Literature DB >> 8568573

Outcomes of 11,788 planned home births attended by certified nurse-midwives. A retrospective descriptive study.

R E Anderson, P A Murphy.   

Abstract

This study describes the outcomes of 11,788 planned home births attended by certified nurse-midwives (CNMs) from 1987 to 1991. A retrospective survey was used to obtain information about the outcomes of intended home birth, including hospital transfers, as well as practice protocols, risk screening, and emergency preparedness. Ninety nurse-midwifery home birth practices provided data for this report (66.2% of identified nurse-midwifery home birth practices). It is estimated that 60-70% of all CNM-attended home births reported in national statistics data during this period were represented in this survey. The overall perinatal mortality was 4.2 per 1,000, including known third-trimester fetal demises. There were no maternal deaths. The intrapartum and neonatal mortality for those intending home birth at the onset of labor was 2 per 1,000; the overall neonatal mortality rate for this group was 1.3 per 1,000. When deaths associated with congenital anomalies were excluded, the intrapartum and neonatal mortality rate was 0.9 per 1,000; the neonatal mortality was 0.2 per 1,000. The overall transfer rate, including antepartum referrals, was 15.9%. The intrapartum transfer rate for those intending home birth at the onset of labor was 8%. Most responding nurse-midwives used standard risk-assessment criteria, only delivered low-risk women at home, and were prepared with emergency equipment necessary for immediate neonatal resuscitation or maternal emergencies. This study supports previous research indicating that planned home birth with qualified care providers can be a safe alternative for healthy lower risk women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8568573     DOI: 10.1016/0091-2182(95)00051-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nurse Midwifery        ISSN: 0091-2182


  10 in total

1.  Data on babies' safety during hospital births are being ignored.

Authors:  J Drife
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-10-09

2.  Outcomes of planned home births with certified professional midwives: large prospective study in North America.

Authors:  Kenneth C Johnson; Betty-Anne Daviss
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-06-18

3.  The safety of home birth: is the evidence good enough?

Authors:  Helen McLachlan; Della Forster
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2009-08-31       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Collaborative survey of perinatal loss in planned and unplanned home births. Northern Region Perinatal Mortality Survey Coordinating Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-11-23

5.  Outcomes of planned home births versus planned hospital births after regulation of midwifery in British Columbia.

Authors:  Patricia A Janssen; Shoo K Lee; Elizabeth M Ryan; Duncan J Etches; Duncan F Farquharson; Donlim Peacock; Michael C Klein
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-02-05       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Perinatal death associated with planned home birth in Australia: population based study.

Authors:  H Bastian; M J Keirse; P A Lancaster
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-08-08

7.  Outcomes of planned home birth with registered midwife versus planned hospital birth with midwife or physician.

Authors:  Patricia A Janssen; Lee Saxell; Lesley A Page; Michael C Klein; Robert M Liston; Shoo K Lee
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2009-08-31       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Unattended Home Labor until Complete Cervical Dilatation Ending with Hospital Delivery: Analysis of 238 Pregnancies.

Authors:  Ozlem Gun Eryilmaz; Nasuh Utku Dogan; Cavidan Gulerman; Leyla Mollamahmutoglu; Nedim Cicek; Ruya Deveer
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2013-02-26

Review 9.  Transfer to hospital in planned home births: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ellen Blix; Merethe Kumle; Hanne Kjærgaard; Pål Øian; Helena E Lindgren
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  Towards a better understanding of risk selection in maternal and newborn care: A systematic scoping review.

Authors:  Bahareh Goodarzi; Annika Walker; Lianne Holten; Linda Schoonmade; Pim Teunissen; François Schellevis; Ank de Jonge
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.