Literature DB >> 11592538

Team midwife care: maternal and infant outcomes.

U Waldenström1, H McLachlan, D Forster, S Brennecke, S Brown.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to add additional information on intervention rates and maternal and infant outcomes of team midwife care to previous reports which have suggested this model of care can be associated with a reduction in medical interventions during labour and birth with no statistically significant influence on maternal and infant outcomes. The study was designed as a randomised controlled trial, with 495 women randomised to team midwife care being compared to 505 women randomsed to standard care. The study revealed no statistical differences between team midwife care and standard care in medical interventions, maternal health and infant health. These findings suggest that team midwifery as it is practised in this study is a safe alternative for women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11592538     DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.2001.tb01225.x

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


  9 in total

Review 1.  Why we should not seek individual informed consent for participation in health services research.

Authors:  J Cassell; A Young
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  A direct comparison of patient-reported outcomes and experiences in alternative models of maternity care in Queensland, Australia.

Authors:  Yvette D Miller; Jessica Tone; Sutapa Talukdar; Elizabeth Martin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-12       Impact factor: 3.752

Review 3.  Quality of care provided by mid-level health workers: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zohra S Lassi; Giorgio Cometto; Luis Huicho; Zulfiqar A Bhutta
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 9.408

4.  Exploring implementation and sustainability of models of care: can theory help?

Authors:  Della A Forster; Michelle Newton; Helen L McLachlan; Karen Willis
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-11-25       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 5.  Models of antenatal care to reduce and prevent preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Cristina Fernandez Turienzo; Jane Sandall; Janet L Peacock
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 6.  Midwifery-led antenatal care models: mapping a systematic review to an evidence-based quality framework to identify key components and characteristics of care.

Authors:  Andrew Symon; Jan Pringle; Helen Cheyne; Soo Downe; Vanora Hundley; Elaine Lee; Fiona Lynn; Alison McFadden; Jenny McNeill; Mary J Renfrew; Mary Ross-Davie; Edwin van Teijlingen; Heather Whitford; Fiona Alderdice
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 3.007

7.  A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Two Alternative Models of Maternity Care in Ireland.

Authors:  Christopher G Fawsitt; Jane Bourke; Aileen Murphy; Brendan McElroy; Jennifer E Lutomski; Rosemary Murphy; Richard A Greene
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 2.561

Review 8.  Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women.

Authors:  Jane Sandall; Hora Soltani; Simon Gates; Andrew Shennan; Declan Devane
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-04-28

9.  COSMOS: COmparing Standard Maternity care with one-to-one midwifery support: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Helen L McLachlan; Della A Forster; Mary-Ann Davey; Judith Lumley; Tanya Farrell; Jeremy Oats; Lisa Gold; Ulla Waldenström; Leah Albers; Mary Anne Biro
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 3.007

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.