Literature DB >> 7819846

Midwife managed delivery unit: a randomised controlled comparison with consultant led care.

V A Hundley1, F M Cruickshank, G D Lang, C M Glazener, J M Milne, M Turner, D Blyth, J Mollison, C Donaldson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether intrapartum care and delivery of low risk women in a midwife managed delivery unit differs from that in a consultant led labour ward.
DESIGN: Pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Subjects were randomised in a 2:1 ratio between the midwives unit and the labour ward.
SETTING: Aberdeen Maternity Hospital, Grampian.
SUBJECTS: 2844 low risk women, as defined by existing booking criteria for general practitioner units in Grampian. 1900 women were randomised to the midwives unit and 944 to the labour ward. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Maternal and perinatal morbidity.
RESULTS: Of the women randomised to the midwives unit, 647 (34%) were transferred to the labour ward antepartum, 303 (16%) were transferred intrapartum, and 80 (4%) were lost to follow up. 870 women (46%) were delivered in the midwives unit. Primigravid women (255/596, 43%) were significantly more likely to be transferred intrapartum than multi-gravid women (48/577, 8%). Significant differences between the midwives unit and labour ward were found in monitoring, fetal distress, analgesia, mobility, and use of episiotomy. There were no significant differences in mode of delivery or fetal outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: Midwife managed intrapartum care for low risk women results in more mobility and less intervention with no increase in neonatal morbidity. However, the high rate of transfer shows that antenatal criteria are unable to determine who will remain at low risk throughout pregnancy and labour.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7819846      PMCID: PMC2541316          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.309.6966.1400

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  13 in total

1.  Comparison of management and outcome of labour under two systems of care.

Authors:  D Walsh
Journal:  Midwives Chron       Date:  1989-08

2.  Comparison of outcome of low-risk labour in an isolated general practice maternity unit and a specialist maternity hospital.

Authors:  S W Lowe; W House; T Garrett
Journal:  J R Coll Gen Pract       Date:  1987-11

3.  Differences in intrapartum obstetric care provided to women at low risk by family physicians and obstetricians.

Authors:  A J Reid; J C Carroll; J Ruderman; M A Murray
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1989-03-15       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Outcomes and procedures in low risk birth: a comparison of hospital and birth center settings.

Authors:  E Feldman; M Hurst
Journal:  Birth       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 3.689

5.  Simulated home delivery in hospital: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  J MacVicar; G Dobbie; L Owen-Johnstone; C Jagger; M Hopkins; J Kennedy
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1993-04

6.  Place of birth and perinatal mortality.

Authors:  M Tew
Journal:  J R Coll Gen Pract       Date:  1985-08

7.  The Dublin randomized controlled trial of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring.

Authors:  D MacDonald; A Grant; M Sheridan-Pereira; P Boylan; I Chalmers
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1985-07-01       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  A prospective comparison of selective and universal electronic fetal monitoring in 34,995 pregnancies.

Authors:  K J Leveno; F G Cunningham; S Nelson; M Roark; M L Williams; D Guzick; S Dowling; C R Rosenfeld; A Buckley
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1986-09-04       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  The use of a birthroom: a randomized controlled trial comparing delivery with that in the labour ward.

Authors:  M G Chapman; M Jones; J E Spring; M De Swiet; G V Chamberlain
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1986-02

10.  How safe is general practitioner obstetrics?

Authors:  G W Taylor; W Edgar; B A Taylor; D G Neal
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1980-12-13       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  27 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.  Primary birthing attendants and birth outcomes in remote Inuit communities--a natural "experiment" in Nunavik, Canada.

Authors:  F Simonet; R Wilkins; E Labranche; J Smylie; M Heaman; P Martens; W D Fraser; K Minich; Y Wu; C Carry; Z-C Luo
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2009-03-13       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  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

4.  Should general practitioners have any role in maternity care in the future?

Authors:  L F Smith
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Prospective regional study of planned home births. Home Birth Study Steering Group.

Authors:  J Davies; E Hey; W Reid; G Young
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-11-23

6.  Care in a midwife managed delivery unit. Pregnancy and delivery require a joint midwifery and medical approach.

Authors:  C Lees; S Campbell; L Cardozo; D Gibb; M Blott; I White
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-03-25

7.  Care in a midwife managed delivery unit. May not be the best option.

Authors:  D Somerset; E O'Donnell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-03-25

8.  Care in a midwife managed delivery unit. Conclusions are not supported by results.

Authors:  P Brocklehurst; L Duley; A Macfarlane; J Garcia; D Elbourne
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-03-25

9.  Care in a midwife managed delivery unit. Analysis is invalid.

Authors:  L F Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-03-25

10.  Care in a midwife managed delivery unit. Medical staff did have input to unit.

Authors:  F Clarke
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-03-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.