A cost-comparison of midwife-led compared with consultant-led maternity care in Ireland (the MidU study)

Advanced Midwifery Practice in Switzerland: Development and challenges

Midwifery is undergoing increasing complexity attributed to global epidemiological, socio-economic and technological shifts. Coupled with a shortage of workforce and the imperative for cost-effectiveness and high-quality care, there is an ongoing international discourse and establishment of new care models and specialized roles, notably Advanced Midwifery Practice (AMP). While countries like the UK and Ireland have embraced AMP roles, Switzerland lags behind with only a few pioneering roles. The absence of regulatory frameworks for AMP within the Swiss legal and healthcare system, hinders the evolution of APM roles necessary to address contemporary needs in perinatal healthcare provision. To effectively harness the midwifery workforce and mitigate premature attrition, Switzerland must formulate distinct career trajectories for postgraduate midwives, particularly for Advanced Practice Midwives (APM). This involves establishing legal standards for educational and clinical prerequisites, delineating guidelines for APM responsibilities and competencies, and devising compensation schemes that mirror the autonomy and leadership competencies integral to these advanced roles within inpatient and outpatient perinatal care models. The incorporation of evaluation and research into AMP is indispensable, contributing to improved patient outcomes and the ongoing professionalization of midwifery. In conjunction with the Swiss Federation of Midwives, all Universities of Applied Sciences in Switzerland have collaboratively drafted a national position paper underscoring the significance of developing APM roles to ensure the provision of high-quality perinatal care. This article aims to elucidate current developments in perinatal care within the Swiss context, providing a comprehensive definition for AMP, delineating its contribution to enhancing and sustaining the quality of care.

Midwife continuity of care models versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women globally and there is a need to establish whether there are differences in effectiveness between midwife continuity of care models and other models of care. This is an update of a review published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of midwife continuity of care models with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (17 August 2022), as well as the reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife continuity of care models or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion criteria, scientific integrity, and risk of bias, and carried out data extraction and entry. Primary outcomes were spontaneous vaginal birth, caesarean section, regional anaesthesia, intact perineum, fetal loss after 24 weeks gestation, preterm birth, and neonatal death. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies involving 18,533 randomised women. We assessed all studies as being at low risk of scientific integrity/trustworthiness concerns. Studies were conducted in Australia, Canada, China, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. The majority of the included studies did not include women at high risk of complications. There are three ongoing studies targeting disadvantaged women. Primary outcomes Based on control group risks observed in the studies, midwife continuity of care models, as compared to other models of care, likely increase spontaneous vaginal birth from 66% to 70% (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.07; 15 studies, 17,864 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), likelyreduce caesarean sections from 16% to 15% (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99; 16 studies, 18,037 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and likely result in little to no difference in intact perineum (29% in other care models and 31% in midwife continuity of care models, average RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.12; 12 studies, 14,268 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may belittle or no difference in preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (6% under both care models, average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.16; 10 studies, 13,850 participants; low-certainty evidence). We arevery uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models on regional analgesia (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.92; 15 studies, 17,754 participants, very low-certainty evidence), fetal loss at or after 24 weeks gestation (average RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.13; 12 studies, 16,122 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and neonatal death (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.71; 10 studies, 14,718 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likely reduce instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum) from 14% to 13% (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.96; 14 studies, 17,769 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduceepisiotomy 23% to 19% (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91; 15 studies, 17,839 participants; low-certainty evidence). When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likelyresult in little to no difference inpostpartum haemorrhage (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.03; 11 studies, 14,407 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and admission to special care nursery/neonatal intensive care unit (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 13 studies, 16,260 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in induction of labour (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; 14 studies, 17,666 participants; low-certainty evidence), breastfeeding initiation (average RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12; 8 studies, 8575 participants; low-certainty evidence), and birth weight less than 2500 g (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 9 studies, 12,420 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models compared to other models of care onthird or fourth-degree tear (average RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.49; 7 studies, 9437 participants; very low-certainty evidence), maternal readmission within 28 days (average RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.96; 1 study, 1195 participants; very low-certainty evidence), attendance at birth by a known midwife (average RR 9.13, 95% CI 5.87 to 14.21; 11 studies, 9273 participants; very low-certainty evidence), Apgar score less than or equal to seven at five minutes (average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24; 13 studies, 12,806 participants; very low-certainty evidence) andfetal loss before 24 weeks gestation (average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.01; 12 studies, 15,913 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No maternal deaths were reported across three studies. Although the observed risk of adverse events was similar between midwifery continuity of care models and other models, our confidence in the findings was limited. Our confidence in the findings was lowered by possible risks of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision of some estimates. There were no available data for the outcomes: maternal health status, neonatal readmission within 28 days, infant health status, and birth weight of 4000 g or more. Maternal experiences and cost implications are described narratively. Women receiving care from midwife continuity of care models, as opposed to other care models, generally reported more positive experiences during pregnancy, labour, and postpartum. Cost savings were noted in the antenatal and intrapartum periods in midwife continuity of care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Women receiving midwife continuity of care models were less likely to experience a caesarean section and instrumental birth, and may be less likely to experience episiotomy. They were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth and report a positive experience. The certainty of some findings varies due to possible risks of bias, inconsistencies, and imprecision of some estimates. Future research should focus on the impact on women with social risk factors, and those at higher risk of complications, and implementation and scaling up of midwife continuity of care models, with emphasis on low- and middle-income countries.

Midwife-led birthing centres in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Uganda: an economic evaluation of case study sites

INTRODUCTION

Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals to reduce maternal and neonatal mortality rates will require the expansion and strengthening of quality maternal health services. Midwife-led birth centres (MLBCs) are an alternative to hospital-based care for low-risk pregnancies where the lead professional at the time of birth is a trained midwife. These have been used in many countries to improve birth outcomes.

METHODS

The cost analysis used primary data collection from four MLBCs in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Uganda (n=12 MLBC sites). Modelled cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to compare the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), measured as incremental cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted, of MLBCs to standard care in each country. Results were presented in 2022 US dollars.

RESULTS

Cost per birth in MLBCs varied greatly within and between countries, from US$21 per birth at site 3, Bangladesh to US$2374 at site 2, Uganda. Midwife salary and facility operation costs were the primary drivers of costs in most MLBCs. Six of the 12 MLBCs produced better health outcomes at a lower cost (dominated) compared with standard care; and three produced better health outcomes at a higher cost compared with standard care, with ICERs ranging from US$571/DALY averted to US$55 942/DALY averted.

CONCLUSION

MLBCs appear to be able to produce better health outcomes at lower cost or be highly cost-effective compared with standard care. Costs do vary across sites and settings, and so further exploration of costs and cost-effectiveness as a part of implementation and establishment activities should be a priority.

Analysis of Maternal Positions during the Dilation and Expulsive Phase and Their Relationship with Perineal Injuries in Eutocic Deliveries Attended by Midwives

This cross-sectional descriptive study aimed to analyze the relationship between maternal positions during the expulsion phase and perineal outcomes in 367 eutocic births attended by midwives or midwifery residents at a public hospital in northern Spain in 2018. A total of 94.3% of women opted for horizontal positions. Limited sacral retroversion was observed in 71.7%, potentially influencing perineal outcomes. A low incidence of tears indicated effective management during the expulsive phase, with an episiotomy rate of 15.3%, which was slightly above the 15% standard. Primiparity and maternal age were identified as risk factors associated with episiotomy. Additionally, sacral mobilization and vertical positions during delivery were significantly related to fewer perineal injuries, suggesting benefits for both mother and newborn. The correlation between maternal positions and the need for epidural analgesia highlighted the importance of considering these in pain management during childbirth. Despite limitations, the study provides valuable insight into obstetric practices and advocates for a woman-centered approach that respects autonomy during childbirth. Further research is needed to explore biomechanical parameters and enhance childbirth experiences.

The first alongside midwifery unit in Spain: A retrospective cohort study of maternal and neonatal outcomes

BACKGROUND

Midwife-led units have been shown to be safer and reduce interventions for women at low risk of complications at birth. In 2017, the first alongside birth center was opened in Spain. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes for women with uncomplicated pregnancies giving birth in the Midwife-led unit (MLU) and in the Obstetric unit (OU) of the same hospital.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study comparing birth outcomes between low-risk women, depending on their planned place of birth. Data were analyzed with an intention-to-treat approach for women that gave birth between January 2018 and December 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 878 women were included in the study, 255 women chose to give birth in the MLU and 623 in the OU. Findings showed that women in the MLU were more likely to have a vaginal birth (91.4%) than in the OU (83.8%) (aOR 2.98 [95%CI 1.62-5.47]), less likely to have an instrumental delivery, 3.9% versus 11.2% (0.25 [0.11-0.55]), to use epidural analgesia, 19.6% versus 77.9% (0.15 [0.04-0.17]) and to have an episiotomy, 7.4% versus 15.4% (0.27 [0.14-0.53]). There were no differences in rates of postpartum hemorrhage, retained placenta, or adverse neonatal outcomes. Intrapartum and postpartum transfer rates from the MLU to the OU were 21.1% and 2.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The high rate of obstetric interventions in Spain could be reduced by implementing midwife-led units across the whole system, without an increase in maternal or neonatal complications.

Which first-trimester risk assessment method for preeclampsia is most suitable? A model-based impact study

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin treatment reduces the risk of preeclampsia among high-risk pregnant women. Internationally, several first-trimester risk-calculation methods are applied.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the costs and benefits of different first-trimester preeclampsia risk estimation algorithms: EXPECT (an algorithmic prediction model based on maternal characteristics), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (a checklist of risk factors), and the Fetal Medicine Foundation (a prediction model using additional uterine artery Doppler measurement and laboratory testing) models, coupled with low-dose aspirin treatment, in comparison with no risk assessment.

STUDY DESIGN

We constructed a decision analytical model estimating the number of cases of preeclampsia with each strategy and the costs of risk assessment for preeclampsia and early aspirin treatment, expressed in euros (€) in a hypothetical population of 100,000 women. We performed 1-way sensitivity analyses to assess the impact of adherence rates on model outcomes.

RESULTS

Application of the EXPECT, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and Fetal Medicine Foundation models results in respectively 1.98%, 2.55%, and 1.90% of the women developing preeclampsia, as opposed to 3.00% of women in the case of no risk assessment. Overall, the net financial benefits of the EXPECT, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and Fetal Medicine Foundation models relative to no risk assessment are €144, €43, and €38 per patient, respectively. The respective percentages of women receiving aspirin treatment are 18.6%, 10.2%, and 6.0% for the 3 risk assessment methods.

CONCLUSION

The EXPECT and Fetal Medicine Foundation model are comparable with regard to numbers of prevented preeclampsia cases, and both are superior to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence model and to no risk assessment. EXPECT is less resource-demanding and results in the highest cost savings, but also requires the highest number of women to be treated with aspirin. When deciding which strategy is preferable, cost savings and easier use have to be weighed against the degree of overtreatment, although low-dose aspirin has no clear disadvantages during pregnancy.

Clinicians' views of factors influencing decision-making for CS for first-time mothers-A qualitative descriptive study

Clinicians' perspectives of the reasons for performing caesarean section (CS) are fundamental to deepening knowledge and understanding of factors influencing decision-making for CS. The aim of this study was to explore midwives' and obstetricians' views of factors influencing decision-making for CS for first-time mothers. A qualitative descriptive study with semi-structured one-to-one audio-recorded interviews was used to gather data from clinicians (15 midwives and 20 senior obstetricians). Following research ethics committee approval, clinicians, who were directly involved in the decision-making process for CS during the period of data collection, were purposively selected from three maternity units in the Republic of Ireland between June 2016 to July 2017. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Three interrelated themes with several subthemes reflective of clinicians' views and experiences emerged following data analysis. These were: 'A fear factor' describing clinicians' fear of adverse outcomes and subsequent litigation, 'Personal preferences versus a threshold-clinician driven factors emphasising the influence of clinicians' personal beliefs, and 'Standardised versus individualised care-a system perspective' explaining the effects of, or lack of, organisational policy and its direct and indirect impact on the decision-making process. Findings show that decisions to perform a CS are, on occasion, based on clinicians' personal beliefs and interpretation, similar to findings from other published literature. Consideration of broader issues related to organisational, socio-cultural and political context is essential when seeking solutions to the rising CS rates. The findings will enable clinicians to reflect on their day-to-day practice, in order to look for modifiable factors that influence their decision-making, and help women understand the multitude of factors that can lead to a decision to perform a CS. Findings will also contribute to the development of the 'next step action' and assist in devising future intervention studies to reduce any unnecessary CSs.

Project20: Maternity care mechanisms that improve (or exacerbate) health inequalities. A realist evaluation

BACKGROUND

Women with low socioeconomic status and social risk factors are at a disproportionate risk of poor birth outcomes and experiences of maternity care. Specialist models of maternity care that offer continuity are known to improve outcomes but underlying mechanisms are not well understood.

AIM

To evaluate two UK specialist models of care that provide continuity to women with social risk factors and identify specific mechanisms that reduce, or exacerbate, health inequalities.

METHODS

Realist informed interviews were undertaken throughout pregnancy and the postnatal period with 20 women with social risk factors who experienced a specialist model of care.

FINDINGS

Experiences of stigma, discrimination and paternalistic care were reported when women were not in the presence of a known midwife during care episodes. Practical and emotional support, and evidence-based information offered by a known midwife improved disclosure of social risk factors, eased perceptions of surveillance and enabled active participation. Continuity of care offered reduced women's anxiety, enabled the development of a supportive network and improved women's ability to seek timely help. Women described how specialist model midwives knew their medical and social history and how this improved safety. Care set in the community by a team of six known midwives appeared to enhance these benefits.

CONCLUSION

The identification of specific maternity care mechanisms supports current policy initiatives to scale up continuity models and will be useful in future evaluation of services for marginalised groups. However, the specialist models of care cannot overcome all inequalities without improvements in the maternity system as a whole.

Midwifery continuity of care: A scoping review of where, how, by whom and for whom?

Systems of care that provide midwifery care and services through a continuity of care model have positive health outcomes for women and newborns. We conducted a scoping review to understand the global implementation of these models, asking the questions: where, how, by whom and for whom are midwifery continuity of care models implemented? Using a scoping review framework, we searched electronic and grey literature databases for reports in any language between January 2012 and January 2022, which described current and recent trials, implementation or scaling-up of midwifery continuity of care studies or initiatives in high-, middle- and low-income countries. After screening, 175 reports were included, the majority (157, 90%) from high-income countries (HICs) and fewer (18, 10%) from low- to middle-income countries (LMICs). There were 163 unique studies including eight (4.9%) randomised or quasi-randomised trials, 58 (38.5%) qualitative, 53 (32.7%) quantitative (cohort, cross sectional, descriptive, observational), 31 (19.0%) survey studies, and three (1.9%) health economics analyses. There were 10 practice-based accounts that did not include research. Midwives led almost all continuity of care models. In HICs, the most dominant model was where small groups of midwives provided care for designated women, across the antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care continuum. This was mostly known as caseload midwifery or midwifery group practice. There was more diversity of models in low- to middle-income countries. Of the 175 initiatives described, 31 (18%) were implemented for women, newborns and families from priority or vulnerable communities. With the exception of New Zealand, no countries have managed to scale-up continuity of midwifery care at a national level. Further implementation studies are needed to support countries planning to transition to midwifery continuity of care models in all countries to determine optimal model types and strategies to achieve sustainable scale-up at a national level.

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.

Antenatal care policies for low-risk pregnant women in high-income countries with a universal health system: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this scoping review is to map the available evidence on the nature, extent, and range of antenatal care policies for low-risk pregnant women in high-income countries with a health system founded on the Beveridge Model.

INTRODUCTION

Low-risk women in high-income countries have good evolutionary perinatal outcomes but high intervention rates in pregnancy and childbirth, which ultimately leads to high morbidity. This has implications at all levels including families, the health care system, and society. This review aims to inform future policy and identify the viability of the adoption of alternative models to the Portuguese context that can reduce unnecessary interventions.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies, protocols, guidelines, and policies that provide guidance on antenatal care for low-risk pregnant women in high-income countries with a health system founded on the Beveridge Model (universal health care) will be considered. Documents from 2005 to present will be included, and no language restrictions will be imposed.

METHODS

An initial search will be conducted in databases including MEDLINE (via PubMed) and CINAHL (via EBSCOhost), followed by a manual search of the reference lists from the documents accepted for inclusion, and a hand search of gray literature. For the countries whose policies are not available through the earlier steps, key persons from health ministries and academia will be contacted. Search results will be exported and data extracted using charting forms. Data will be synthesized using narrative description.

Process lessons from evaluating a combined continuity of carer and home birth scheme

INTRODUCTION

Continuity of midwifery carer improves outcomes, but there is significant variation in how such schemes are implemented and evaluated cross-culturally. The Angus home birth scheme in Scotland incorporates continuity of carer throughout pregnancy, labor, birth, and the postnatal period.

METHODS

Manual maternity case note review to evaluate the 80% continuity of carer and 3% planned home birth rate targets.

RESULTS

Of 1466 women booking for maternity care, 69 joined the scheme. Forty-four had a planned home birth (3% overall), of whom seven were originally deemed ineligible. Of the 44, eight (18%) also achieved 80% continuity of carer with the primary midwife; by including a home birth team colleague, the continuity rate rose to 73%. Women whose care achieved home birth and continuity targets had lower deprivation scores. Eligibility issues, women's changing circumstances, and data recording lapses were complicating issues.

CONCLUSIONS

Targets must be both feasible and meaningful and should be complemented by assessing a broad range of outcomes while viewing the scheme holistically. By expanding eligibility criteria, the home birth rate target was met; including input from a home birth team colleague in the calculation meant the continuity target was nearly met. With dedicated and competent staff, adequate resource and political support, and when considered in the round, the scheme's viability within local services was confirmed. Other generalizable learning points included the need to standardize definitions and data recording methods. Comparability across schemes helps grow the evidence base so that the links between processes and outcomes can be identified.

Delivery care by obstetric nurses in maternity hospitals linked to the Rede Cegonha, Brazil - 2017

This study aimed to assess whether nurses' presence in delivery care in maternity hospitals linked to the Rede Cegonha program promotes access to best obstetric practices during labor and delivery. We conducted an evaluative study in 2017 in all 606 SUS maternity hospitals that joined this strategic policy in all Brazilian states. We collected data from maternity hospital managers and puerperae. The analysis was performed at two levels: hospital with or without a nurse in delivery care; and professionals that attended vaginal delivery, whether doctors or nurses. We used best practices and interventions for vaginal deliveries and cesarean section rates as dependent variables. We included 5.016 subjects for analyses of vaginal deliveries and 9.692 to calculate cesarean section rates. Multiple regressions were adjusted for geographic region, maternity hospital size, and puerperae skin color and parity. Maternity hospitals with nurses in delivery care used more the partograph and less oxytocin, lithotomy, episiotomy, and cesarean section. Deliveries attended by nurses had more frequent use of the partograph and a lower likelihood of lithotomy and episiotomy. The inclusion of nurses in vaginal delivery care has successfully brought women closer to a more physiological and respectful delivery.

Sustaining the quality of midwifery practice in Belgium: Challenges and opportunities for advanced midwife practitioners

BACKGROUND

Midwifery practice is essential in achieving high-quality maternal and newborn care in all settings and countries. However, midwifery practice has become more complex over the past decades. Considerable demands are being placed on midwives to meet increasing epidemiological, socio-economic, and technological challenges. These require a well-trained midwifery workforce ready to shape the care in the near and long-term future.

OBJECTIVE

To discuss advanced midwife practitioner role implementation in Belgium as a possible answer to healthcare-related challenges that impact midwifery practice. Furthermore, to stimulate a debate within the profession at all levels in Belgium and in countries considering advanced midwife practitioner roles.

METHOD

The framework by De Geest et al. (2008) served as a basis for discussing the drivers for advanced midwife practitioner role implementation: the legal, policy and economic context, workforce issues, education, practice patterns, and healthcare needs of the population.

FINDINGS

A legal basis for advanced midwife practitioner role implementation is lacking in Belgium. Remuneration opportunities for the non-clinical part of these roles (e.g. leadership and innovation activities) are missing. It might be challenging for healthcare organisations to support the implementation of such roles, as immediate revenues of non-clinical activities are absent. However, sufficient potential resources are available to fill in future advanced midwife practitioner positions. Additionally, advanced midwife practitioner specific master programmes are being planned in the near future.

CONCLUSIONS

Although several barriers for the implementation of advanced midwife practitioner roles were identified, a discussion should be held on the opportunities of implementing these roles to facilitate the development of new models of care that meet current and future challenges in midwifery practice and healthcare. After initial discussions amongst midwives in academic, managerial, and policy positions, stakeholders such as obstetricians, general practitioners, associations representing healthcare organisations, and policy makers should be involved as a next step.

Caesarean Section on Maternal Request: An Italian Comparative Study on Patients' Characteristics, Pregnancy Outcomes and Guidelines Overview

In recent years, the rate of caesarean sections has risen all over the world. Accordingly, efforts are being made worldwide to understand this trend and to counteract it effectively. Several factors have been identified as contributing to the selection of caesarean section (CS), especially an obstetricians' beliefs, attitudes and clinical practices. However, relatively few studies have been conducted to understand the mechanisms involved, to explore influencing factors and to clearly define the risks associated with the caesarean section on maternal request (CSMR). This comparative study was conducted to elucidate the factors influencing the choice of CSMR, as well as to compare the associated risks of CSMR to CS for breech presentation among Italian women. From 2015 to 2018, a total of 2348 women gave birth by caesarean section, of which 8.60% (202 women) chose a CSMR. We found that high educational attainment, use of assisted reproductive technology, previous operative deliveries and miscarriages within the obstetric history could be positively correlated with the choice of CSMR in a statistically significant way. This trend was not confirmed when the population was stratified based on patients' characteristics, obstetric complications and gestational age. Finally, no major complications were found in patients that underwent CSMR. We believe that it is essential to evaluate patients on a case-by-case basis. It is essential to understand the personal experience, to explain the knowledge available on the subject and to ensure a full understanding of the risks and benefits of the medical practice to guarantee the patients not only their best scientific preparation but also human understanding.

Midwifery-led care can lower caesarean section rates according to the Robson ten group classification system

INTRODUCTION

Midwifery-led care is recognised as the best choice of maternity care for low-risk women. Robson’s Ten Group Classification System (TGCS) is an internationally recognised audit tool, however there is no midwifery-led service presenting their statistics in this way. The objective of this study was to analyse caesarean section rates for the women attending midwifery-led care at the National Maternity Hospital Dublin, Ireland, using the Robson TGCS.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of electronic records for a total of 1097 women who were booked to attend the community midwife team in the National Maternity Hospital, during 2016 and 2017.

RESULTS

The rate of caesarean section in low-risk nulliparous women (Robson Group 1) was under 6%, without affecting the perinatal outcome. The induction rate in nulliparous women (Group 2) was 36%, less than the national average the cesarean rates were quadruple in this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-risk women who attend midwifery-led services, have a low caesarean section rate in this study. This was achieved with continuity of care, good antenatal preparation, and support throughout labour and birth by a dedicated team of midwives. Outcomes can only be truly compared if we use the same criteria to measure them. The TGCS demonstrates the effectiveness of midwifery-led care.

Understanding Factors Leading to Primary Cesarean Section and Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery in the Friuli-Venezia Giulia Region (North-Eastern Italy), 2005-2015

Although there is no evidence that elevated rates of cesarean sections (CS) translate into reduced maternal/child perinatal morbidity or mortality, CS have been increasingly overused almost everywhere, both in high and low-income countries. The primary cesarean section (PCS) has become a major driver of the overall CS (OCS) rate, since it carries intrinsic risk of repeat CS (RCS) in future pregnancies. In our study we examined patterns of PCS, pl compared with planned TOLAC anned PCS (PPCS), vaginal birth after 1 previous CS (VBAC-1) and associated factors in Friuli Venezia Giulia (FVG), a region of North-Eastern Italy, collecting data from its 11 maternity centres (coded from A to K) during 2005-2015. By fitting three multiple logistic regression models (one for each delivery mode), we calculated the adjusted rates of PCS and PPCS among women without history of CS, whilst the calculation of the VBAC rate was restricted to women with just one previous CS (VBAC-1). Results, expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI), were controlled for the effect of hospital, calendar year as well as several factors related to the clinical and obstetric conditions of the mothers and the newborn, the obstetric history and socio-demographic background. In FVG during 2005-2015 there were 24,467 OCS (rate of 24.2%), 19,565 PCS (19.6%), 7,736 PPCS (7.7%) and 2,303 VBAC-1 (28.4%). We found high variability of delivery mode (DM) at hospital level, especially for PCS and PPCS. Breech presentation was the strongest determinant for PCS as well as PPCS. Leaving aside placenta previa/abuptio placenta/ante-partum hemorrhage, further significant factors, more importantly associated with PCS than PPCS were non-reassuring fetal status and obstructed labour, followed by (in order of statistical significance): multiple birth; eclampsia/pre-eclampsia; maternal age 40-44 years; placental weight  600-99 g; oligohydramios; pre-delivery LoS 3-5 days; maternal age 35-39 years; placenta weight 1,000-1,500 g; birthweight < 2,000 g; maternal age ≥ 45 years; pre-delivery LoS ≥ 6 days; mother's age 30-34 years; low birthweight (2,000-2,500 g); polyhydramnions; cord prolaspe; ≥6 US scas performed during pregnancy and pre-term gestations (33-36 weeks). Significant factors for PPCS were (in order of statistical significance): breech presentation; placenta previa/abruptio placenta/ante-partum haemorrhage; multiple birth; pre-delivery LoS ≥ 3 days; placental weight ≥ 600 g; maternal age  40-44 years; ≥6 US scans performed in pregnancy; maternal age ≥ 45 and 35-39 years; oligohydramnios; eclampsia/pre-eclampsia; mother's age 30-34 years; birthweight <2,000 g; polyhydramnios and pre-term gestation (33-36 weeks). VBAC-1 were more likely with gestation ≥ 41 weeks, placental weight <500 g and especially labour analgesia. During 2005-2015 the overall rate of PCS in FVG (19.6%) was substantially lower than the corresponding figure reported in 2010 for the entire Italy (29%) and still slightly under the most recent national PCS rate for 2017 (22.2%). The VBAC-1 rate on women with history of one previous CS in FVG was 28.4% (25.3% considering VBAC on all women with at least 1 previous CS), roughly three times the Italian national rate of 9% reported for 2017. The discrepancy between the OCS rate at country level (38.1%) and FVG's (24.2%) is therefore mainly attributable to RCS. Although there was a marginal decrease of PCS and PPCS crudes rates over time in the whole region, accompained by a progressive enhancement of the crude VBAC rate, we found remarkable variability of DM across hospitals. To further contain the number of unnecessary PCS and promote VBAC where appropriate, standardized obstetric protocols should be introduced and enforced at hospital level. Decision-making on PCS should be carefully scrutinized, introducing a diagnostic second opinion for all PCS, particularly for term singleton pregancies with cephalic presentation and in case of obstructed labour as well as non-reassuring fetal status, grey areas potentially affected by subjective clinical assessment. This process of change could be facilitated with education of staff/patients by opinion leaders and prenatal counseling for women and partners, although clinical audits, financial penalties and rewards to efficient maternity centres could also be considered.

Value based maternal and newborn care requires alignment of adequate resources with high value activities

Background

Evidence based practice has been associated with better quality of care in many situations, but it has not been able to address increasing need and demand in healthcare globally and stagnant or decreasing healthcare resources. Implementation of value-based healthcare could address many important challenges in health care systems worldwide. Scaling up exemplary high value care practices offers the potential to ensure values-driven maternal and newborn care for all women and babies.

Discussion

Increased use of healthcare interventions over the last century have been associated with reductions in maternal and newborn mortality and morbidity. However, over an optimum threshold, these are associated with increases in adverse effects and inappropriate use of scarce resources. The Quality Maternal and Newborn Care framework provides an example of what value based maternity care might look like. To deliver value based maternal and newborn care, a system-level shift is needed, ‘from fragmented care focused on identification and treatment of pathology for the minority to skilled care for all’.

Ideally, resources would be allocated at population and individual level to ensure care is woman-centred instead of institution/ profession centred but oftentimes, the drivers for spending resources are ‘the demands and beliefs of the acute sector’. We argue that decisions to allocate resources to high value activities, such as continuity of carer, need to be made at the macro level in the knowledge that these investments will relieve pressure on acute services while also ensuring the delivery of appropriate and high value care in the long run. To ensure that high value preventive and supportive care can be delivered, it is important that separate staff and money are allocated to, for example, models of continuity of carer to prevent shortages of resources due to rising demands of the acute services.

Summary

To achieve value based maternal and newborn care, mechanisms are needed to ensure adequate resource allocation to high value maternity care activities that should be separate from the resource demands of acute maternity services. Funding arrangements should support, where wanted and needed, seamless movement of women and neonates between systems of care.

Antenatal and intrapartum interventions for reducing caesarean section, promoting vaginal birth, and reducing fear of childbirth: An overview of systematic reviews

Concern has been expressed globally over rising caesarean birth rates. Recently, the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) called for help from governmental bodies, professional organisations, women’s groups, and other stakeholders to reduce unnecessary caesareans. As part of a wider research initiative, we conducted an overview of systematic reviews of antenatal and intrapartum interventions, and reports of evidence based recommendations, to identify and highlight those that have been shown to be effective for reducing caesarean birth, promoting vaginal birth and reducing fear of childbirth. Following registration of the review protocol, (PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018090681), we searched The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed, CINAHL and EMBASE (Jan 2000-Jan 2018) and searched for grey literature in PROSPERO, and on websites of health professional and other relevant bodies. Screening and selection of reviews, quality appraisal using AMSTAR-2, and data extraction were performed independently by pairs of at least two reviewers. Excluding reviews assessed as ‘critically low’ on AMSTAR-2 (n = 54), 101 systematic reviews, and 10 reports of evidence based recommendations were included in the overview. Narrative synthesis was performed, due to heterogeneity of review methodology and topics. The results highlight twenty-five interventions, across 17 reviews, that reduced the risk of caesarean, nine interventions across eight reviews that increased the risk of caesarean, eight interventions that reduced instrumental vaginal birth, four interventions that increased spontaneous vaginal birth, and two interventions that reduced fear of childbirth. This overview of reviews identifies and highlights interventions that have been shown to be effective for reducing caesarean birth, promoting vaginal births and reducing fear of childbirth. In recognising that clinical practices change over time, this overview includes reviews published from 2000 onwards only, thus providing contemporary evidence, and a valuable resource for clinicians when making decisions on practices that should be implemented for reducing unnecessary caesarean births safely.

Protocol Registration: PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018090681. Available from: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018090681

The cost of vaginal birth at home, in a birth centre or in a hospital setting in New South Wales: A micro-costing study

BACKGROUND

Women want greater choice of place of birth in New South Wales, Australia. It is perceived to be more costly to health services for women with a healthy pregnancy to give birth at home or in a birth centre. It is not known how much it costs the health service to provide care for women planning to give birth in these settings.

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the direct cost of giving birth vaginally at home, in a birth centre or in a hospital for women at low risk of complications, in New South Wales.

METHODS

A micro-costing design was used. Observational (time and motion) and resource use data collection was undertaken to identify the staff time and resources required to provide care in a public hospital, birth centre or at home for women with a healthy pregnancy.

FINDINGS

The median cost of providing care for women who plan to give birth at home, in a birth centre and in a hospital were similar (AUD $2150.07, $2100.59 and $2097.30 respectively). Midwifery time was the largest contributor to the cost of birth at home, and overhead costs accounted for over half of the total cost of BC and hospital birth. The cost of consumables was low in all three settings.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we have found there is little difference in the cost to the health service when a woman has an uncomplicated vaginal birth at home, in a birth centre or in a hospital setting.

Informing the development midwifery standards for practice: A literature review for policy development

AIM

To critically appraise and synthesise the literature regarding the role and scope of midwifery practice, specifically to inform the evidence based development of standards for practice for all midwives in Australia.

DESIGN

A structured scoping review of the literature DATA SOURCES: CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE Complete and Cochrane Libraries databases, online and grey literature databases REVIEW METHODS: Comprehensive searches of databases used key words and controlled vocabulary for each database to search for publications 2006-2016. Studies were not restricted by research method.

FINDINGS

There is no substantive body of literature on midwifery competency standards or standards for practice. From 1648 papers screened, twenty-eight papers were identified to inform this review. Eight studies including systematic reviews were annotated with three research papers further assessed as having direct application to this review. To inform the development of Midwife standards for practice, the comprehensive role of the midwife across multiple settings was seen to include: woman centred and primary health care; safe supportive and collaborative practice; clinical knowledge and skills with interpersonal and cultural competence.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

Midwifery practice is not restricted to the provision of direct clinical care and extends to any role where the midwife uses midwifery skills and knowledge. This practice includes working in clinical and non-clinical relationships with the woman and other clients as well as working in management, administration, education, research, advisory, regulatory, and policy development roles.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This review articulates the definition, role and scope of midwifery practice to inform the development of contemporary standards for practice for the Australian midwife.

Cost-effectiveness of continuity of midwifery care for women with complex pregnancy: a structured review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Critical evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and clinical effectiveness of continuity of midwifery care models for women experiencing complex pregnancy is an important consideration in the review and reform of maternity services. Most studies either focus on women who experience healthy pregnancy or mixed risk samples. These results may not be generalised across the childbearing continuum to women with risk factors. This review critically evaluates studies that measure the cost of care for women with complex pregnancies, with a focus on method and quality.

AIMS / OBJECTIVES

To critically appraise and summarise the evidence relating to the combined cost-effectiveness, resource use and clinical effectiveness of midwifery continuity models for women who experience complex pregnancies and their babies in developed countries.

DESIGN

Structured review of the literature utilising a matrix method to critique the methods and quality of studies.

METHOD

A search of Medline, CINAHL, MIDIRS, DARE, EMBASE, OVID, PubMed, ProQuest, Informit, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHSEED) for the years 1994 - 2018 was conducted.

RESULTS

Nine articles met the inclusion criteria. The review identified four areas of economic evaluation that related to women who experienced complex pregnancy and continuity of midwifery care. (1) cost and clinical effectiveness comparisons between continuity of midwifery care versus obstetric-led units; (2) cost of continuity of midwifery care and/or team midwifery compared to Standard Care; (3) cost-effectiveness of continuity of midwifery care for Australian Aboriginal women versus standard care; (4) patterns of antenatal care for women of high obstetric risk and comparative provider cost. Cost savings specific to women from high risk samples who received continuity of midwifery care compared with obstetric-led standard care was stated for only one study in the review. Kenny et al. 1994 identified cost savings of AUS $29 in the antenatal period for women who received the midwifery team model from a stratified sub-set of high-risk pregnant woman within a mixed risk sample of 446 women. One systematic review relevant to the UK context, Ryan et al. (2013), applied sensitivity analysis to include women of all risk categories. Where risk ratio for overall fetal/neonatal death was systematically varied based on the 95% confidence interval of 0.79 to 1.09 from pooled studies, the aggregate annual net monetary benefit for continuity of midwifery care ranged extremely widely from an estimated gain of £472 million to a loss of £202 million. Net health benefit ranged from an annual gain of 15 723 QALYs to a loss of 6 738 QALYs. All other studies in this review reported cost savings narratively or within mixed risk samples where risk stratification was not clearly stated or related to the midwifery team model only.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies that measure the cost of continuity of midwifery care for women with complex pregnancy across the childbearing continuum are limited and apply inconsistent methods of economic evaluation. The cost and outcomes of implementing continuity of midwifery care for women with complex pregnancy is an important issue that requires further investigation. Robust cost-effectiveness evidence is essential to inform decision makers, to implement sustainable systems change in comparative maternity models for pregnant women at risk and to address health inequity.

Factors influencing decision-making for caesarean section in Sweden - a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Rising rates of caesarean section (CS) are a concern in many countries, yet Sweden has managed to maintain low CS rates. Exploring the multifactorial and complex reasons behind the rising trend in CS has become an important goal for health professionals. The aim of the study was to explore Swedish obstetricians' and midwives' perceptions of the factors influencing decision-making for CS in nulliparous women in Sweden.

METHODS

A qualitative design was chosen to gain in-depth understanding of the factors influencing the decision-making process for CS. Purposive sampling was used to select the participants. Four audio-recorded focus group interviews (FGIs), using an interview guide with open ended questions, were conducted with eleven midwives and five obstetricians from two selected Swedish maternity hospitals after obtaining written consent from each participant. Data were managed using NVivo© and thematically analysed. Ethical approval was granted by Trinity College Dublin.

RESULTS

The thematic analysis resulted in three main themes; 'Belief in normal birth - a cultural perspective'; 'Clarity and consistency - a system perspective' and 'Obstetrician makes the final decision, but...', and each theme contained a number of subthemes. However, 'Belief in normal birth' emerged as the core central theme, overarching the other two themes.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that believing that normal birth offers women and babies the best possible outcome contributes to having and maintaining a low CS rate. Both midwives and obstetricians agreed that having a shared belief (in normal birth), a common goal (of achieving normal birth) and providing mainly midwife-led care within a 'team approach' helped them achieve their goal and keep their CS rate low.

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

BACKGROUND

The Irish government has committed to expand midwifery-led care alongside consultant-led care nationally, although very little is known about the potential net benefits of this reconfiguration.

OBJECTIVES

To formally compare the costs and benefits of the major models of care in Ireland, with a view to informing priority setting using the contingent valuation technique and cost-benefit analysis.

METHODS

A marginal payment scale willingness-to-pay question was adopted from an ex ante perspective. 450 pregnant women were invited to participate in the study. Cost estimates were collected primarily, describing the average cost of a package of care. Net benefit estimates were calculated over a 1-year cycle using a third-party payer perspective.

RESULTS

To avoid midwifery-led care, women were willing to pay €821.13 (95% CI 761.66-1150.41); to avoid consultant-led care, women were willing to pay €795.06 (95% CI 695.51-921.15). The average cost of a package of consultant- and midwifery-led care was €1,762.12 (95% CI 1496.73-2027.51) and €1018.47 (95% CI 916.61-1120.33), respectively. Midwifery-led care ranked as the best use of resources, generating a net benefit of €1491.22 (95% CI 989.35-1991.93), compared with €123.23 (95% CI -376.58 to 621.42) for consultant-led care.

CONCLUSIONS

While both models of care are cost-beneficial, the decision to provide both alternatives may be constrained by resource issues. If only one alternative can be implemented then midwifery-led care should be undertaken for low-risk women, leaving consultant-led care for high-risk women. However, pursuing one alternative contradicts a key objective of government policy, which seeks to improve maternal choice. Ideally, multiple alternatives should be pursued.

Midwife-led maternity care in Ireland - a retrospective cohort study

Background

Midwife-led maternity care is shown to be safe for women with low-risk during pregnancy. In Ireland, two midwife-led units (MLUs) were introduced in 2004 when a randomised controlled trial (the MidU study) was performed to compare MLU care with consultant-led care (CLU). Following study completion the two MLUs have remained as a maternity care option in Ireland. The aim of this study was to evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes and transfer rates during six years in the larger of the MLU sites.

Methods

MLU data for the six years 2008–2013 were retrospectively analysed, following ethical approval. Rates of transfer, reasons for transfer, mode of birth, and maternal and fetal outcomes were assessed. Linear-by-Linear Association trend analysis was used for categorical data to evaluate trends over the years and one-way ANOVA was used when comparing continuous variables.

Results

During the study period, 3,884 women were registered at the MLU. The antenatal transfer rate was 37.4% and 2,410 women came to labour in the MLU. Throughout labour and birth, 567 women (14.6%) transferred to the CLU, of which 23 were transferred after birth due to need for suturing or postpartum hemorrhage. The most common reasons for intrapartum transfer were meconium stained liquor/abnormal fetal heart rate (30.3%), delayed labour progress in first or second stage (24.9%) and woman’s wish for epidural analgesia (15.1%). Of the 1,903 babies born in the MLU, 1,878 (98.7%) were spontaneous vaginal births and 25 (1.3%) were instrumental (ventouse/forceps). Only 25 babies (1.3%) were admitted to neonatal intensive care unit.

All spontaneous vaginal births from the MLU registered population, occurring in the study period in both the MLU and CLU settings (n = 2,785), were compared. In the MLU more often 1–2 midwives (90.9% vs 69.7%) cared for the women during birth, more women had three vaginal examinations or fewer (93.6% vs 79.9%) and gave birth in an upright position (standing, squatting or kneeling) (52.0% vs 9.4%), fewer women had an amniotomy (5.9% vs 25.9%) or episiotomy (3.4% vs 9.7%) and more women had a physiological management of third stage of labour (50.9% vs 4.6%).

Conclusions

Midwife-led care is a safe option that could be offered to a large proportion of healthy pregnant women. With strict transfer criteria there are very few complications during labour and birth. Maternity units without the option of MLU care should consider its introduction.

Labouring Together: collaborative alliances in maternity care in Victoria, Australia-protocol of a mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

For over a decade, enquiries into adverse perinatal outcomes have led to reports that poor collaboration has been detrimental to the safety and experience of maternity care. Despite efforts to improve collaboration, investigations into maternity care at Morecambe Bay (UK) and Djerriwarrh Health Services (Australia) have revealed that poor collaboration and decision-making remain a threat to perinatal safety. The Labouring Together study will investigate how elements hypothesised to influence the effectiveness of collaboration are reflected in perceptions and experiences of clinicians and childbearing women in Victoria, Australia. The study will explore conditions that assist clinicians and women to work collaboratively to support positive maternity outcomes. Results of the study will provide a platform for consumers, clinician groups, organisations and policymakers to work together to improve the quality, safety and experience of maternity care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

4 case study sites have been selected to represent a range of models of maternity care in metropolitan and regional Victoria, Australia. A mixed-methods approach including cross-sectional surveys and interviews will be used in each case study site, involving both clinicians and consumers. Quantitative data analysis will include descriptive statistics, 2-way multivariate analysis of variance for the dependent and independent variables, and χ² analysis to identify the degree of congruence between consumer preferences and experiences. Interview data will be analysed for emerging themes and concepts. Data will then be analysed for convergent lines of enquiry supported by triangulation of data to draw conclusions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Organisational ethics approval has been received from the case study sites and Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee (2014-238). Dissemination of the results of the Labouring Together study will be via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations, and in written reports for each case study site to support organisational change.

Women, Midwives, and a Medical Model of Maternity Care in Switzerland

This article presents a case study on the organization of maternity health care in Switzerland. Switzerland has a costly health care system with high intervention rates within an obstetric-led maternity care model. Evidence has shown that midwifery care is associated with lower cost, higher satisfaction rates among women, and less intervention. However, in this model, midwives are both marginalized and underused.

The article focuses on the distribution of power and knowledge between midwives, women, and the medical profession. The varying power structures that shape the maternity care system in Switzerland are examined, using a case study approach that draws on Foucault’s concepts of the gaze, surveillance, disciplinary power, and the docile body. This article critically analyzes the model of maternity care received by women in Switzerland and how it negatively impacts on both women’s personal and midwives’ professional autonomy while simultaneously driving up costs.

A better understanding of the underlying power structures operating within the maternity care system may facilitate the implementation of more midwifery-led care currently being endorsed by the Swiss Midwifery Association and some government agencies. This could result in reduced cost and lower intervention rates with reduced associated morbidity.

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

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 continuity models and other models of care.

OBJECTIVES

To compare midwife-led continuity models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (25 January 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led continuity models of care or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials involving 17,674 women. We assessed the quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes (i.e. regional analgesia (epidural/spinal), caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum), spontaneous vaginal birth, intact perineum, preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) and all fetal loss before and after 24 weeks plus neonatal death using the GRADE methodology: all primary outcomes were graded as of high quality.For the primary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience regional analgesia (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14; high quality), instrumental vaginal birth (average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.97; participants = 17,501; studies = 13; high quality), preterm birth less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91; participants = 13,238; studies = eight; high quality) and less all fetal loss before and after 24 weeks plus neonatal death (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; participants = 17,561; studies = 13; high quality evidence). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.07; participants = 16,687; studies = 12; high quality). There were no differences between groups for caesarean births or intact perineum.For the secondary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience amniotomy (average RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 3253; studies = four), episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14) and fetal loss less than 24 weeks and neonatal death (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98; participants = 15,645; studies = 11). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (average RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.37; participants = 10,499; studies = seven), have a longer mean length of labour (hours) (mean difference (MD) 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; participants = 3328; studies = three) and more likely to be attended at birth by a known midwife (average RR 7.04, 95% CI 4.48 to 11.08; participants = 6917; studies = seven). There were no differences between groups for fetal loss equal to/after 24 weeks and neonatal death, induction of labour, antenatal hospitalisation, antepartum haemorrhage, augmentation/artificial oxytocin during labour, opiate analgesia, perineal laceration requiring suturing, postpartum haemorrhage, breastfeeding initiation, low birthweight infant, five-minute Apgar score less than or equal to seven, neonatal convulsions, admission of infant to special care or neonatal intensive care unit(s) or in mean length of neonatal hospital stay (days).Due to a lack of consistency in measuring women's satisfaction and assessing the cost of various maternity models, these outcomes were reported narratively. The majority of included studies reported a higher rate of maternal satisfaction in midwife-led continuity models of care. Similarly, there was a trend towards a cost-saving effect for midwife-led continuity care compared to other care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that women who received midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience intervention and more likely to be satisfied with their care with at least comparable adverse outcomes for women or their infants than women who received other models of care.Further research is needed to explore findings of fewer preterm births and fewer fetal deaths less than 24 weeks, and all fetal loss/neonatal death associated with midwife-led continuity models of care.

Costing Alternative Birth Settings for Women at Low Risk of Complications: A Systematic Review

Background

There is demand from women for alternatives to giving birth in a standard hospital setting however access to these services is limited. This systematic review examines the literature relating to the economic evaluations of birth setting for women at low risk of complications.

Methods

Searches of the literature to identify economic evaluations of different birth settings of the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EconLit, Business Source Complete and Maternity and Infant care. Relevant English language publications were chosen using keywords and MeSH terms between 1995 and 2015. Inclusion criteria included studies focussing on the comparison of birth setting. Data were extracted with respect to study design, perspective, PICO principles, and resource use and cost data.

Results

Eleven studies were included from Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, the USA, and the UK. Four studies compared costs between homebirth and the hospital setting and the remaining seven focussed on the cost of birth centre care and the hospital setting. Six studies used a cost-effectiveness analysis and the remaining five studies used cost analysis and cost comparison methods. Eight of the 11 studies found a cost saving in the alternative settings. Two found no difference in the cost of the alternative settings and one found an increase in birth centre care.

Conclusions

There are few studies that compare the cost of birth setting. The variation in the results may be attributable to the cost data collection processes, difference in health systems and differences in which costs were included. A better understanding of the cost of birth setting is needed to inform policy makers and service providers.

Quality of intra-partum care at a university hospital in Nepal: A prospective cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the quality of intra-partum care provided to women with an expected normal birth at a university hospital in Nepal.

METHODS

A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted during three weeks in November 2013. Nurses at the labor ward collected data from 292 consecutive births. Of these, 164 women of low risk were expected to have a normal birth and were included in the study; 107 (65%) were nulliparous. The self-administered questionnaire covered maternal characteristics, previous pregnancies and births, current pregnancy, labor and birth. Nine items assessed care management, five of which comprised the Bologna score with a total possible score of 5: presence of a companion, use of partograph, non-use of augmentation, non-supine position, and skin-to-skin contact.

RESULTS

The women were assisted by physicians (56%), nurses (42%) or students under supervision (2%). All were in good health after birth. Two had a postpartum hemorrhage exceeding 500 ml and 49% had an episiotomy. Apgar score in all neonates was ≥ 7 at five minutes. Mean Bologna score was 1.43 (variance 0-3).

CONCLUSIONS

The management of care in normal birth could be improved in the studied setting, and there is a need for more research to support such improvement.