admission criteria of the protocol were: the presence of regular, painful contractions, the cervix at least four cm dilated and at least one of the following cues: cervix effaced, and spontaneous rupture of membranes, or "show". The primary outcome measure was childbirth method. Data were analyzed in SPSS-22 using Mann-Whitney and Chi-square tests. The level of statistical significance was set as p<0.05.

FINDING

There were significant differences between the intervention and control groups in the number of caesarian section (CS) (p<0.001). Two groups had a statistically significant difference in amniotomy (p=0.003), augmentation by oxytocin (p<0.001), number of vaginal examinations (p<0.001) and fundal pressure (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a protocol for admission of low risk nulliparous women in active labour contributed to reduction of the primary caesarean section rate and interventions during childbirth. A risk assessment and using evidence informed guidelines in admission can contribute to reduce unsafe and harmful practices and support normalisation of birth. This is essential for demedicalisation and a useful strategy for reducing primary CS.

Describing latent phase duration and associated characteristics among 1281 low-risk women in spontaneous labor

BACKGROUND

Recent research suggests that latent phase of labor may terminate at 6 rather than 4 centimeters of cervical dilation. The objectives of this study were to: (a) characterize duration of the latent phase of labor among term, low-risk, United States women in spontaneous labor using the women's self-identified onset; and (b) quantify associations between demographic and maternal/newborn health characteristics and the duration of the latent phase.

METHODS

This prospective study (n = 1281) described the duration of the latent phase of labor in hours, stratified by parity at the mean, median, and 80th, 90th, and 95th percentiles. The duration of the latent phase was compared for each characteristic using t tests or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and regression models that controlled for confounders.

RESULTS

In this sample of predominantly white, healthy women, duration of the latent phase of labor was longer than described in previous studies: The median duration was 9.0 hours and mean duration was 11.8 hours in nulliparous women. The median duration was 6.8 hours and mean duration was 9.3 hours in multiparous women. Among nulliparous women, longer duration was seen in women whose fetus was in a malposition. Among multiparous women, longer durations were noted in women with chorioamnionitis and those who gave birth between 41 and 41 + 6 weeks' gestation (vs between 40 and 40 + 6 weeks' gestation).

CONCLUSIONS

The latent phase of labor may be longer than previously estimated. Contemporary estimates of latent phase of labor duration will help women and providers accurately anticipate, prepare, and cope during spontaneous labor.

Promoting active labor admission: Early labor lounge implementation barriers and facilitators from the clinician perspective

BACKGROUND

The cesarean birth rate for low-risk pregnant individuals in the United States exceeds the recommended Healthy People 2020 rate. One recommended strategy to reduce cesarean in this population is delaying hospital admission until active labor commences. A quality improvement program was implemented at a community hospital using the early labor lounge (ELL) to promote admission in active labor. This study focuses on identifying the barriers and facilitators from the clinician perspective to implementing the ELL.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of clinicians. Interview transcripts were open coded and themes identified inductively. A framework analysis was then conducted using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

Twenty-five staff members participated. Barriers and facilitators were identified in four of the CFIR domains. Facilitators included the strength of the evidence and the ELL itself, including the tools it contained for supporting women in latent labor. Barriers to implementation included clinician self-efficacy and perceived low usage of the ELL.

CONCLUSION

This analysis using, CFIR identified several barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the ELL. The context of the individual woman presenting in triage and the acceptability and self-efficacy of the individual clinicians represented important factors for implementation.

Associations among cervical dilatation at admission, intrapartum care, and birth mode in low-risk, nulliparous women

BACKGROUND

Admission in early labor is associated with increased likelihood of cesarean birth, but the context in which this occurs is unclear. Previous research has explored the relationship between dilatation at admission and the use of single intrapartum interventions; however, the majority of women in the United States receive multiple intrapartum interventions. The objective of this study was to examine the associations among cervical dilatation at admission, intrapartum care, and birth mode in low-risk, nulliparous women with spontaneous onset of labor.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, observational study of 21 858 nulliparous, singleton, term vertex births that occurred from 2002 to 2007 across nine hospitals in the Consortium on Safe Labor. Outcome measures included the individual and combined use of intrapartum interventions (amniotomy, epidural anesthesia, oxytocin augmentation) and birth mode.

RESULTS

In this sample, 92.0% of women received at least one intrapartum intervention and 22.7% received all three interventions. After propensity score adjustment, women were more than twice as likely to receive the combination of amniotomy-epidural-oxytocin when admitted at 0-3 cm (RR 2.83 [95% CI 2.45-3.27]) and 4-5 cm (2.49 [2.15-2.89]) compared to 6-10 cm. Adjusted likelihood of cesarean birth was five times greater for women admitted at 0-3 cm (5.26 [4.36-6.34]) and two times greater for women admitted at 4-5 cm (2.27 [1.86-2.77]) compared to 6-10 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

To promote normal physiologic birth, low-risk, nulliparous women should be engaged in shared decision-making about timing of admission after spontaneous onset of labor.

Does introducing a dedicated early labour area improve birth outcomes? A pre-post intervention study

PROBLEM

Women increasingly present to hospital in early labour, but admission before active labour contributes to overuse of interventions, poorer clinical and psychological outcomes, and higher healthcare costs.

BACKGROUND

Innovative models of early labour care have so far not improved birth outcomes.

AIM

To examine if reconfiguring the early labour service in a large Australian maternity service improved (1) the birth outcomes of women who presented in early labour and (2) alleviated bed blockages by decreasing length of stay in the Pregnancy Assessment and Observation Unit.

METHODS

Pre-post intervention design, using routinely collected clinical data before and after the implementation of the reconfigured early labour service.

FINDINGS

There were 527 women in pre-intervention cohort and 747 in the post-intervention cohort. The two groups were similar in age, body mass index, marital status, education level and gestation at birth. Post intervention, epidural use did not change significantly, but rates of amniotomy (35.7% vs. 49.9%, p = <0.001), meconium-stained liquor (20.1% vs 26.1%, p = 0.04), and neonatal nursery admission (2.7% vs. 5.8% p =  0.01) increased. The proportion of women staying in the Assessment unit more than two hours decreased, but not significantly.

CONCLUSION

Changing the location and model of early labour care did not influence epidural use, nor improve women's birth outcomes. For women in early labour, admission to any location within the hospital may be as problematic as admission to birth suite specifically.

Timing of hospital admission in labour: latent versus active phase, mode of birth and intrapartum interventions. A correlational study

BACKGROUND

Hospitalization of women in latent labour often leads to a cascade of unnecessary intrapartum interventions, to avoid potential disadvantages the recommendation should be to stay at home to improve women's experience and perinatal outcomes.

AIM

The primary aim of this study was to investigate the association between hospital admission diagnosis (latent vs active phase) and mode of birth. The secondary aim was to explore the relationship between hospital admission diagnosis, intrapartum intervention rates and maternal/neonatal outcomes.

METHODS

A correlational study was conducted in a large Italian maternity hospital. Data from January 2013 to December 2014 were collected from the hospital electronic records. 1.446 records of low risk women were selected. These were dichotomized into two groups based on admission diagnosis: 'latent phase' or 'active phase' of labour.

FINDINGS

52.7% of women were admitted in active labour and 47.3% in the latent phase. Women in the latent phase group were more likely to experience a caesarean section or an instrumental birth, artificial rupture of membranes, oxytocin augmentation and epidural analgesia. Admission in the latent phase was associated with higher intrapartum interventions, which were statistically correlated to the mode of birth.

CONCLUSIONS

Women admitted in the latent phase were more likely to experience intrapartum interventions, which increase the probability of caesarean section. Maternity services should be organized around women and families needs, providing early labour support, to enable women to feel reassured facilitating their admission in labour to avoid the cascade of intrapartum interventions which increases the risk of caesarean section.

Australian private midwives with hospital visiting rights in Queensland: Structures and processes impacting clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Reporting the outcomes for women and newborns accessing private midwives with visiting rights in Australia is important, especially since this data cannot currently be disaggregated from routinely collected perinatal data.

AIM

1) Evaluate the outcomes of women and newborns cared for by midwives with visiting access at one Queensland facility and 2) explore private midwives views about the structures and processes contributing to clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Mixed methods. An audit of the 'all risk' 529 women receiving private midwifery care. Data were compared with national core maternity variables using Chi square statistics. Telephone interviews were conducted with six private midwives and data analysed using thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

Compared to national data, women with a private midwife were significantly more likely to be having a first baby (49.5% vs 43.6% p=0.007), to commence labour spontaneously (84.7% vs 52.7%, p<0.001), experience a spontaneous vaginal birth (79% vs 54%, p<0.001) and not require pharmacological pain relief (52.9% vs 23.1%, p<0.001). The caesarean section rate was significantly lower than the national rate (13% vs 32.8%, p<0.001). In addition fewer babies required admission to the Newborn Care Unit (5.1% vs 16%, p<0.001). Midwives were proud of their achievements. Continuity of care was considered fundamental to achieving quality outcomes. Midwives valued the governance processes embedded around the model.

CONCLUSIONS

Private midwives with access to the public system is safe. Ensuring national data collection accurately captures outcomes relative to model of care in both the public and private sector should be prioritised.

Interventions for promoting the initiation of breastfeeding

BACKGROUND

Despite the widely documented risks of not breastfeeding, initiation rates remain relatively low in many high-income countries, particularly among women in lower-income groups. In low- and middle-income countries, many women do not follow World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations to initiate breastfeeding within the first hour after birth. This is an update of a Cochrane Review, first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and describe health promotion activities intended to increase the initiation rate of breastfeeding.To evaluate the effectiveness of different types of breastfeeding promotion activities, in terms of changing the number of women who initiate breastfeeding.To evaluate the effectiveness of different types of breastfeeding promotion activities, in terms of changing the number of women who initiate breastfeeding early (within one hour after birth).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (29 February 2016) and scanned reference lists of all articles obtained.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with or without blinding, of any breastfeeding promotion intervention in any population group, except women and infants with a specific health problem.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial reports for inclusion, extracted data and assessed trial quality. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion and a third review author was involved when necessary. We contacted investigators to obtain missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials involving 107,362 women in seven countries are included in this updated review. Five studies involving 3,124 women did not contribute outcome data and we excluded them from the analyses. The methodological quality of the included trials was mixed, with significant numbers of studies at high or unclear risk of bias due to: inadequate allocation concealment (N = 20); lack of blinding of outcome assessment (N = 20); incomplete outcome data (N = 19); selective reporting (N = 22) and bias from other potential sources (N = 17). Healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and support versus standard care The studies pooled here compare professional health workers delivering breastfeeding education and support during the prenatal and postpartum periods with standard care. Interventions included promotion campaigns and counselling, and all took place in a formal setting. There was evidence from five trials involving 564 women for improved rates ofbreastfeeding initiation among women who received healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and support (average risk ratio (RR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.92; Tau² = 0.07, I² = 62%, low-quality evidence) compared to those women who received standard care. We downgraded evidence due to design limitations and heterogeneity. The outcome of early initiation of breastfeeding was not reported in the studies under this comparison. Non-healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and support versus standard care There was evidence from eight trials of 5712 women for improved rates of breastfeeding initiation among women who received interventions from non-healthcare professional counsellors and support groups (average RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.40; Tau² = 0.02, I² = 86%, low-quality evidence) compared to women who received standard care. In three trials of 76,373 women, there was no clear difference between groups in terms of the number of women practicing early initiation of breastfeeding (average RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.95; Tau² = 0.18, I² = 78%, very low-quality evidence). We downgraded the evidence for a combination of design limitations, heterogeneity and imprecision (wide confidence intervals crossing the line of no effect). Other comparisonsOther comparisons in this review also looked at the rates of initiation of breastfeeding and there were no clear differences between groups for the following comparisons of combined healthcare professional-led education with peer support or community educator versus standard care (2 studies, 1371 women) or attention control (1 study, 237 women), breastfeeding education using multimedia (a self-help manual or a video) versus routine care (2 studies, 497 women); early mother-infant contact versus standard care (2 studies, 309 women); and community-based breastfeeding groups versus no breastfeeding groups (1 study, 18,603 women). None of these comparisons reported data on early initiation of breastfeeding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found low-quality evidence that healthcare professional-led breastfeeding education and non-healthcare professional-led counselling and peer support interventions can result in some improvements in the number of women beginning to breastfeed. The majority of the trials were conducted in the USA, among women on low incomes and who varied in ethnicity and feeding intention, thus limiting the generalisability of these results to other settings.Future studies would ideally be conducted in a range of low- and high-income settings, with data on breastfeeding rates over various timeframes, and explore the effectiveness of interventions that are initiated prior to conception or during pregnancy. These might include well-described interventions, including health education, early and continuing mother-infant contact, and initiatives to help mothers overcome societal barriers to breastfeeding, all with clearly defined outcome measures.

Being in a safe and thus secure place, the core of early labour: A secondary analysis in a Swedish context

BACKGROUND

Early labour is the very first phase of the labour process and is considered to be a period of time when no professional attendance is needed. However there is a high frequency of women who seek care at the delivery wards during this phase. When a woman is admitted to the delivery ward, one role for midwives is to determine whether the woman is in established labour or not. If the woman is assessed as being in early labour she will probably then be advised to return home. This recommendation is made due to past research that found that the longer a woman is in hospital the higher the risk for complications for her and her child. Women have described how this situation leaves them in a vulnerable situation where their preferences are not always met and where they are not always included in the decision-making process.

AIM

The aim of this study was to generate a theory based on where a woman chooses to be during the early labour process and to increase our understanding about how experiences can differ from place to place.

METHODS

The method was a secondary analysis with grounded theory. The data used in the analysis was from two qualitative interview studies and 37 transcripts.

CONCLUSION

The findings revealed a substantive theory that women needed to be in a safe and thus secure place during early labour. This theory also describes the interplay between how women ascribed their meaning of childbirth as either a natural live event or a medical one, how this influenced where they wanted to be during early labour, and how that chosen place influenced their experiences of labour and birth.

Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are differences in morbidity and mortality, effectiveness and psychosocial outcomes between midwife-led continuity models and other models of care.

OBJECTIVES

To compare midwife-led continuity models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (25 January 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led continuity models of care or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials involving 17,674 women. We assessed the quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes (i.e. regional analgesia (epidural/spinal), caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum), spontaneous vaginal birth, intact perineum, preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) and all fetal loss before and after 24 weeks plus neonatal death using the GRADE methodology: all primary outcomes were graded as of high quality.For the primary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience regional analgesia (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14; high quality), instrumental vaginal birth (average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.97; participants = 17,501; studies = 13; high quality), preterm birth less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91; participants = 13,238; studies = eight; high quality) and less all fetal loss before and after 24 weeks plus neonatal death (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; participants = 17,561; studies = 13; high quality evidence). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.07; participants = 16,687; studies = 12; high quality). There were no differences between groups for caesarean births or intact perineum.For the secondary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience amniotomy (average RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 3253; studies = four), episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14) and fetal loss less than 24 weeks and neonatal death (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98; participants = 15,645; studies = 11). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (average RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.37; participants = 10,499; studies = seven), have a longer mean length of labour (hours) (mean difference (MD) 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; participants = 3328; studies = three) and more likely to be attended at birth by a known midwife (average RR 7.04, 95% CI 4.48 to 11.08; participants = 6917; studies = seven). There were no differences between groups for fetal loss equal to/after 24 weeks and neonatal death, induction of labour, antenatal hospitalisation, antepartum haemorrhage, augmentation/artificial oxytocin during labour, opiate analgesia, perineal laceration requiring suturing, postpartum haemorrhage, breastfeeding initiation, low birthweight infant, five-minute Apgar score less than or equal to seven, neonatal convulsions, admission of infant to special care or neonatal intensive care unit(s) or in mean length of neonatal hospital stay (days).Due to a lack of consistency in measuring women's satisfaction and assessing the cost of various maternity models, these outcomes were reported narratively. The majority of included studies reported a higher rate of maternal satisfaction in midwife-led continuity models of care. Similarly, there was a trend towards a cost-saving effect for midwife-led continuity care compared to other care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that women who received midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience intervention and more likely to be satisfied with their care with at least comparable adverse outcomes for women or their infants than women who received other models of care.Further research is needed to explore findings of fewer preterm births and fewer fetal deaths less than 24 weeks, and all fetal loss/neonatal death associated with midwife-led continuity models of care.

Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are differences in morbidity and mortality, effectiveness and psychosocial outcomes between midwife-led continuity models and other models of care.

OBJECTIVES

To compare midwife-led continuity models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led continuity models of care or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials involving 17,674 women. We assessed the quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes (i.e., regional analgesia (epidural/spinal), caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum), spontaneous vaginal birth, intact perineum, preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) and overall fetal loss and neonatal death (fetal loss was assessed by gestation using 24 weeks as the cut-off for viability in many countries) using the GRADE methodology: All primary outcomes were graded as of high quality.For the primary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience regional analgesia (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14; high quality), instrumental vaginal birth (average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.97; participants = 17,501; studies = 13; high quality), preterm birth less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91; participants = 13,238; studies = 8; high quality) and less overall fetal/neonatal death (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; participants = 17,561; studies = 13; high quality evidence). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.07; participants = 16,687; studies = 12; high quality). There were no differences between groups for caesarean births or intact perineum.For the secondary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience amniotomy (average RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 3253; studies = 4), episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14) and fetal loss/neonatal death before 24 weeks (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98; participants = 15,645; studies = 11). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (average RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.37; participants = 10,499; studies = 7), have a longer mean length of labour (hours) (mean difference (MD) 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; participants = 3328; studies = 3) and more likely to be attended at birth by a known midwife (average RR 7.04, 95% CI 4.48 to 11.08; participants = 6917; studies = 7). There were no differences between groups for fetal loss or neonatal death more than or equal to 24 weeks, induction of labour, antenatal hospitalisation, antepartum haemorrhage, augmentation/artificial oxytocin during labour, opiate analgesia, perineal laceration requiring suturing, postpartum haemorrhage, breastfeeding initiation, low birthweight infant, five-minute Apgar score less than or equal to seven, neonatal convulsions, admission of infant to special care or neonatal intensive care unit(s) or in mean length of neonatal hospital stay (days).Due to a lack of consistency in measuring women's satisfaction and assessing the cost of various maternity models, these outcomes were reported narratively. The majority of included studies reported a higher rate of maternal satisfaction in midwife-led continuity models of care. Similarly, there was a trend towards a cost-saving effect for midwife-led continuity care compared to other care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that women who received midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience intervention and more likely to be satisfied with their care with at least comparable adverse outcomes for women or their infants than women who received other models of care.Further research is needed to explore findings of fewer preterm births and fewer fetal deaths less than 24 weeks, and overall fetal loss/neonatal death associated with midwife-led continuity models of care.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Latent versus Active Labor Hospital Admission for Medically Low-Risk, Term Women

OBJECTIVE

To assess the outcomes and costs of hospital admission during the latent versus active phase of labor. Latent labor hospital admission has been consistently associated with elevated maternal risk for increased interventions, including epidural anesthesia and cesarean delivery, longer hospital stay, and higher utilization of hospital resources.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness model was built to simulate a theoretic cohort of 3.2 million term, medically low-risk women either being admitted in latent labor (< 4 cm dilation) or delaying admission until active labor (≥ 4 cm dilation). Outcomes included epidural use, mode of delivery, stillbirth, maternal death, and costs of care. All probability, cost, and utility estimates were derived from the literature, and total quality-adjusted life years were calculated. Sensitivity analyses and a Monte Carlo simulation were used to investigate the robustness of model assumptions.

RESULTS

Delaying admission until active labor would result in 672,000 fewer epidurals, 67,232 fewer cesarean deliveries, and 9.6 fewer maternal deaths in our theoretic cohort as compared to admission during latent labor. Additionally, delaying admission results in a cost savings of $694 million annually in the United States. Sensitivity analyses indicated the model was robust within a wide range of probabilities and costs. Monte Carlo simulation found that delayed admission was the optimal strategy in 76.79 percent of trials.

CONCLUSION

Delaying admission until active labor is a dominant strategy, resulting in both better outcomes and lower costs. Issues related to clinical translation of these findings are explored.