Literature DB >> 11065032

A randomised controlled trial comparing birthing centre care with delivery suite care in Adelaide, Australia.

J P Byrne1, C A Crowther, J R Moss.   

Abstract

Birthing centre care offers women with a low risk of complication in pregnancy an alternative to conventional care for the birthing of their baby. It is important these two forms of care are appropriately assessed. A randomised controlled trial comparing the newly opened birthing centre with the established conventional delivery suite was conducted at the then Queen Victoria Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia. The outcomes measured included maternal satisfaction, costs and clinical outcomes both for mother and baby which related to the need for Caesarean section, episiotomy or tear rate and method of feeding. Two hundred and one women attending the hospital's antenatal clinic were randomly allocated to either birthing centre or delivery suite care. One hundred women were allocated to the birthing centre. No differences were found in either group related to clinical outcomes or costs. The only difference in maternal satisfaction was the choice women made for their next birth. More women in the birthing centre group felt they were encouraged to breastfeed immediately after birth. While the numbers in this study were too small to detect any but large differences in outcome, birthing centre care should remain an option for women and further studies undertaken with larger numbers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11065032     DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.2000.tb03333.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol        ISSN: 0004-8666            Impact factor:   2.100


  9 in total

1.  UK childbirth delivery options in 2001-2002: alternatives to consultant unit booking and delivery.

Authors:  Lindsay Fp Smith; Caroline P Smith
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Post natal use of analgesics: comparisons between conventional postnatal wards and a maternity hotel.

Authors:  Hedvig Nordeng; Anne Eskild; Britt-Ingjerd Nesheim
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2010-02-10

Review 3.  Interventions for promoting the initiation of breastfeeding.

Authors:  Olukunmi O Balogun; Elizabeth J O'Sullivan; Alison McFadden; Erika Ota; Anna Gavine; Christine D Garner; Mary J Renfrew; Stephen MacGillivray
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-11-09

Review 4.  Alternative versus conventional institutional settings for birth.

Authors:  Ellen D Hodnett; Soo Downe; Denis Walsh
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-08-15

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

Authors:  S Bernitz; R Rolland; E Blix; M Jacobsen; K Sjøborg; P Øian
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2011-07-12       Impact factor: 6.531

6.  Births in two different delivery units in the same clinic--a prospective study of healthy primiparous women.

Authors:  Britt Ingeborg Eide; Anne Britt Vika Nilsen; Svein Rasmussen
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2009-06-22       Impact factor: 3.007

7.  Evaluation of satisfaction with care in a midwifery unit and an obstetric unit: a randomized controlled trial of low-risk women.

Authors:  Stine Bernitz; Pål Øian; Leiv Sandvik; Ellen Blix
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-06-18       Impact factor: 3.007

Review 8.  Developing quality indicators for assessing quality of birth centre care: a mixed- methods study.

Authors:  Inge C Boesveld; Marieke A A Hermus; Hanneke J de Graaf; Marit Hitzert; Karin M van der Pal-de Bruin; Raymond G de Vries; Arie Franx; Therese A Wiegers
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Maternal and perinatal outcomes by planned place of birth in Australia 2000 - 2012: a linked population data study.

Authors:  Caroline S E Homer; Seong L Cheah; Chris Rossiter; Hannah G Dahlen; David Ellwood; Maralyn J Foureur; Della A Forster; Helen L McLachlan; Jeremy J N Oats; David Sibbritt; Charlene Thornton; Vanessa L Scarf
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-10-29       Impact factor: 2.692

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.