Literature DB >> 18843666

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

Marie Hatem1, Jane Sandall, Declan Devane, Hora Soltani, Simon Gates.   

Abstract

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 and other models of care.
OBJECTIVES: To compare midwife-led models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (January 2008), Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group's Trials Register (January 2008), Current Contents (1994 to January 2008), CINAHL (1982 to August 2006), Web of Science, BIOSIS Previews, ISI Proceedings, (1990 to 2008), and the WHO Reproductive Health Library, No. 9. SELECTION CRITERIA: All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led or other models of care during pregnancy, and where care is provided during the ante- and intrapartum period in the midwife-led model. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All authors evaluated methodological quality. Two authors independently checked the data extraction. MAIN
RESULTS: We included 11 trials (12,276 women). Women who had midwife-led models of care were less likely to experience antenatal hospitalisation, risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.99), the use of regional analgesia (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.91), episiotomy (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.88), and instrumental delivery (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.96) and were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.29), spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.06), to feel in control during labour and childbirth (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.30), attendance at birth by a known midwife (RR 7.84, 95% CI 4.15 to 14.81) and initiate breastfeeding (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.76). In addition, women who were randomised to receive midwife-led care were less likely to experience fetal loss before 24 weeks' gestation (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97), and their babies were more likely to have a shorter length of hospital stay (mean difference -2.00, 95% CI -2.15 to -1.85). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for overall fetal loss/neonatal death (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.00), or fetal loss/neonatal death of at least 24 weeks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.53). AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: All women should be offered midwife-led models of care and women should be encouraged to ask for this option.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18843666     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004667.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  77 in total

Review 1.  Active versus expectant management for women in the third stage of labour.

Authors:  Cecily M Begley; Gillian M L Gyte; Declan Devane; William McGuire; Andrew Weeks
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-11-09

2.  Prenatal parental education from the perspective of fathers with experience as primary caregiver immediately following birth: a phenomenographic study.

Authors:  Kerstin Erlandsson; Elisabet Häggström-Nordin
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2010

3.  Evidence-Based Practice in the United States: Challenges, Progress, and Future Directions.

Authors:  Rosaly Correa-de-Araujo
Journal:  Health Care Women Int       Date:  2015-10-16

4.  Midwifery care and patient-provider communication in maternity decisions in the United States.

Authors:  Katy B Kozhimannil; Laura B Attanasio; Y Tony Yang; Melissa D Avery; Eugene Declercq
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2015-07

5.  An evaluation of male partners' perceptions of antenatal classes in a national health service hospital: implications for service provision in london.

Authors:  Nessie Shia; Oluseyi Alabi
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2013

6.  Supporting Healthy and Normal Physiologic Childbirth: A Consensus Statement by ACNM, MANA, and NACPM.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2013

Review 7.  Perineal techniques during the second stage of labour for reducing perineal trauma.

Authors:  Vigdis Aasheim; Anne Britt Vika Nilsen; Liv Merete Reinar; Mirjam Lukasse
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-06-13

8.  Perception of pregnant women about antenatal care in a cottage hospital in Port Harcourt, Nigeria.

Authors:  M I Ekott; U Ovwigho; A Ehigiegba; A Fajola; B Fakunle
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2013-04

Review 9.  Delivery arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Agustín Ciapponi; Simon Lewin; Cristian A Herrera; Newton Opiyo; Tomas Pantoja; Elizabeth Paulsen; Gabriel Rada; Charles S Wiysonge; Gabriel Bastías; Lilian Dudley; Signe Flottorp; Marie-Pierre Gagnon; Sebastian Garcia Marti; Claire Glenton; Charles I Okwundu; Blanca Peñaloza; Fatima Suleman; Andrew D Oxman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-09-13

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.