Strong Start in birth centers: Socio-demographic characteristics, care processes, and outcomes for mothers and newborns

"It's my Home away from Home:" A hermeneutic phenomenological study exploring decision-making experiences of choosing a freestanding birth centre for perinatal care

PROBLEM

The high-value, midwifery-led birth centre (BC) model of care is underutilized in the United States, a country with high rates of obstetric intervention and maternal morbidity and mortality.

BACKGROUND

Birth setting decision-making is a complex, preference-sensitive, and resource-dependent process. Understanding how people choose BCs for care may help increase the utilization of BCs and generate positive perinatal outcomes.

AIM

This study explores the decision-making experiences of people with Medicaid insurance who chose to give birth in a BC in Massachusetts by gathering interview data to interpret and provide meaning about their selection of birth setting.

METHODS

We employed a hermeneutic phenomenology study to interview people about their decision to give birth in a BC. Interview data were coded using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to interpret and provide meaning.

FINDINGS

Twelve women participated in the study. Five themes emerged that described participants' decision-making processes: 1) Stepping Away from "the System," 2) Decision-Making with External Influences, 3) Accessing BC Care, 4) Finding a Home at the BC, and 5) Decision-Making as a Temporal Process.

DISCUSSION

The decision to choose a BC was a dynamic process that occurred over time and was influenced by factors such as the quality of care, accessibility, external influences, and the physical environment.

CONCLUSION

Prioritizing an individual's capacity to choose their birth setting and fostering awareness about options in the context of informed decision-making are pivotal steps toward attaining equity in perinatal health. Securing public insurance coverage and equitable reimbursement for BCs represent essential policies aimed at facilitating universal access to the BC model for all people.

A case study analysis of a successful birth center in northern Uganda

BACKGROUND

Mothers and infants continue to die at alarming rates throughout the Global South. Evidence suggests that high-quality midwifery care significantly reduces preventable maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. This paper uses a case study approach to describe the social and institutional model at one birth center in Northern Uganda where, in over 20,000 births, there have been no maternal deaths and the neonatal mortality rate is 11/1000-a rate that is lower than many high-resource countries.

METHODS

This case study combined institutional ethnographic and narrative methods to explore key maternal and neonatal outcomes. The sample included birthing people who intended to or had given birth at the center, as well as the midwives, staff, stakeholders, and community health workers affiliated with the center. Data were collected through individual and small group interviews, participant observation, field notes, data and document reviews. Iterative and systematic analytical steps were followed, and all data were organized and managed with Atlas.ti software.

RESULTS

Findings describe the setting, an overview of the birth center's history, how it is situated within the community, its staffing, administration, clinical outcomes, and model of care. A synthesis of contextual variables and key outcomes as they relate to the components of the evidence-informed Quality Maternal and Newborn Care (QMNC) framework are presented. Three overarching themes were identified: (a) community knowledge and understanding, (b) community integrated care, and (c) quality care that is respectful, accessible, and available.

CONCLUSIONS

This birth center is an example of care that embodies the findings and anticipated outcomes described in the QMNC framework. Replication of this model in other childbearing settings may help alleviate unnecessary perinatal morbidity and mortality.

Interventions to mitigate pregnancy-related mortality and morbidity in Black birthing people: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of interventions to improve perinatal outcomes to mitigate pregnancy-related mortality and morbidity in Black birthing people.

DATA SOURCES

We searched 5 databases from 2000 through the final search date of April 5, 2023: Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature Plus with Full Text (EBSCOhost), Embase (Elsevier), PubMed, and Scopus (Elsevier) and ClinicalTrials.gov.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Only quantitative studies were eligible including observational and randomized controlled trials. All participants in selected studies must identify as Black or study results must be stratified by race that includes Black birthing people. The study must (1) measure a perinatal outcome of interest (2) occur in the United States and (3) be written in the English language. Studies were excluded if they were published prior to 2000, not published in the English language, or did not meet the criteria above.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

A data extraction template identified intervention type and perinatal outcome. Perinatal outcomes included but were not limited to: cardiovascular disorders, mortality, or preterm delivery. Interventions included: community programs, educational enhancement, individual counseling, medical intervention, or policy. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Three investigators assessed studies individually and group consensus was used for a final decision.

RESULTS

From 4,302 unique studies, 41 studies met inclusion criteria. Community programs such as the Supplemental Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and Healthy Start (n=17, 41.5%) were the most common interventions studied. Individual counseling closely followed (n=15, 36.6%). Medical interventions were not among the more commonly used intervention types (n=9, 21.9%). Most articles focused on preterm delivery (n=28, 68.3%). Few articles studied cardiovascular disorders (n=4, 9.8%) or hemorrhage (n=3, 7.3%). No articles studied pregnancy-related morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite current conversations on Black maternal mortality, there is currently limited literature examining interventions addressing perinatal morbidity and mortality in Black birthing people in the United States. These interventions do not address how to mitigate perinatal outcomes of interest. Patient-centered outcomes research is warranted to better understand as well as to resolve inequities related to Black maternal health. El resumen está disponible en Español al final del artículo.

Quality of birth care and risk factors of length of stay after birth: A machine learning approach

AIM

Length of stay (LOS) is an outcome measure and is assumed to be related to quality. The objective of this study is to examine the quality of birth care and risk factors associated with LOS after birth.

METHODS

A nationwide population-based Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) was used for the year 2018. A total of 1849 women ages 15-49 were included. Explanatory factor analysis and machine learning predictors such as Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, Neural Network, k-Nearest Neighbor, and Naïve Bayes were used to identify the quality of birth care and risk factors associated with LOS after birth.

RESULTS

As a result of the explanatory factor analysis, factor structures of quality of birth care, antenatal check-ups and supplements, and risk factors associated with birth were obtained using the Categorical Component Analysis method. The type of delivery, place of delivery, age, and type of place, which are under the quality of birth care, and risk factors associated with birth factors were found to be the variables that had the highest impact on LOS estimation. Random forest (Accuracy = 0.5789), support vector machine (radial) (Accuracy = 0.5766), and neural network (Accuracy = 0.5750) models outperformed, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Type of delivery which is an indicator of quality of birth care is a strong predictor of LOS after birth according to the Random Forest model. We demonstrated that machine learning techniques offer precise LOS prediction after birth. Further studies assessing the effect of quality of birth care on predicting LOS at birth would be beneficial.

Listening to Black Women's Perspectives of Birth Centers and Midwifery Care: Advocacy, Protection, and Empowerment

INTRODUCTION

Black women in Texas experience high rates of adverse maternal outcomes that have been linked to health inequities and structural racism in the maternal care system. Birth centers and midwifery care are highlighted in the literature as contributing to improved perinatal care experiences and decreased adverse outcomes for Black women. However, compared with White women, Black women underuse birth centers and midwifery care. Black women's perceptions in Texas of birth center and midwifery care are underrepresented in research. Thus, this study aimed to highlight the views of Black women residing in Texas on birth centers and midwifery care to identify their needs and explore ways to increasing access to perinatal care.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 10 pregnant and postpartum Black women residing in Texas. Questions focused on the women's access, knowledge, and use of birth centers and midwifery care in the context of their lived maternal care experiences. Interview transcripts were reviewed and analyzed using inductive, qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The Black women interviewed all shared experiences of discrimination and bias while receiving obstetric care that affected their interest in and overall perceptions of birth center and midwifery care. Participants also discussed financial and institutional barriers that impacted their ease of access to birth center and midwifery care services. Additionally, participants highlighted the need for culturally sensitive and respectful perinatal health care.

DISCUSSION

The Black women interviewed in this study emphasized the prevalence of racism and discrimination in perinatal health care encounters, a reflection consistent with current literature. Black women also expressed a desire to use birth centers and midwifery care but identified the barriers in Texas that impede access. Study findings highlight the need to address barriers to promote equitable perinatal health care access for Black women.

Neonatal morbidity and mortality in birth centers in the United States 2018-2021: An observational study of low-risk birthing individuals

BACKGROUND

Many studies reporting neonatal outcomes in birth centers include births with risk factors not acceptable for birth center care using the evidence-based CABC criteria. Accurate comparisons of outcomes by birth setting for low-risk patients are needed.

METHODS

Data from the public Natality Detailed File from 2018 to 2021 were used. Logistic regression, including adjusted and unadjusted odds ratios, compared neonatal outcomes (chorioamnionitis, Apgar scores, resuscitation, intensive care, seizures, and death) between centers and hospitals. Covariates included maternal diabetes, body mass index, age, parity, and demographic characteristics.

RESULTS

The sample included 8,738,711 births (8,698,432 (99.53%) in hospitals and 40,279 (0.46%) in birth centers). There were no significant differences in neonatal deaths (aOR 1.037; 95% CI [0.515, 2.088]; p-value 0.918) or seizures (aOR 0.666; 95% CI [0.315, 1.411]; p-value 0.289). Measures of morbidity either not significantly different or less likely to occur in birth centers compared to hospitals included chorioamnionitis (aOR 0.032; 95% CI [0.020, 0.052]; p-value < 0.001), Apgar score < 4 (aOR 0.814, 95% CI [0.638, 1.039], p-value 0.099), Apgar score < 7 (aOR 1.075, 95% CI [0.979, 1.180], p-value 0.130), ventilation >6 h (aOR 0.349; [0.281,0.433], p-value < 0.001), and intensive care admission (aOR 0.356; 95% CI [0.328, 0.386], p-value < 0.001). Birth centers had higher odds of assisted neonatal ventilation for <6 h as compared to hospitals (aOR 1.373; 95% CI [1.293, 1.457], p-value < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Neonatal deaths and seizures were not significantly different between freestanding birth centers and hospitals. Chorioamnionitis, Apgar scores < 4, and intensive care admission were less likely to occur in birth centers.

Postpartum care for parent-infant dyads: A community midwifery model

INTRODUCTION

Postpartum health is in crisis in the United States, with rising pregnancy-related mortality and worsening racial inequities. The World Health Organization recommends four postpartum visits during the 6 weeks after childbirth, yet standard postpartum care in the United States is generally one visit 6 weeks after birth. We present community midwifery postpartum care in the United States as a model concordant with World Health Organization guidelines, describing this model of care and its potential to improve postpartum health for birthing people and babies.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 34 community midwives providing care in birth centers and home settings in Oregon and California. A multidisciplinary team analyzed data using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 24 participants were Certified Professional Midwives; 10 were certified nurse-midwives. A total of 14 midwives identified as people of color. Most spoke multiple languages. We describe six key elements of the community midwifery model of postpartum care: (1) multiple visits, including home visits; typically five to eight over six weeks postpartum; (2) care for the parent-infant dyad; (3) continuity of personalized care; (4) relationship-centered care; (5) planning and preparation for postpartum; and (6) focus on postpartum rest.

CONCLUSION

The community midwifery model of postpartum care is a guideline-concordant approach to caring for the parent-infant dyad and may address rising pregnancy-related morbidity and mortality in the United States.

Race, ethnicity, and indications for primary cesarean birth: Associations within a national birth center registry

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic disparities in cesarean rates in the United States are well documented. This study investigated whether cesarean inequities persist in midwife-led birth center care, including for individuals with the lowest medical risk.

METHODS

National registry records of 174,230 childbearing people enrolled in care in 115 midwifery-led birth center practices between 2007 and 2022 were analyzed for primary cesarean rates and indications by race and ethnicity. The lowest medical risk subsample (n = 70,521) was analyzed for independent drivers of cesarean birth.

RESULTS

Primary cesarean rates among nulliparas (15.5%) and multiparas (5.7%) were low for all enrollees. Among nulliparas in the lowest-risk subsample, non-Latinx Black (aOR = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.15-1.63), Latinx (aOR = 1.51; 95% CI, 1.32-1.73), and Asian participants (aOR = 1.48; 95% CI, 1.19-1.85) remained at higher risk for primary cesarean than White participants. Among multiparas, only Black participants experienced a higher primary cesarean risk (aOR = 1.49; 95% CI, 1.02-2.18). Intrapartum transfers from birth centers were equivalent or lower for Black (14.0%, p = 0.345) and Latinx (12.7%, p < 0.001) enrollees. Black participants experienced a higher proportion of primary cesareans attributed to non-reassuring fetal status, regardless of risk factors. Place of admission was a stronger predictor of primary cesarean than race or ethnicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Place of first admission in labor was the strongest predictor of cesarean. Racism as a chronic stressor and a determinant of clinical decision-making reduces choice in birth settings and may increase cesarean rates. Research on components of birth settings that drive inequitable outcomes is warranted.

Midwifery Workforce Density Moderates the Association Between Independent Practice and Pregnancy Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Studies comparing pregnancy outcomes before and after state transition to independent midwifery practice have found little change in primary cesarean birth and preterm birth rates. One reason may be the failure to control for midwife density. The objective was to test if the local midwife density moderates the association between state independent midwifery practice and pregnancy outcomes.

METHODS

Birth records were abstracted from the State Inpatient Databases for 6 states. The Area Health Resource File provided county variables. Midwife density was operationalized as no midwives, low midwife density (<4.5 per 1000 births), and high midwife density (≥4.5 midwives per 1000 births). Multivariate logistic regression models compared primary cesarean birth and preterm birth, controlling for maternal and county characteristics. Moderation was tested by including an interaction term (independent practice × density) to the regression models. The magnitude of association for the interaction was measured by stratifying the models.

RESULTS

The study included 875,156 women; most (79.7%) resided in a county with low midwife density. Restricted midwifery practice was associated with increased odds of both primary cesarean birth and preterm birth. The interaction term was significant for both preterm birth and primary cesarean, indicating moderation. The largest magnitude of difference was the increased odds of preterm birth in counties with a high midwife density and restricted practice (odds ratio, 3.50; 95% CI, 2.43-5.06) compared with those with high midwife density and independent practice.

DISCUSSION

Midwife density moderates the association between independent midwifery practice and primary cesarean birth and preterm birth. Moderation may explain why prior studies found small or no changes in outcomes when states adopted independent practice. Moderation models can improve testing for associations with independent practice. Both midwife independent practice and increasing midwifery workforce size can be strategies to improve state pregnancy outcomes.

Prenatal care in US birth centers: Midwives' perceptions of contributors to birthing People's confidence in physiologic birth

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe US freestanding birth center models of prenatal care and to examine how the components of this care contribute to birthing people's confidence in their ability to have a physiologic birth.

DESIGN

This was a qualitative descriptive study utilizing semi-structured interviews with birth center midwives. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, constant comparative method and consensus coding to ensure rigor.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Midwives from six urban and rural freestanding birth centers in a Midwestern US state were interviewed. Twelve birth center midwives participated.

FINDINGS

Six themes emerged: the birth center physical space and organization of care, dimensions of midwifery care within the birth center, continuity of care and seamless service, the empowered birthing person, physiologic birth as normative, and the hospital paradigm and US cultures of birth.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

We identified significant components of birth center models of prenatal care that midwives believe enhance birthing people's confidence for physiologic childbirth. These components may be considered for application to other settings and may improve perinatal care and outcomes.

Targeted health and social care interventions for women and infants who are disproportionately impacted by health inequalities in high-income countries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Disadvantaged populations (such as women from minority ethnic groups and those with social complexity) are at an increased risk of poor outcomes and experiences. Inequalities in health outcomes include preterm birth, maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, and poor-quality care. The impact of interventions is unclear for this population, in high-income countries (HIC). The review aimed to identify and evaluate the current evidence related to targeted health and social care service interventions in HICs which can improve health inequalities experienced by childbearing women and infants at disproportionate risk of poor outcomes and experiences.

METHODS

Twelve databases searched for studies across all HICs, from any methodological design. The search concluded on 8/11/22. The inclusion criteria included interventions that targeted disadvantaged populations which provided a component of clinical care that differed from standard maternity care.

RESULTS

Forty six index studies were included. Countries included Australia, Canada, Chile, Hong Kong, UK and USA. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, and results showed three intervention types: midwifery models of care, interdisciplinary care, and community-centred services. These intervention types have been delivered singularly but also in combination of each other demonstrating overlapping features. Overall, results show interventions had positive associations with primary (maternal, perinatal, and infant mortality) and secondary outcomes (experiences and satisfaction, antenatal care coverage, access to care, quality of care, mode of delivery, analgesia use in labour, preterm birth, low birth weight, breastfeeding, family planning, immunisations) however significance and impact vary. Midwifery models of care took an interpersonal and holistic approach as they focused on continuity of carer, home visiting, culturally and linguistically appropriate care and accessibility. Interdisciplinary care took a structural approach, to coordinate care for women requiring multi-agency health and social services. Community-centred services took a place-based approach with interventions that suited the need of its community and their norms.

CONCLUSION

Targeted interventions exist in HICs, but these vary according to the context and infrastructure of standard maternity care. Multi-interventional approaches could enhance a targeted approach for at risk populations, in particular combining midwifery models of care with community-centred approaches, to enhance accessibility, earlier engagement, and increased attendance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42020218357.

Developmental Strategy and Validation of the Midwifery Interventions Classification (MIC): A Delphi Study Protocol and Results from the Developmental Phase

This study protocol aims to describe the rationale and developmental strategy of the first study in the Italian context which aimed to define a Midwifery Interventions Classification, an evidence-based, standardized taxonomy and classification of midwifery interventions. Midwifery interventions require a specific definition, developed through a consensus-building process by stakeholders to develop the Italian taxonomy of the Midwifery Interventions Classification with the potential for international transferability, implementation, and scaling up. A multi-round Delphi study was designed between June and September 2022, and data collection is planned between February 2023 and February 2024. The developmental phase of the study is based on a literature review to select meaningful midwifery interventions from the international literature, aiming to identify an evidence-based list of midwifery interventions. This phase led to including 16 articles derived from a systematic search performed on PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus; 164 midwifery interventions were selected from the data extraction performed on the 16 included articles. Healthcare professionals, researchers, and service users will be eligible panelists for the Delphi surveys. The protocol designed a dynamic number of consultation rounds based on the ratings and interim analysis. A nine-point Likert scoring system is designed to evaluate midwifery interventions. Attrition and attrition bias will be evaluated. The results from the study designed in this protocol will inform the development of the Italian taxonomy of the Midwifery Interventions Classification. A shared classification of midwifery interventions will support audit and quality improvement, education, and comparable data collections for research, sustaining public recognition of midwifery interventions to promote optimal maternal and newborn health.

[Good practices, interventions, and results: a comparative study between a birthing center and hospitals of the Brazilian Unified National Health System in the Southeastern Region, Brazil]

This study aims to compare obstetric care in a birthing center and in hospitals of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS) considering good practices, interventions, and maternal and perinatal results in the Southeast Region of Brazil. A cross-sectional study was conducted with comparable retrospective data from two studies on labor and birth. A total of 1,515 puerperal women of usual risk of birthing centers and public hospitals in the Southeast region were included. Propensity score weighting was used to balance the groups according to the following covariates: age, skin-color, parity, membrane integrity, and cervix dilation at hospitalization. Logistic regressions were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) between the place of birth and outcomes. In birthing centers, compared to hospitals, the puerperal woman had a higher chance of having a companion (OR = 86.31; 95%CI: 29.65-251.29), eating or drinking (OR = 862.38; 95%CI: 120.20-6,187.33), walking around (OR = 7.56; 95%CI: 4.65-12.31), using non-pharmacological methods for pain relief (OR = 27.82; 95%CI: 17.05-45.40), being in an upright position (OR = 252.78; 95%CI: 150.60-423.33), and a lower chance of using oxytocin (OR = 0.22; 95%CI: 0.16-0.31), amniotomy (OR = 0.01; 95%CI: 0.01-0.04), episiotomy (OR = 0.01; 95%CI: 0.00-0.02), and Kristeller maneuvers (OR = 0.01; 95%CI: 0.00-0.02). Also, in birthing centers the newborn had a higher chance of exclusive breastfeeding (OR = 1.84; 95%CI: 1.16-2.90) and a lower chance of airway (OR = 0.24; 95%CI: 0.18-0.33) and gastric aspiration (OR = 0.15; 95%: 0.10-0.22). Thus, birthing centers offers a greater supply of good practices and fewer interventions in childbirth and birth care, with more safety and care without influence on the outcomes.

Birth Center Breastfeeding Rates: A Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Breastfeeding rates in the United States fall short of national targets and are marked by racial and ethnic disparities. Birth centers are associated with high rates of breastfeeding initiation and duration, yet no systematic review has compiled reported birth center breastfeeding data.

METHODS

A PRISMA-guided literature review was conducted in CINAHL, PubMed, and Web of Science to retrieve quantitative studies that reported breastfeeding data in birth centers. Inclusion criteria focused on English language studies published since 2011 with breastfeeding outcomes from birth centers in the United States.

RESULTS

Ten studies were included for analysis. Breastfeeding rates that exceeded actual and target national breastfeeding rates were reported among all 10 studies. Characteristics about breastfeeding outcomes were reported heterogeneously across the studies, which included a range of breastfeeding timepoints (immediately postpartum up to 6 weeks postpartum) and definitions of breastfeeding.

DISCUSSION

Although breastfeeding rates reported in birth centers are higher than national breastfeeding rates and targets, authors of the included studies did not explore or analyze these rates in-depth. Developing standard definitions and data collection may enhance research about breastfeeding outcomes in birth centers.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Giving birth in a birth center is associated with higher than national breastfeeding rates.

Factors influencing birth setting decision making in the United States: An integrative review

BACKGROUND

The United States has the highest perinatal morbidity and mortality (M&M) rates among all high-resource countries in the world. Birth settings (birth center, home, or hospital) influence clinical outcomes, experience of care, and health care costs. Increasing use of low-intervention birth settings can reduce perinatal M&M. This integrative review evaluated factors influencing birth setting decision making among women and birthing people in the United States.

METHODS

A search strategy was implemented within the CINAHL, PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guided the review, and the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice model was used to evaluate methodological quality and appraisal of the evidence. The Whittemore and Knafl integrative review framework informed the extraction and analysis of the data and generation of findings.

RESULTS

We identified 23 articles that met inclusion criteria. Four analytical themes were generated that described factors that influence birth setting decision making in the United States: "Birth Setting Safety vs. Risk," "Influence of Media, Family, and Friends on Birth Setting Awareness," "Presence or Absence of Choice and Control," and "Access to Options."

DISCUSSION

Supporting women and birthing people to make informed decisions by providing information about birth setting options and variations in models of care by birth setting is a critical patient-centered strategy to ensure equitable access to low-intervention birth settings. Policies that expand affordable health insurance to cover midwifery care in all birth settings are needed to enable people to make informed choices about birth location that align with their values, individual pregnancy characteristics, and preferences.

Systematic review and meta-analysis to examine intrapartum interventions, and maternal and neonatal outcomes following immersion in water during labour and waterbirth

OBJECTIVES

Water immersion during labour using a birth pool to achieve relaxation and pain relief during the first and possibly part of the second stage of labour is an increasingly popular care option in several countries. It is used particularly by healthy women who experience a straightforward pregnancy, labour spontaneously at term gestation and plan to give birth in a midwifery led care setting. More women are also choosing to give birth in water. There is debate about the safety of intrapartum water immersion, particularly waterbirth. We synthesised the evidence that compared the effect of water immersion during labour or waterbirth on intrapartum interventions and outcomes to standard care with no water immersion. A secondary objective was to synthesise data relating to clinical care practices and birth settings that women experience who immerse in water and women who do not.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

A search was conducted using CINAHL, Medline, Embase, BioMed Central and PsycINFO during March 2020 and was replicated in May 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Primary quantitative studies published in 2000 or later, examining maternal or neonatal interventions and outcomes using the birthing pool for labour and/or birth.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Full-text screening was undertaken independently against inclusion/exclusion criteria in two pairs. Risk of bias assessment included review of seven domains based on the Robbins-I Risk of Bias Tool. All outcomes were summarised using an OR and 95% CI. All calculations were conducted in Comprehensive Meta-Analysis V.3, using the inverse variance method. Results of individual studies were converted to log OR and SE for synthesis. Fixed effects models were used when I2 was less than 50%, otherwise random effects models were used. The fail-safe N estimates were calculated to determine the number of studies necessary to change the estimates. Begg's test and Egger's regression risk assessed risk of bias across studies. Trim-and-fill analysis was used to estimate the magnitude of effect of the bias. Meta-regression was completed when at least 10 studies provided data for an outcome.

RESULTS

We included 36 studies in the review, (N=157 546 participants). Thirty-one studies were conducted in an obstetric unit setting (n=70 393), four studies were conducted in midwife led settings (n=61 385) and one study was a mixed setting (OU and homebirth) (n=25 768). Midwife led settings included planned home and freestanding midwifery unit (k=1), alongside midwifery units (k=1), planned homebirth (k=1), a freestanding midwifery unit and an alongside midwifery unit (k=1) and an alongside midwifery unit (k=1). For water immersion, 25 studies involved women who planned to have/had a waterbirth (n=151 742), seven involved water immersion for labour only (1901), three studies reported on water immersion during labour and waterbirth (n=3688) and one study was unclear about the timing of water immersion (n=215).Water immersion significantly reduced use of epidural (k=7, n=10 993; OR 0.17 95% CI 0.05 to 0.56), injected opioids (k=8, n=27 391; OR 0.22 95% CI 0.13 to 0.38), episiotomy (k=15, n=36 558; OR 0.16; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.27), maternal pain (k=8, n=1200; OR 0.24 95% CI 0.12 to 0.51) and postpartum haemorrhage (k=15, n=63 891; OR 0.69 95% CI 0.51 to 0.95). There was an increase in maternal satisfaction (k=6, n=4144; OR 1.95 95% CI 1.28 to 2.96) and odds of an intact perineum (k=17, n=59 070; OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.79) with water immersion. Waterbirth was associated with increased odds of cord avulsion (OR 1.94 95% CI 1.30 to 2.88), although the absolute risk remained low (4.3 per 1000 vs 1.3 per 1000). There were no differences in any other identified neonatal outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This review endorses previous reviews showing clear benefits resulting from intrapartum water immersion for healthy women and their newborns. While most included studies were conducted in obstetric units, to enable the identification of best practice regarding water immersion, future birthing pool research should integrate factors that are known to influence intrapartum interventions and outcomes. These include maternal parity, the care model, care practices and birth setting.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019147001.

Adoption of Consensus Guidelines for Safe Prevention of the Primary Cesarean Delivery by Freestanding Birth Centers

INTRODUCTION

Slow or arrested progress in labor is the most frequent (64%) indication for nonemergent transfer of laboring people from freestanding birth centers to the hospital. After the 2014 publication of the Consensus Statement on Safe Prevention of Primary Cesarean Delivery (Consensus Statement), many freestanding birth centers changed their clinical practice guidelines to allow more time for active labor in the birth center prior to hospital transfer. The result of these changes has not been evaluated in birth centers. Evaluation of adoption of guidelines based on the Consensus Statement in hospitals has shown inconsistent results.

METHODS

Birth centers were contacted to determine whether they changed clinical practice guidelines in response to the Consensus Statement. A before-after analysis compared outcomes for the 2 calendar years before and the 2 calendar years after adoption of new guidelines with a retrospective analysis of deidentified client-level data collected in the American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data Registry.

RESULTS

A third of responding birth centers (11 of 33) changed their clinical practice guidelines, mostly redefining the onset of active labor as beginning at 6 cm cervical dilatation and allowing 4 hours of arrest of dilatation in active labor before transfer to the hospital. These changes were associated with fewer diagnoses of prolonged first stage of labor (13.8% vs 8.0%, P < .01) but not with fewer intrapartum transfers (14.0% vs 14.7%, P = .55) or cesarean births (5.0 vs 4.1%, P = .26.) DISCUSSION: We found no evidence that making these practice changes was associated with better outcomes. Two hours of a lack of documented cervical change in active labor is likely long enough to diagnose arrested progress in labor. Research on proportion of morbidity and mortality associated with prolonged labor could inform practice guidelines for transfers.

Choosing a Birth Setting: A Shared Decision-Making Approach

Perinatal outcomes vary widely depending on individual birth settings (birth center, home, and hospital). The purpose of this case study is to explore a patient-centered, shared decision-making approach to achieve an informed, values-based choice about birth settings. Engaging in a shared decision-making approach regarding birth setting options would support people to have the information and ability to judge for themselves how benefits and risks across birth center, home, and hospital settings would best fit with their values and personal health. A patient decision aid about birth setting options could facilitate increased equity regarding access to birth settings that offer improved perinatal health outcomes, helping to reduce perinatal health disparities in the United States.

Place of Birth Preferences and Relationship to Maternal and Newborn Outcomes Within the American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data Registry, 2007-2020

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to describe sociodemographic variations in client preference for birthplace and relationships to perinatal health outcomes.

METHODS

Descriptive data analysis (raw number, percentages, and means) showed that preference for birthplace varied across racial and ethnic categories as well as sociodemographic categories including educational status, body mass index, payer status, marital status, and gravidity. A subsample of medically low-risk childbearing people, qualified for birth center admission in labor, was analyzed to assess variations in maternal and newborn outcomes by site of first admission in labor.

RESULTS

While overall clinical outcomes exceeded national benchmarks across all places of admission in the sample, disparities were noted including higher cesarean birth rates among Black and Hispanic people. This variation was larger within the population of people who preferred to be admitted to the hospital in labor in the absence of medical indication.

CONCLUSION

This study supports that the birth center model provides safe delivery care across the intersections of US sociodemographics. Findings from this study highlight the importance of increased access and choice in place of birth for improving health equity, including decreasing cesarean birth and increasing breastfeeding initiation.

The Impact of Culturally-Centered Care on Peripartum Experiences of Autonomy and Respect in Community Birth Centers: A Comparative Study

OBJECTIVE

National studies report that birth center care is associated with reduced racial and ethnic disparities and reduced experiences of mistreatment. In the US, there are very few BIPOC-owned birth centers. This study examines the impact of culturally-centered care delivered at Roots, a Black-owned birth center, on the experience of client autonomy and respect.

METHODS

To investigate if there was an association between experiences of autonomy and respect for Roots versus the national Giving Voice to Mothers (GVtM) participants, we applied Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for the overall sample and stratified by race.

RESULTS

Among BIPOC clients in the national GVtM sample and the Roots sample, MADM and MORi scores were statistically higher for clients receiving culturally-centered care at Roots (MADM p < 0.001, MORi p = 0.011). No statistical significance was found in scores between BIPOC and white clients at Roots Birth Center, however there was a tighter range among BIPOC individuals receiving care at Roots showing less variance in their experience of care.

CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE

Our study confirms previous findings suggesting that giving birth at a community birth center is protective against experiences of discrimination when compared to care in the dominant, hospital-based system. Culturally-centered care might enhance the experience of perinatal care even further, by decreasing variance in BIPOC experience of autonomy and respect. Policies on maternal health care reimbursement should add focus on making community birth sustainable, especially for BIPOC provider-owners offering culturally-centered care.

A Qualitative Study of US Women's Perspectives on Confidence for Physiologic Birth in the Birth Center Model of Prenatal Care

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to increase understanding of the components of the US birth center model of prenatal care and how the birth center prenatal care model contributes to birthing people's confidence for physiologic childbirth.

METHODS

This was a qualitative descriptive study using semistructured interviews with individuals who gave birth in freestanding birth centers. Birthing people were recruited from freestanding birth centers in a Midwestern US state and were between the ages of 18 and 42, were English-speaking, and had experienced a birth center birth within the previous 6 months. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using Glaser's constant comparative method.

RESULTS

Twelve women who gave birth in birth centers, representing urban and rural settings, participated. Four core categories were identified encompassing the components of birth center prenatal care and how the birth center model contributes to women's confidence for physiologic birth: birth center culture and processes, midwifery model of care within the birth center, internal influences, and outside influences.

DISCUSSION

Women who gave birth in birth centers believed that the birth center culture and environment, the midwifery model of care in the birth center, internal influences including the belief that birth is a normal physiologic process, and outside influences including family support and positive birth stories contributed to their confidence for physiologic birth.

Associations between Place of Birth, Type of Attendant, and Small for Gestational Age Births among Pregnant non-Hispanic Black Medicaid Recipients

INTRODUCTION

Although non-Hispanic Black women have increased risks of adverse birth outcomes compared with non-Hispanic white women in the United States, there is a lack of research specifically focusing on non-Hispanic Black women. Thus, this study's purpose was to evaluate whether place of birth and type of attendant used during labor is associated with having a newborn born small for gestational age (SGA) among non-Hispanic Black Medicaid recipients.

METHODS

This study used 2017 Natality data from the National Vital Statistics System for non-Hispanic Black women who used Medicaid as a source of payment (N = 322,604). Type of attendant (ie, the medical professional who assisted during childbirth), place of birth (ie, setting where the woman gave birth), maternal factors, and SGA were obtained from birth certificates. We used multivariate logistic regression to investigate the association between place of birth, type of birth attendant, and newborns born SGA.

RESULTS

After adjustment, women who used a certified nurse-midwife or other midwife as an attendant during labor had statistically significant decreased odds of having a neonate born SGA compared with those who had a physician as an attendant (odds ratio [OR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.66-0.71 and OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55-0.85, respectively). Those who gave birth in a birthing center or had planned home births also had statistically significant decreased odds of having a neonate born SGA (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.38-0.69 and OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.21-0.66, respectively). However, those who had an unplanned home birth had twice the odds of having a neonate born SGA compared with those who gave birth at a hospital or clinic (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.50-2.64).

DISCUSSION

Given the racial disparity in adverse birth outcomes for non-Hispanic Black women, the observed associations provide justification for future research to determine whether birthing location and birth attendant are related to SGA.

A maternity care home model of enhanced prenatal care to reduce preterm birth rate and NICU use

BACKGROUND

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) funded 182 US health care sites to reduce preterm birth rates by enhancing prenatal care for at-risk women. As a funded site, the enhanced prenatal care maternity care home (MCH) model was implemented from 2013 to 2018 for 1042 Medicaid-eligible pregnant women.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the impact of enhanced services on preterm birth risk reduction. Certified community health workers provided enhanced services from enrollment through six weeks postpartum. Participants attending enhanced intake and third-trimester prenatal visits comprised the Active Group (N = 632). Participants missing third-trimester visits, but participating in enhanced intake and postpartum visits, comprised the Inactive Group (N = 128). Lost Group participants attended only intake visits (N = 282). Data were collected through CMS-developed intake, third-trimester, postpartum, and exit forms. Descriptive analysis, analysis of variance, and the chi-square tests analyzed the impact of risk factors, participant characteristics, and program participation on birth outcomes.

RESULTS

Active Group compared with Inactive and Lost Group participants experienced significantly lower preterm birth rates (7.64% vs 22.48% and 15.82%, P < 0.001) and therefore a significantly lower NICU admission rate compared with Inactive and Lost Groups (2.82% vs 11.85% and 5.47%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The MCH model of enhanced prenatal care reduced preterm birth and NICU admission rates for Active Group participants. The Black Active Group participant preterm birth rate was not significantly different than other Active Group rates, but was lower than Black Inactive and Lost Group rates.

Associations between prolonged second stage of labor and maternal and neonatal outcomes in freestanding birth centers: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines for second stage management do not provide guidance for community birth providers about when best to transfer women to hospital care for prolonged second stage. Our goal was to increase the evidence base for these providers by: 1) describing the lengths of second stage labor in freestanding birth centers, and 2) determining whether proportions of postpartum women and newborns experiencing complications change as length of second stage labor increases.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of de-identified client-level data collected in the American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data Registry, including women giving birth in freestanding birth centers January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2016. We plotted proportions of postpartum women and newborns transferred to hospital care against length of the second stage of labor, and assessed significance of these with the Cochran-Armitage test for trend or chi-square test. Secondary maternal and newborn outcomes were compared for dyads with normal and prolonged second stages of labor using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Second stage labor exceeded 3 hours for 2.3% of primiparous women and 2 hours for 6.6% of multiparous women. Newborn transfers increased as second stage increased from < 15 minutes to > 2 hours (0.6% to 6.33%, p for trend = 0.0008, for primiparous women, and 1.4% to 10.6%, p for trend < 0.0001, for multiparous women.) Postpartum transfers for multiparous women increased from 1.4% after second stage < 15 minutes to greater than 4% for women after second stage exceeding 2 hours (p for trend < 0.0001.) CONCLUSIONS: Complications requiring hospitalization of postpartum women and newborns become more common as the length of the second stage increases. Birth center guidelines should consider not just presence of progress but also absolute length of time as indications for transfer.

Freestanding Birth Centers: An Evidence-Based Option for Birth

Every childbearing person has the right to learn about all options for perinatal care provider and birth setting. To ensure an informed decision about their preferred birth plan, information should be provided either preconceptionally or in early pregnancy. Personal preferences and risk status should be considered in decision-making. Numbers of births in birth centers have doubled over past decade to almost 20,000 births per year. The evidence shows that childbearing people who participate in birth center care, even if they have only birth center prenatal care, experience better outcomes including lower rates of preterm birth, low birth weight births, and cesarean birth, and higher rates of breastfeeding when compared to people with similar risk profiles who receive typical perinatal care.

A realist review to explore how midwifery continuity of care may influence preterm birth in pregnant women

BACKGROUND

Midwifery continuity of care models are the only health system intervention associated with both a reduction in preterm birth (PTB) and an improvement in perinatal survival; however, questions remain about the mechanisms by which such positive outcomes are achieved. We aimed to uncover theories of change by which we can postulate how and why continuity of midwifery care models might affect PTB.

METHODS

We followed Pawson's guidance for conducting a realist review and performed a comprehensive search to identify existing literature exploring the impact of continuity models on PTB in all pregnant women. A realist methodology was used to uncover the context (C), mechanisms (M), and outcomes (O) and to develop a group of CMO configurations to illuminate middle-range theories.

RESULTS

Eleven papers were included from a wide variety of settings in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States. The majority of study participants had low socioeconomic status or social risk factors and received diverse models of midwifery continuity of care. Three themes-woman-midwife partnership, maternity pathways and processes, and system resources-encompassed ten CMO configurations. Building relationships, trust, confidence, and advocacy resulted in women feeling safer, less stressed, and more secure and respected, and encouraged them to access and engage in antenatal care with more opportunities for early prevention and diagnosis of complications, which facilitated effective management when compliance to guidelines was ensured. Organizational infrastructure, innovative partnerships, and robust community systems are crucial to overcome barriers, address women's complex needs, ensure quality of care, and reduce PTB risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnant women living in different contexts in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States at low and mixed risk of complications and with low socioeconomic status or social risk factors experienced continuity models in similar ways, and similar underlying mechanisms may have influenced PTB outcomes. Further research is required to understand how continuity models may influence behavioral change, physiological stress levels, ethnic disparities in PTB and care coordination, and navigation of health services.

Social-ecological considerations for the sleep health of rural mothers

Using a social-ecological framework, we identify social determinants that interact to influence sleep health, identify gaps in the literature, and make recommendations for targeting sleep health in rural mothers. Rural mothers experience unique challenges and protective factors in maintaining adequate sleep health during the postpartum and early maternal years. Geographic isolation, barriers to comprehensive behavioral medicine services, and intra-rural ethno-racial disparities are discussed at the societal (e.g., public policy), social (e.g., community) and individual levels (e.g., stress) of the social-ecological model. Research on sleep health would benefit from attention to methodological considerations of factors affecting rural mothers such as including parity in population-level analyses or applying community-based participatory research principles. Future sleep health programs would benefit from using existing social support networks to disseminate sleep health information, integrating behavioral health services into clinical care frameworks, and tailoring culturally-appropriate Telehealth/mHealth programs to enhance the sleep health of rural mothers.

The role of pandemic-related pregnancy stress in preference for community birth during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced unparalleled uncertainty into the lives of pregnant women, including concerns about where it is the safest to give birth, while preserving their rights and wishes. Reports on the increased interest in community births (at home or in birth centers) are emerging. The purpose of this project was to quantitatively investigate psychological factors related to this birth preference.

METHODS

This study included 3896 pregnant women from the COVID-19 Pregnancy Experiences (COPE) Study who were anticipating a vaginal birth. COPE Study participants were recruited online between April 24 and May 15, 2020, and completed a questionnaire that included preference with respect to place of birth and psychological constructs: fear of childbirth, basic beliefs about birth, pandemic-related preparedness stress, and pandemic-related perinatal infection stress.

RESULTS

Women who preferred a community birth, on average, had less childbirth fear, had stronger beliefs that birth is a natural process, were less likely to see birth as a medical process, and were less stressed about being unprepared for birth and being infected with COVID-19. In multivariate models, higher stress about perinatal COVID-19 infection was associated with greater likelihood of preferring a community birth. The effect of perinatal infection stress on preference was stronger when preparedness stress was high.

DISCUSSION

Women's birth preferences during the COVID-19 pandemic are associated with psychological processes related to risk perception. Community births are more appealing to women who view being in a hospital as hazardous because of the pandemic. Policies and prenatal care aimed to increase access to safe in-hospital and out-of-hospital birth services should be encouraged.

Exploring Why Birth Center Clients Choose Hospitalization for Labor and Birth

OBJECTIVE

To identify demographic and clinical factors associated with birth center clients electing hospitalization for labor and birth and to explore the timing and rationale for elective hospitalization via health records.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of multiyear data from a quality assurance project at a single birth center. We compared two subsamples-birth center preference group and hospital preference group-and described the apparent rationale for transfers among clients in the latter group.

SETTING

A single freestanding birth center where all midwives have admitting privileges at a local hospital and can accompany labor transfers.

PARTICIPANTS

All cases included in the analytic sample represent women with low-risk pregnancies who were eligible for birth center birth. The birth center preference group represents clients planning to give birth at the center, and the hospital preference group consists of clients who elected for hospitalization.

MEASUREMENTS

Relevant demographic and clinical information was provided for the entire analytic sample and was matched with available data collected systematically by birth center staff via chart review. The data set also included anonymous responses to an e-mailed questionnaire from clients identified by birth center staff.

RESULTS

Approximately 56.1% (N = 1,155) of the cases in the data set were eligible for comparative analysis. The birth center preference and hospital preference groups included 899 (77.8%) and 256 (22.2%) individuals, respectively. In the hospital preference group, Black clients (n = 23), those who were publicly insured (n = 49), and primiparas (n = 101) were significantly overrepresented. Chart review data and questionnaire responses highlighted insurance restrictions, family preferences, pain relief options, and postpartum care as influential factors among members of the hospital preference subsample.

CONCLUSION

The present analysis shows associations between certain individual characteristics and elective hospitalization during labor for birth center clients. Health record data and questionnaire responses indicated a variety of reasons for electing hospitalization, illustrating the complexity of clients' decision-making during pregnancy and birth.

The role of midwifery and other international insights for maternity care in the United States: An analysis of four countries

BACKGROUND

The United States (US) spends more on health care than any other high-resource country. Despite this, their maternal and newborn outcomes are worse than all other countries with similar levels of economic development. Our purpose was to describe maternal and newborn outcomes and organization of care in four high-resource countries (Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, and United Kingdom) with consistently better outcomes and lower health care costs, and to identify opportunities for emulation and improvement in the United States.

METHOD

We examined resources that described health care organization and financing, provider types, birth settings, national, clinical guidelines, health care policies, surveillance data, and information for consumers. We conducted interviews with country stakeholders representing the disciplines of obstetrics, midwifery, pediatrics, neonatology, epidemiology, sociology, political science, public health, and health services. The results of the analysis were compared and contrasted with the US maternity system.

RESULTS

The four countries had lower rates of maternal mortality, low birthweight, and newborn and infant death than the United States. Five commonalities were identified as follows: (1) affordable/ accessible health care, (2) a maternity workforce that emphasized midwifery care and interprofessional collaboration, (3) respectful care and maternal autonomy, (4) evidence-based guidelines on place of birth, and (5) national data collections systems.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings reveal marked differences in the other countries compared to the United States. It is critical to consider the evidence for improved maternal and newborn outcomes with different models of care and to examine US cultural and structural failures that are leading to unacceptable and substandard maternal and infant outcomes.

Birth and the Big Bad Wolf: Biocultural Evolution and Human Childbirth, Part 2

In Part 2 of this two-part article, we further employ the lens of evolutionary medicine to explore similarities in premodern biocultural features of birth, arguing that these were an outgrowth of our common evolutionary heritage as bipedal primates. These practices grew out of the empiricism of millennia of trial and error and supported humans to give birth in closer alignment with our evolved biology. We argue that many common obstetric procedures today work against this evolved biology. In seeking to manage birth, we sometimes generate an obstetric paradox wherein we (over)intervene in human childbirth to try to keep it safe, yet thereby cause harm. We describe premodern birthing patterns in three sections: (a) eating and drinking at will and unrestrained movement in labor with upright pushing; (b) obligate midwifery and continuous labor support; and (c) the low-intervention birth/long-term breastfeeding/co-sleeping adaptive complex, and discuss how these are still relevant today. We conclude with a set of suggestions for improving the global technocratic treatment of birth and with a futuristic epilogue about a 7th, cyborgian pig that asks: What will become of birth as humans continue to coevolve with our technologies?

Implementing Screening Guidelines for Preeclampsia Prevention in a Birth Center: A Quality Improvement Project

The aim of the project was to identify women at risk for developing preeclampsia who present for birth center care in order to initiate preventative treatment and retain them within the birth center practice. Birth center patients with preeclampsia disqualify for birth center care requiring hospital transfer. The target population consisted of pregnant women choosing birth center care with certified nurse midwives. Quality improvement method was utilized. Over 5-weeks, patients with 12 to 28 weeks' gestation were screened for preeclampsia risk factors; patients with high risk for preeclampsia initiated low-dose aspirin (LDA). All patients were evaluated for preeclampsia diagnosis up to 2 weeks postpartum. Outcomes were evaluated through chart audits. Screening for preeclampsia risk significantly increased LDA use. Preeclampsia screening did not statistically reduce incidences of preeclampsia but did show a moderate reduction. Use of LDA did not statistically reduce preeclampsia diagnoses but had a large reduction effect. Screening for preeclampsia in birth center patients results in increased use of LDA and potentially decreased rates of hospital transfer. Implementing preeclampsia screening is cost-effective and allows for increased patient retention.

Strong Start in birth centers: Socio-demographic characteristics, care processes, and outcomes for mothers and newborns

BACKGROUND

A recent Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation report evaluated the four-year Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns Initiative, which sought to improve maternal and newborn outcomes through exploration of three enhanced, evidence-based care models. This paper reports the socio-demographic characteristics, care processes, and outcomes for mothers and newborns engaged in care with American Association of Birth Centers (AABC) sites.

METHODS

The authors examined data for 6424 Medicaid or Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) beneficiaries in birth center care who gave birth between 2013 and 2017. Using data from the AABC Perinatal Data Registry™, descriptive statistics were used to evaluate socio-behavioral and medical risks, and core perinatal quality outcomes. Comparisons are made between outcomes in the AABC sample and national data during the study period.

RESULTS

Childbearing mothers enrolled at AABC sites had diverse socio-behavioral risk factors similar to the national profile. The AABC sites exceeded national quality benchmarks for low birthweight (3.28%), preterm birth (4.42%), and primary cesarean birth (8.56%). Racial disparities in perinatal indicators were present within the Strong Start sample; however, they were at narrower margins than in national data. The enhanced model of care was notable for use of midwifery-led prenatal, labor, and birth care and decreased hospital admission.

CONCLUSIONS

Birth center care improves population health, patient experience, and value. The model demonstrates the potential to decrease racial disparity and improve population health. Reduction of regulatory barriers and implementation of sustainable reimbursement are warranted to move the model to scale for Medicaid beneficiaries nationwide.