Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2002 Feb 5;166(3):315-23.

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

Affiliations
Comparative Study

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

Patricia A Janssen et al. CMAJ. .

Abstract

Background: The choice to give birth at home with a regulated midwife in attendance became available to expectant women in British Columbia in 1998. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of home birth by comparing perinatal outcomes for planned home births attended by regulated midwives with those for planned hospital births.

Methods: We compared the outcomes of 862 planned home births attended by midwives with those of planned hospital births attended by either midwives (n = 571) or physicians (n = 743). Comparison subjects who were similar in their obstetric risk status were selected from hospitals in which the midwives who were conducting the home births had hospital privileges. Our study population included all home births that occurred between Jan. 1, 1998, and Dec. 31, 1999.

Results: Women who gave birth at home attended by a midwife had fewer procedures during labour compared with women who gave birth in hospital attended by a physician. After adjustment for maternal age, lone parent status, income quintile, use of any versus no substances and parity, women in the home birth group were less likely to have epidural analgesia (odds ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-0.27), be induced, have their labours augmented with oxytocin or prostaglandins, or have an episiotomy. Comparison of home births with hospital births attended by a midwife showed very similar and equally significant differences. The adjusted odds ratio for cesarean section in the home birth group compared with physician-attended hospital births was 0.3 (95% CI 0.22-0.43). Rates of perinatal mortality, 5-minute Apgar scores, meconium aspiration syndrome or need for transfer to a different hospital for specialized newborn care were very similar for the home birth group and for births in hospital attended by a physician. The adjusted odds ratio for Apgar scores lower than 7 at 5 minutes in the home birth group compared with physician-attended hospital births was 0.84 (95% CI 0.32-2.19).

Interpretation: There was no increased maternal or neonatal risk associated with planned home birth under the care of a regulated midwife. The rates of some adverse outcomes were too low for us to draw statistical comparisons, and ongoing evaluation of home birth is warranted.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Are home births safe?
    Blais R. Blais R. CMAJ. 2002 Feb 5;166(3):335-6. CMAJ. 2002. PMID: 11868643 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
  • The pleasures of home birth?
    McIntyre C, Moser M. McIntyre C, et al. CMAJ. 2002 Jun 11;166(12):1509-10; author reply 1511. CMAJ. 2002. PMID: 12074107 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
  • The pleasures of home birth?
    Fawcett L. Fawcett L. CMAJ. 2002 Jun 11;166(12):1509; author reply 1511. CMAJ. 2002. PMID: 12074108 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
  • The pleasures of home birth?
    De Lorenzi C. De Lorenzi C. CMAJ. 2002 Jun 11;166(12):1509; author reply 1511. CMAJ. 2002. PMID: 12074109 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
  • The pleasures of home birth?
    Krikke EH. Krikke EH. CMAJ. 2002 Jun 11;166(12):1509; author reply 1511. CMAJ. 2002. PMID: 12074110 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
  • The pleasures of home birth?
    Farine D. Farine D. CMAJ. 2002 Jun 11;166(12):1510-1; author reply 1511. CMAJ. 2002. PMID: 12074111 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
  • The pleasures of home birth?
    Petzold J. Petzold J. CMAJ. 2002 Jun 11;166(12):1510; author reply 1511. CMAJ. 2002. PMID: 12074112 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
  • The pleasures of home birth?
    Okon L, Okon MA. Okon L, et al. CMAJ. 2002 Jun 11;166(12):1510; author reply 1511. CMAJ. 2002. PMID: 12074113 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. Chamberlain G, Wraight A, Crowley P. Birth at home: a report of the national survey of home births in the UK by the National Birthday Trust. Pract Midwife 1999;2:35-39. - PubMed
    1. Janssen P, Holt V, Myers S. Licensed midwife-attended, out-of-hospital births in Washington State: Are they safe? Birth 1994;21:141-8. - PubMed
    1. Wiegers T, Keirse M, van der Zee J, Berghs G. Outcome of planned home and planned hospital births in low risk pregnancies: prospective study in midwifery practices in the Netherlands. BMJ 1996;313:1309-13. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ackermann-Liebrich U, Voegeli T, Günter-Witt K, Kunz I, Züllig M, Schindler C, et al. Home vs. hospital deliveries: follow up study of matched pairs for procedures and outcome. BMJ 1996;131:1313-8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gulbransen G, Hilton J, McKay L, Cox A. Home birth in New Zealand 1973–93: incidence and mortality. N Z Med J 1997:110;87-9. - PubMed

Publication types