Comparison of midwife-led and obstetrician-led care in Lithuania: A retrospective cohort study

Midwife-Led Versus Obstetrician-Led Perinatal Care for Low-Risk Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 1.4 Million Pregnancies

Background: The optimum model of perinatal care for low-risk pregnancies has been a topic of debate. Obstetrician-led care tends to perform unnecessary interventions, whereas the quality of midwife-led care has been subject to debate. This review aimed to assess whether midwife-led care reduces childbirth intervention and whether this comes at the expense of maternal and neonatal wellbeing. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for relevant studies. Studies were checked for eligibility by screening the titles, abstracts, and full texts. We performed meta-analyses using the inverse variance method using RevMan software version 5.3. We pooled data using the risk ratio and mean difference with the 95% confidence interval. Results: This review included 44 studies with 1,397,320 women enrolled. Midwife-led care carried a lower risk of unplanned cesarean and instrumental vaginal deliveries, augmentation of labor, epidural/spinal analgesia, episiotomy, and active management of labor third stage. Women who received midwife-led care had shorter hospital stays and lower risks of infection, manual removal of the placenta, blood transfusion, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Furthermore, neonates delivered under midwife-led care had lower risks of acidosis, asphyxia, transfer to specialist care, and ICU admission. Postpartum hemorrhage, perineal tears, APGAR score < 7, and other outcomes were comparable between the two models of management. Conclusions: Midwife-led care reduced childbirth interventions with favorable maternal and neonatal outcomes in most cases. We recommend assigning low-risk pregnancies to midwife-led perinatal care in health systems with infrastructure allowing for smooth transfer when complications arise. Further research is needed to reflect the situation in low-resource countries.

Systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effects of midwife care on cesarean birth

BACKGROUND

The increasing number of unnecessary cesarean births is a cause for concern and may be addressed by increasing access to midwifery care. The objective of this review was to assess the effect of midwifery care on the likelihood of cesarean births.

METHODS

We searched five databases from the beginning of records through May 2020. We included observational studies that reported odds ratios or data allowing the calculation of odds ratios of cesarean birth for births with and without midwife involvement in care or presence at the institution. Standard inverse-variance random-effects meta-analysis was used to generate overall odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

We observed a significantly lower likelihood of cesarean birth in midwife-led care, midwife-attended births, among those who received instruction pre-birth from midwives, and within institutions with a midwifery presence.

CONCLUSIONS

Care from midwives reduces the likelihood of cesarean birth in all the analyses, perhaps due to their greater preference and skill for physiologic births. Increased use of midwives in maternal care can reduce cesarean births and should be further researched and implemented broadly, potentially as the default modality in maternal care.

[Birth in the Midwife-Led Delivery Room of a Perinatal Center - Learning Curve, Outcomes and Benchmark]

INTRODUCTION

Most births in Germany take place in a clinical setting. Midwife-led units have been offered in Germany since 2003 as an addition to the primarily physician-led obstetric care. The purpose of this study was to analyze differences regarding medical parameters between a midwife-led and a primarily physician-led unit in a level 1 perinatal center.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 12/2020 and 12/2021, all births begun in the midwife-led unit were retrospectively analyzed and compared to a physician-led control cohort. Outcome measures were defined as obstetric interventions, delivery mode and duration, delivery position, and maternal and neonatal outcome.

RESULTS

The percentage of deliveries started in the midwife-led unit out of the total birth rate was 4.8% (n=132). Most transfers were made for more effective analgesia (52.6%). Among medically indicated transfers (n=30, 39.5%), transfers due to CTG abnormalities and failure to progress in labor after rupture of membranes predominated. 43.9% (n=58) of patients gave birth successfully in the midwife-led unit. The rate of episiotomy was significantly higher in the primarily physician-led unit compared to the successful midwife-led unit (p=0.019).

CONCLUSION

Birth in a midwife-led unit within a perinatal center can be considered an equivalent alternative to primarily physician-led birth for low-risk pregnant women.

Woman-Centered Care: Standardized Outcomes Measure

Background and Objectives: Patient- or woman-centered care, prioritizing women's perspectives, needs, and preferences, is a widely recommended approach to enhance the quality of maternity care services. It aligns with the broader principles of patient-centered care, emphasizing the importance of a collaborative and respectful relationship between healthcare providers and women. This study evaluates low-risk pregnancies managed by midwives and obstetrician-gynecologists in Lithuania using patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures. Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted between September 2022 and April 2023. Data were collected through patient-reported questionnaires. Results: A total of 153 pregnant women who had singleton, low-risk pregnancies participated in the study, of whom 24.8% had their pregnancies supervised by a midwife, and 75.2% of the participants had their pregnancies supervised by an obstetrician-gynecologist. The study found no statistically significant differences in assessed patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures between both models of care. Conclusions: Adopting patient-centered approaches enables healthcare systems to understand and address women's specific needs and preferences, fostering high-quality and woman-centered care. This research adds to the growing evidence supporting midwife-led care and emphasizes the importance of personalized, woman-centered approaches in maternity care, ultimately enhancing maternal health outcomes and promoting positive experiences for low-risk pregnant women. The quality of care provided by midwives remains uncompromised and equivalently proficient compared to the care provided by collaborative teams.

Utilizing Midwifery-Led Care Units (MLCU) for Enhanced Maternal and Newborn Health in India: An Evidence-Based Review

The allocation of the midwife-led care unit (MLCU), a midwifery-led care model in which midwives carry out eminent roles to enrich maternal and newborn outcomes with minimal standard interventions, has appeared to be productive in furthering the quality of care and positive childbirth experiences. In the present article, we review the investments needed in MLCUs for their inclusion into the public health system by describing their advantages, the latest trends in maternal mortality, the roles of midwives, the relevant background, and the current advances in midwifery practices in India. Midwifery-led care is directed by a philosophy that considers pregnancy and childbirth as normal physiological events for women. Making use of a midwife, especially in low-risk pregnancies, extends satisfactory and cost-effective care. The Government of India has begun to introduce midwifery services to the country to improve the quality, righteousness, and worthiness in the provision of care and to offload higher-level hospitals. The year 2020 was designated as the "Year of the Nurse and the Midwife" by the WHO, highlighting the importance of nurses' and midwives' roles in sustaining quality health care. Further, the acceptability among clinicians and the public is crucial for the future advancement and implementation of MLCUs in India.

Lithuanian midwives' attitudes and actions during low-risk birth

INTRODUCTION

This study sheds light on the attitudes and practices of Lithuanian midwives during low-risk births. The aim is to reveal how autonomous work is incorporated into daily routines, how care is oriented towards the mother, and how care is delivered before and during interventions. It highlights midwives' views on both their own and their colleagues' actions during labor, what is aimed for and what outcome is expected.

METHODS

A qualitative research method was chosen. Midwives were interviewed individually in February and April 2022 by random sampling and semi-structured interviews, after the purpose of the survey was explained and their consent was given to use the information only for scientific work purposes. Midwives were recruited through social networks, sharing information about the study and its nature. All data were coded and analyzed in aggregate form. Ten midwives working in the labor ward participated in the study.

RESULTS

From the midwives' point of view, every birth and its experience are unique. Midwives work together with mothers to achieve the common goal of a positive birth experience. Communication with the mother and her family, good rapport, clear information and informed decision-making are key aspects for midwives during labor. The midwife's actions must be reasonable and purposeful, with a preference for non-medicated methods of pain and stress relief.

CONCLUSIONS

A low-risk birth that is within the competence of midwives is one in which there is a low likelihood of medical interventions. Midwives are encouraged to minimize the use of interventions and to provide high quality delivery care.

Suspected Labour as a Reason for Emergency Medical Services Team Interventions in Poland—A Retrospective Analysis

The purpose of this study was to present the characteristics of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) team responses to calls regarding suspected labour in out-of-hospital settings in Poland. We performed a retrospective analysis of EMS team interventions in cases of suspected onset of labour outside a hospital setting. The analysis included 12,816 EMS team responses to calls regarding women in suspected labour in the period between January 2018 and December 2019. The mean age of the patients studied was 28.24 years (SD = 6.47). The majority of patients were at term (76.36%) and in their second pregnancy (29.96%). EMS teams were most often dispatched in the summer (25.95%) and in urban areas (63.26%). Most EMS teams were basic (68.99%) and interventions most often took place between 19:00 and 06:59 (63.14%). Significant differences were observed between preterm and term pregnant women attended by EMS teams in terms of variables such as the age of the patient, number of previous labours, history of miscarriage, presence of vaginal bleeding, time of year, location of call, type and composition of EMS team dispatched, urgency code and time of call, duration of intervention, selected emergency medical procedures performed and test results.

A comparison between midwifery and obstetric care at birth in Spain: Across-sectional study of perinatal outcomes

BACKGROUND

The organizational structure of maternity services determines the choice of which professionals provide care during pregnancy, birth, and the postnatal period, and it influences the kind of care they deliver and the level of continuity of care offered. There is considerable evidence that demonstrates a relationship between how care is provided and the maternal and neonatal health outcomes. Registered midwives and obstetricians provide maternity care across Spain. To date, no studies have assessed whether maternity outcomes differ between these two groups.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine the association between the care received (midwifery care versus obstetric care) and the maternal and neonatal outcomes in women with normal, low- and medium-risk pregnancies in Spain from 2016 to 2019.

DESIGN

A prospective, multicentre, cross-sectional study was carried out as part of COST Action IS1405 at 44 public hospitals in Spain in the years 2016-2019. The protocol can be accessed through the registry ISRCTN14062994. The sample size of this study was 11,537 women. The primary outcome was mode of birth. The secondary outcomes included augmentation with oxytocin, use of epidural analgesia, women's position at birth, perineal integrity, third stage of labour management, maternal and neonatal admission to intensive care, Apgar score, neonatal resuscitation, and early initiation of breastfeeding. Chi-square tests for categorical variables and independent sample t-test for continuous variables to assess differences between the midwifery and obstetric groups were calculated. Odds ratio with intervals of confidence at 95% were calculated for obstetric interventions and perinatal outcomes. A multivariate logistic regression model was applied in order to examine the effect of type of healthcare provider on perinatal outcomes. These models were adjusted for care provider, type of onset of labour, use of anaesthesia, pregnancy risk, maternal age, parity, and gestational age at birth.

RESULTS

Midwifery care was associated with lower rates of operative births and severe perineal damage and had no higher adverse outcomes. No statistically significant differences were observed in the use of other obstetric interventions between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study should encourage a shift in the current maternity care system towards a greater integration of midwifery-led services in order to achieve optimal birth outcomes for women and newborns.

REGISTRY NUMBER

ISRCTN14062994.

Comparison of vaginal birth outcomes in midwifery-led versus physician-led setting: A propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Experts in many countries are recommending a scaling up midwifery-led care as a model to improve maternal and newborn outcomes, reduce rates of unnecessary interventions, realise cost savings, and facilitate normal spontaneous vaginal birth.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare midwifery-led and obstetrician-gynaecologist-led care-related vaginal birth outcomes.

PARTICIPANTS

Pregnant women in Kaunas city maternity care facilities.

METHODS

A propensity score-matched case-control study of midwifery-led versus physician-led low-risk birth outcomes. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between the groups. Continuous variables are presented as mean ± standard deviation and analysed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Categorical and binary variables are presented as frequency (percentage), and differences were analysed using the chi-square test. Analyses were conducted separately for the unmatched (before propensity score matched [PSM]) and matched (after PSM) groups.

RESULTS

After adjusting groups for propensity score, postpartum haemorrhage differences between physician-led and midwifery-led labours were significantly different (169.5 and 152.6 mL; p = 0.026), same for hospital stay duration (3.3 and 3.1 days, p = 0.042). Also, in matched population, significant differences were seen for episiotomy rates (chi2 = 4.8; p = 0.029), newborn Apgar 5 min score (9.58 and 9.76; p = 0.002), and pain relief (chi2 = 14.9; p = 0.002). Significant differences were seen in unmatched but not confirmed in matched population for obstetrical procedures used during labour, breastfeeding, birth induction, newborn Apgar 1 min scores, and successful vaginal birth as an overall spontaneous vaginal birth success measure.

CONCLUSION

The midwifery-led care model showed significant differences from the physician-led care model in episiotomy rates, hospital stay duration and postpartum haemorrhage, and newborn Apgar 5 min scores. Midwifery-led care is as safe as physician-led care and does not influence the rate of successful spontaneous vaginal births.

The prevalence of burnout, depression, anxiety and stress in the Lithuanian midwifery workforce and correlation with sociodemographic factors

Aim

To investigate the prevalence of burnout, depression, anxiety and stress of Lithuanian midwives.

Design

A descriptive, cross‐sectional survey design.

Methods

The Work Health and Emotional Wellbeing of Midwives (WHELM) survey instrument developed within the Australian maternity context was adapted and used in this research. The survey collects country‐specific demographic data and incorporates several validated measures including the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI), Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS‐21).

Results

Three hundred and thirty‐eight completed surveys were received. Results obtained using a CBI subscale showed that 84.9% experienced personal burnout, 70.1% reported work‐related burnout and 41.1% had client‐related burnout. The results indicate that the midwives reported moderate to extreme levels of depression (16.3%), anxiety (28.4%) and stress (13.9%) symptoms.

The professional identity of Lithuanian midwifery students: An exploratory study

INTRODUCTION

Midwifery practice, which contributes to the improvement of the health and well-being of mothers and infants, varies greatly across the world. In former Soviet Union countries, midwifery was developed in a context marked by the Soviet regime and often remains underdeveloped. However, it is now gaining momentum in several countries including Lithuania where midwives have gained some autonomy in the past years. This study aims to explore the professional identity of student-midwives in Lithuania.

METHODS

Semi-directed interviews were conducted with six student-midwives recruited in two educational institutions in Kaunas, Lithuania. The interviews addressed the respondents' perception of midwifery in Lithuania as well as their personal experiences.

RESULTS

This study suggests that the participants view midwifery as a medical profession, strongly anchored in the biomedical world. Indeed, they associate midwifery with medicine and nursing, they greatly value their medical degree, and they associate their profession with the hospital setting. The respondents further defined their profession by emphasizing their holistic woman-centred approach, which sets them apart from other healthcare professions. These elements of the participants' professional identity can be viewed as professionalization strategies used to better establish their profession within the field of maternal healthcare.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the participant student-midwives view midwifery as a medical profession, rooted in the biomedical field, but also characterized by a unique care approach. This exploratory study thus contributes to a better understanding of midwifery in Lithuania.

Risk Perception of Health Professionals in Intrapartum Care Decisions: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

Background

Risk perception plays an important role in decision-making processes. Differences in obstetric intervention rates suggest that, in addition to medical indications, the risk perception of obstetric health professionals might have a major influence on their decision-making process during childbirth. Although studies have investigated whether risk perception affects the role of midwifery or influences decision making during childbirth, little is known about what obstetric health professionals actually perceive as risk or risky situations and whether different risk perceptions lead to more interventions during intrapartum care.

Objective

The objective of this study is to understand the association of risk perception and the decision-making processes of obstetric health professionals (midwives and obstetricians) in Germany during intrapartum care. The study has 3 specific aims: (1) gain insight into what obstetric health professionals perceive as risk in the German clinical setting, (2) assess the extent to which personal and systemic factors have an impact on obstetric health professionals’ risk perception, and (3) investigate whether different perceptions of risk are associated with different decisions being made by obstetric health professionals.

Methods

This is an exploratory sequential mixed methods study with 2 phases, a qualitative followed by a quantitative phase. In the first phase, qualitative data are collected and analyzed by conducting focus group discussions and applying qualitative content analysis to address aim 1. In the second phase, for aims 2 and 3 and to help explain the qualitative results, quantitative data are collected and analyzed by conducting an observational study using case vignettes within a survey constructed on the basis of the qualitative results.

Results

Enrollment in the first (qualitative) phase began in July 2019, and data collection and analysis have been completed. The second (quantitative) phase is currently planned, and data collection is expected to start in December 2020. First results of the qualitative phase are expected to be submitted for publication in 2020, with completion of the second phase scheduled for 2021.

Conclusions

This mixed methods study will examine the perception of risk and its association with the decision-making processes of obstetric health professionals during their care of women in childbirth. The rationale for this approach is that the qualitative data and their analysis explore participants' views in more depth, while the quantitative data will help to provide and explore a general understanding of the research problem. The results are expected to be relevant to health care professionals, policymakers, and educational institutions in order to minimize underuse, overuse, and misuse of interventions during intrapartum care.

Trial Registration

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00017172; https://tinyurl.com/y2zoowkx

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/21443

Caesarean section rates analysed using Robson's 10-Group Classification System: a cross-sectional study at a tertiary hospital in Ethiopia

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the caesarean section (CS) rates using Robson's 10-Group Classification System among women who gave birth at Hawassa University Referral Hospital in southern Ethiopia.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study design to determine CS rate using Robson's 10-Group Classification System.

SETTING

Hawassa University Referral Hospital in south Ethiopia.

PARTICIPANTS

4004 women who gave birth in Hawassa University Referral Hospital from June 2018 to June 2019.

RESULTS

The 4004 women gave birth to 4165 babies. The overall CS rate was 32.8% (95% CI: 31.4%-34.3%). The major contributors to the overall CS rates were: Robson group 1 (nulliparous women with singleton pregnancy at term in spontaneous labour) 22.9%; group 5 (multiparous women with at least one previous CS) 21.4% and group 3 (multiparous women without previous CS, with singleton pregnancy in spontaneous labour) 17.3%. The most commonly reported indications for CS were 'fetal compromise' (35.3%) followed by previous CS (20.3%) and obstructed labour (10.7%).

CONCLUSION

A high proportion of women giving birth at this hospital were given a CS, and many of them were in a low-risk group. Few had trial of labour. More active use of partogram, improving fetal heartbeat-monitoring system, implementing midwife-led care, involving a companion during labour and auditing the appropriateness of CS indications may help to reduce the CS rate.

Maternal and neonatal outcome of births planned in alongside midwifery units: a cohort study from a tertiary center in Germany

Background

For healthy women entering birth after uneventful pregnancy, midwife-led models of care have the potential to reduce interventions and increase the vaginal birth rate. In Germany, 98.4% of women are giving birth in consultant-led obstetric units. Alongside midwifery units (AMU) have been established in 2003. We compared the outcome of women registered for planned birth in the AMU at our hospital with a matched group of low-risk women who gave birth in standard obstetric care during the same period of time.

Methods

We used a retrospective cohort study design. The study group consisted of all women admitted to labor ward who had registered for birth in AMU from 2010 to 2017. For the control group, low-risk women were selected; additionally, matching was performed for parity. Mode of birth was chosen as primary outcome parameter for the mother. For the neonate, a composite primary outcome (5-min Apgar < 7 or umbilical cord arterial pH < 7.10 or transfer to specialist neonatal care) was defined. Secondary outcomes included epidural anesthesia, duration of the second stage of labor, episiotomy, obstetric injury, and postpartum hemorrhage. Non-inferiority was assessed, and multiple logistic regression analysis was performed.

Results

Six hundred twelve women were admitted for labor in AMU, the control group consisted of 612 women giving birth in standard obstetric care. Women in the study group were on average older and had a higher body mass index (BMI); birthweight was on average 95 g higher. Non-inferiority could be established for the primary outcome parameters. Epidural anesthesia and episiotomy rates were lower, and the mean duration of the second stage of labor was shorter in the study group; second-degree perineal tears were less common, higher-order obstetric lacerations occurred more frequently.

Overall, 50.3% of women were transferred to standard obstetric care. Regression analysis revealed effects of parity, age and birthweight on the chance of transfer.

Conclusion

Compared to births in our consultant-led obstetric unit, the outcome of births planned in the AMU was not inferior, and intervention rates were lower. Our results support the integration of AMU as a complementary model of care for low-risk women.