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
. 2020 May 6;20(1):267.
doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-02962-4.

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

Affiliations

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

Waltraut M Merz et al. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. .

Abstract

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.

Keywords: Alongside midwifery unit; Low-risk pregnancy; Maternal healthcare provision; Midwife-led care; Mode of birth; Obstetric intervention; Obstetric service; Transfer rate.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Parity and BMI by study group, transferred (n = 308); study group, not transferred (n = 304); study group, total (n = 612); and control group (n = 612)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Duration of the second stage of labor (minutes) by study group, transferred (n = 251); study group, not transferred (n = 303); study group, total (n = 554); and control group (n = 559)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Episiotomy by study group, transferred (n = 251); study group, not transferred (n = 304); study group, total (n = 554); and control group (n = 560)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Umbilical cord arterial pH value by study group, transferred (n = 302); study group, not transferred (n = 298); study group, total (n = 600); and control group (n = 609)

References

    1. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. - PubMed
    1. Oladapo OT, Tunçalp Ö, Bonet M, Lawrie TA, Portela A, Downe S, et al. WHO model of intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience: transforming care of women and babies for improved health and wellbeing. BJOG. 2018;125(8):918–922. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.15237. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bohren MA, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C, Fukuzawa RK, Cuthbert A. Continuous support for women during childbirth (review) Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7:CD003766. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sandall J, Soltani H, Gates S, Shennan A, Devane D. Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;4:CD004667. - PMC - PubMed
    1. McLachlan HL, Forster DA, Davey MA, Farrell T, Gold L, Biro MA, et al. Effects of continuity of care by a primary midwife (caseload midwifery) on caesarean section rates in women of low obstetric risk: the COSMOS randomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2012;119(12):1483–1492. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03446.x. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms