E D Hodnett1. 1. Maternal, Infant and Reproductive Health Research Unit, 790 Bay Street, Sute 715, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA, M5G 1N8. ellen.hodnett@utoronto.ca
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many home-like birth centres have been established near conventional labour wards for the care of pregnant women who prefer and require little or no medical intervention during labour and birth. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of care in a home-like birth environment compared to care in a conventional labour ward, on labour and birth outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register was searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing a home-like institutional birth environment to conventional hospital care for pregnant women at low risk of obstetric complications. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality was assessed. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials involving almost 8000 women were included. Substantial numbers of women allocated to home-like settings were transferred to standard care before or during labour, making interpretation of results difficult. Allocation to a home-like setting was associated with lower rates of intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 0.93), fetal heart rate abnormalities (0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.81), augmented labour, and immobility during labour, as well as greater satisfaction with care, and increased likelihood of sore nipples and mastitis. There was a non-statistically significant trend towards higher perinatal mortality in the home-like setting (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 2.78). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There appear to be some benefits from home-like settings for childbirth, although increased support from caregivers may be more important. Caregivers and clients in home-like settings need to watch for signs of complications.
BACKGROUND: Many home-like birth centres have been established near conventional labour wards for the care of pregnant women who prefer and require little or no medical intervention during labour and birth. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of care in a home-like birth environment compared to care in a conventional labour ward, on labour and birth outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register was searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing a home-like institutional birth environment to conventional hospital care for pregnant women at low risk of obstetric complications. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality was assessed. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials involving almost 8000 women were included. Substantial numbers of women allocated to home-like settings were transferred to standard care before or during labour, making interpretation of results difficult. Allocation to a home-like setting was associated with lower rates of intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 0.93), fetal heart rate abnormalities (0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.81), augmented labour, and immobility during labour, as well as greater satisfaction with care, and increased likelihood of sore nipples and mastitis. There was a non-statistically significant trend towards higher perinatal mortality in the home-like setting (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 2.78). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There appear to be some benefits from home-like settings for childbirth, although increased support from caregivers may be more important. Caregivers and clients in home-like settings need to watch for signs of complications.