Established Evidence Results

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Continuity of Care (Caseload), Midwifery, Home Visit (caregiver),

Intervention Description: A model pilot program was established in South Australia to address the ongoing closure of regional maternity services and bring sustainable birthing services to the area with the aim of keeping birthing as close to home as safely possible. This Midwifery Caseload Model of Care (MMoC) model was an all-risk model or care whereby 12.9 full-time equivalent midwives were employed to work in collaboration with general practitioners (GP)/obstetricians across five birthing sites (Port Pirie, Crystal Brook, Wallaroo, Clare and Jamestown). In the MMoC all pregnant women in the region could be referred to the program and allocated to a known midwife once pregnancy had been confirmed. Care was then provided by the MMoC midwife and an obstetric GP or obstetrician. The service delivery model prioritized choice and interdisciplinary care. An anonymous questionnaire incorporating validated surveys and key questions from the Quality Maternal and Newborn Care (QMNC) Framework was used to assess care across the antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal period.

Intervention Results: Most women (97%) received a postnatal visit from a MMoC midwife and 84.1% reported the MMoC midwives were their main postpartum care provider. Shared care GP/MMoC midwives accounted for 8.9% (n = 17) and 6.9% (n = 13) indicated they had “other” postnatal care such as child and family health nurse, midwives and nurses at the birth hospital, and midwives at referral hospital due to baby’s prematurity. Overall women had an average of four postnatal visits. Close to a third of women (32.5%) had six or more visits. Most women (77%) reported receiving their visit in their home or a combination of home and not at home (20%). Only 3.2% of visits were not conducted at home. In addition to midwifery visits, most women (approximately 80%) also used community supports, the most frequently being child and family health nurses.

Conclusion: In this regional/rural MMoC, women were able to receive quality continuity and components of care as have been previously benchmarked against the QMNC Framework. Women embraced the new MMoC, established strong relationships with their midwives and were able to maintain good collaborative arrangements with their local GPs. The generalisability of these results should be considered for other regions which offer maternity services and have GP obstetrician support. These findings are consistent with existing evidence that supports midwifery continuity of care for women and adds to the growing body of evidence for midwifery caseload outside of metropolitan areas

Study Design: Mixed methods design using qualitative and quantitative methodologies

Setting: Five birthing sites in South Australia (Port Pirie, Crystal Brook, Wallaroo, Clare and Jamestown).

Population of Focus: Pregnant women in regional/rural areas

Sample Size: 205

Age Range: 16-42 years

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Care Coordination, Patient Navigation, Midwifery,

Intervention Description: The intervention described in the article is the Early Care Model for initiation of perinatal care. This model is a midwifery-led, patient-centered approach designed to reduce barriers to early initiation of perinatal care for pregnant individuals. The key components of the intervention include: Timely access to care as soon as pregnancy is confirmed or suspected. One-hour telehealth visits for early pregnancy assessment and support. Comprehensive assessment of clinical and social needs during the initial prenatal visit. Tailored perinatal care recommendations and referrals based on individual health history and preferences. Promotion of midwifery care and education about all care options. Use of virtual language interpretation services for increased accessibility. Focus on antiracist and antibias approaches to provide equitable care , . These components collectively aim to provide early and comprehensive care to pregnant individuals, address systemic barriers to care engagement, and promote improved outcomes and decreased disparities in perinatal health

Intervention Results: Instead, it focuses on describing the key strengths and components of the Early Care Model for initiation of perinatal care, as well as the potential impact of the model on health equity and perinatal outcomes. The article emphasizes the importance of early access to prenatal care, the benefits of the model's approach to care initiation, and the strategies for overcoming barriers to implementation, such as billing and reimbursement challenges in the United States healthcare system

Conclusion: The conclusion drawn from the article on the Early Care Model for initiation of perinatal care highlights the potential of this model to significantly impact health equity in perinatal care. The model is seen as a promising approach to reducing disparities, improving outcomes, and increasing access to early and comprehensive perinatal care for pregnant individuals. However, the article also acknowledges the real barriers to implementation, particularly related to billing and reimbursement systems in the United States healthcare system. To address these barriers and make the Early Care Model more accessible and actionable, the article presents recommendations for stakeholders, including health plans, legislators, and regulators. These recommendations focus on adjusting reimbursement to reflect the benefits of the model, expanding Medicaid coverage for pregnant individuals, and advocating for policy changes to support the adoption of innovative care delivery models like the Early Care Model . Overall, the article underscores the importance of addressing systemic challenges in healthcare delivery to promote equitable care, improve perinatal outcomes, and enhance access to quality care for pregnant individuals.

Study Design: the article outlines the key components and strategies of the model, focusing on its innovative approach to providing early and comprehensive perinatal care to pregnant individuals. The model is presented as a new care delivery approach aimed at reducing barriers to early initiation of perinatal care and improving health outcomes for pregnant people and their fetuses

Setting: it does mention that the model was developed and implemented by Quilted Health, a healthcare organization based in Washington state . The model is designed to be adaptable to the needs of specific communities and care settings

Population of Focus: The target audience for the Early Care Model for initiation of perinatal care includes pregnant individuals seeking prenatal care services. The model is designed to reduce barriers to early initiation of perinatal care and improve outcomes for pregnant people and their fetuses 2. Additionally, stakeholders involved in the implementation of the model, such as health plans, legislators, regulators, and perinatal care providers, are also key audiences for the recommendations and strategies outlined in the article

Sample Size: The focus of the article is more on the model itself, its strategies, and the potential impact on health equity in perinatal care

Age Range: However, the model is designed to provide early access to prenatal care for pregnant individuals, which typically includes adults of reproductive age. The focus is on improving perinatal outcomes and reducing disparities in care for pregnant individuals, regardless of their specific age range

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Midwifery,

Intervention Description: In contrast to traditional models of prenatal care in which the first visit is deferred until gestational age allows for a dating ultrasound, the Early Care model allows for care to be initiated at any gestation. Patients are offered accessible telehealth early pregnancy appointments for thorough assessment of clinical and social needs to better meet each person's unique and diverse experiences.

Intervention Results: Patients can received timely referrals for emergent clinical and social needs, as well as education about all care options.

Conclusion: This model promotes improved outcomes and decreased disparities, as well as broader awareness of midwifery care. This article provides an overview of the Early Care model experience.

Study Design: Qualitative

Setting: Community-based

Population of Focus: Women of color

Sample Size: Unknown

Age Range: Not disclosed

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Midwifery, PROVIDER/PRACTICE, HOSPITAL, Chart Audit and Feedback, Organizational Changes, Quality Improvement, POPULATION-BASED SYSTEMS, Community — Outreach, Outreach, COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY

Intervention Description: To improve quality of care by offering more women a safe and attractive normal vaginal delivery. The target group was primarily nulliparous women at term with spontaneous onset of labor and cephalic presentation.

Intervention Results: The CS rate in nulliparous women at term with spontaneous onset of labor decreased from 10% in 2006 to 3% in 2015. During the same period the overall CS rate dropped from 20% to 11%. The prevalence of children born at the unit with umbilical cord pH <7 and Apgar score <4 at 5 min were the same over the years studied. At present, 95.2% of women delivering at our unit are satisfied with their delivery experience.

Conclusion: The CS rates have declined after implementing the nine items of organizational and cultural changes. It seems that a specific and persistent multidisciplinary activity with a focus on the Robson group 1 can reduce CS rates without increased risk of neonatal complications.

Study Design: Time trend analysis

Setting: 1 public, medium-sized tertiary level obstetric unit

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women who gave birth between January 2006 and October 2015

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: n=~900 (880-924) per year

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Midwifery

Intervention Description: Women at low risk for complications were offered the option of using a midwife-led service, rather than obstetrician-led care, in a hospital setting. The service is not separated from the conventional delivery ward and uses the same rooms for labor and birth. The midwife-led care team consists of 21 certified and experienced midwives who agreed to participate in the study. During an observation period of more than 10 years, data from 4098 women were recorded.

Intervention Results: Midwife-led care management demonstrated a significant decrease in interventions, including oxytocin use (p < 0.001), medical pain relief (p < 0.001), and artificial rupture of membranes (ARM) (p < 0.01) as well as fewer episiotomies (p < 0.001), as compared with obstetrician-led care. Moreover, no negative effects on maternal or neonatal outcomes were observed. The mean length of the second stage of labor, rate of perineal laceration and APGAR scores did not differ significantly between the study groups (p > 0.05). Maternal age (p < 0.01), head diameter (p < 0.001), birth weight (p < 0.001) and the absence of midwife-led care (p < 0.05) were independent risk factors for perineal trauma. The overall referral rate was low (7%) and was most commonly caused by pathologic cardiotocography (CTG) and prolonged first- and second-stage of labor. Most referred mothers nevertheless had spontaneous deliveries (77%), and there were low rates of vaginal operative deliveries and cesarean sections (vacuum extraction, 16%; cesarean section, 7%).

Conclusion: The present study confirmed that midwife-led care confers important benefits and causes no adverse outcomes for mother and child. The favorable obstetrical outcome clearly highlights the importance of the selection of obstetric care, on the basis of previous risk assessment. We therefore fully support the recommendation that midwife-led care be offered to all low-risk women and that mothers should be encouraged to use this option. However, to increase the numbers of midwife-led care deliveries in Austria in the future, it will be necessary to expand this care model and to establish new midwife-led care units within hospital facilities.

Setting: University Hospital of Vienna

Population of Focus: Low risk pregnant women

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Midwifery

Intervention Description: All laboring individuals in this study were triaged by either a midwife or physician, and all additionally received nursing care. Each of several private practices feeding into this hospital has at least 1 midwife providing prenatal care. Midwives also provide intrapartum care in the hospital, alongside obstetrician hospitalists who provide some care during the day shift. However, once a laboring patient is admitted to a physician for intrapartum management, they do not change to a midwife provider for labor or birth. Approximately half of the individuals in this sample were admitted by a midwife (52.2%, n = 175), and the other half were admitted by a physician (47.8%, n = 160). For this study, provider type data for each participant at 2 time points were collected: during the triage visit (admitted provider type) and at birth.

Intervention Results: Patients admitted by midwives had lower odds of oxytocin augmentation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.29-0.87), epidural (aOR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.12-0.69), and cesarean birth (aOR = 0.308, 95% CI = 0.14-0.67), compared with those triaged by physicians after controlling for patient characteristics and triage timing. This study provides additional context to midwives as labor triage providers for healthy, low-risk pregnant individuals; however, challenges persisted with measurement.

Conclusion: More research is needed on the specific components of care during labor that support low-risk patients to avoid medical interventions and poor outcomes.

Setting: Community-based hospital

Population of Focus: Low risk nulliparous women

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Labor Support, Midwifery, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE

Intervention Description: To investigate the association between one-to-one midwifery care and birth outcomes with pain relief as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include obs

Intervention Results: Logistic regression analysis show that nulliparous women receiving one-to-one midwifery care in the active phase of labour are less likely to have an epidural analgesia, adjusted OR of 0.81 (95% CI 0.72,0.91), less likely to be given nitrous oxide, adjusted OR of 0.77 (95% CI 0.69,0.85), and they more often received massages, adjusted OR of 1.76 (95% CI 1.47,2.11), compared with women not receiving one-to-one midwifery care. Descriptive analyses show that women receiving one-to-one midwifery care in the active phase of labour are less likely to have a caesarean section (5.8% vs. 7.2%) and they are less likely to have an operative vaginal birth (16.5% vs. 23.7%). No significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of low Apgar scores at five minutes.

Conclusion: We found that one-to-one midwifery care in the active phase of labour may be associated with birth outcomes, including decreased use of epidural analgesia and a decreased rate of caesarean sections and operative vaginal birth. The results of this study could encourage midwives to be present during the active phase of labour to promote physiological birth.

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Continuity of Care (Caseload), HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Active Management of Labor, Midwifery

Intervention Description: To explore the relationship between the degree to which labour is established on admission to hospital and method of birth.

Intervention Results: Nulliparous women randomised to standard care were more likely to have labour augmented than those having caseload care (54.2% and 45.5% respectively, p=0.008), but were no more likely to use epidural analgesia. They were admitted earlier in labour, spending 1.1 hours longer than those in the caseload arm in hospital before the birth (p=0.003). Parous women allocated to standard care were more likely than those in the caseload arm to use epidural analgesia (10.0% and 5.3% respectively, p=0.047), but were no more likely to have labour augmented. They were also admitted earlier in labour, with a median cervical dilatation of 4 cm compared with 5 cm in the caseload arm (p=0.012). Pooling the two randomised groups of nulliparous women, and after adjusting for randomised group, maternal age and maternal body mass index, early admission to hospital was strongly associated with caesarean section. Admission before the cervix was 5 cm dilated increased the odds 2.4-fold (95%CI 1.4, 4.0; p=0.001). Augmentation of labour and use of epidural analgesia were each strongly associated with caesarean section (adjusted odds ratios 3.10 (95%CI 2.1, 4.5) and 5.77 (95%CI 4.0, 8.4) respectively.

Conclusion: These findings that women allocated to caseload care were admitted to hospital later in labour, and that earlier admission was strongly associated with birth by caesarean section, suggest that remaining at home somewhat longer in labour may be one of the mechanisms by which caseload care was effective in reducing caesarean section in the COSMOS trial.

Study Design: RCT

Setting: 1 large, tertiary maternity hospital

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women with a planned vaginal delivery who gave birth after recruitment between September 2007 and June 20102

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: n=1,532

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Midwifery, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE

Intervention Description: This study was designed to assess the impact of selected medical interventions during labor upon cesarean section rates by comparing the maternal and neonatal outcomes of obstetrician- and nurse-midwife-managed low-risk private patients.

Intervention Results: Nurse-midwife-managed patients had a significantly lower rate of cesarean section (8.5% versus 12.9%; P < .005) and operative vaginal delivery (5.3% versus 17%, P = .0001) than the physician-managed patients. Epidural anesthesia and oxytocin for induction and augmentation were used significantly more frequently in the physician-managed patients. Both interventions were associated with an increased rate of cesarean section. Fetal outcomes in the two groups were not statistically different.

Conclusion: Women cared for by nurse-midwives had a lower cesarean section rate, fewer interventions, and equally good maternal and infant outcomes when compared with those cared for by physicians.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort

Setting: 1 women’s hospital in Illinois

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women who gave birth between January 1987 and December 19902

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: Total (n=4,827) Intervention (n=322) Control (n=4,505)

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Continuity of Care (Caseload), Epidural Analgesia, Midwifery

Intervention Description: To determine if nulliparous women intending to have epidural analgesia have a similar labour profile and delivery outcome to women who intend to have their labour managed using alternative forms of pain relief.

Intervention Results: Rate of CS lower in CMS group vs. epidural group (14.2% vs. 17.2%; p>0.05)

Conclusion: The duration of labour was shorter in the CMS group compared with EPI (10.7 hours (inter quartile (IQ) 7.0,15.2) versus 11.4 hours (IQ 8.2,15.2), p = 0.039). The median duration of the first stage was 8.9 hours (IQ 6,12.5) versus 9.5 hours (IQ 7,12.7) (p = 0.069), and the median duration of the second stage was 1.33 hours (IQ 0.6,2.5) versus 1.48 hours (IQ 0.77,2.6) (p = 0.034). The requirement for oxytocin augmentation in spontaneous labour was 39.8% CMS versus 46.2% EPI (p = 0.129). There was no significant difference in the caesarean section rates. The need for any operative delivery was significantly lower in CMS (43.9% CMS versus 51.5% EPI, p = 0.019).

Study Design: RCT

Setting: 1 tertiary obstetric institution

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women who gave birth between May 1997 and October 1999

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: Total (n=992) Intervention (n=499) Control (n=493)

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Midwifery, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE

Intervention Description: The aim of the present study was to compare intervention rates associated with labour in low-risk women who begin their labour in a midwife-led unit and a conventional care unit.

Intervention Results: Emergency caesarean and instrumental delivery rates in women who were admitted to the midwife-led and conventional birth wards were statistically non-different, but more women admitted to the conventional birth ward had episiotomy. More women in the conventional delivery ward received epidural analgesia, pudental nerve block and nitrous oxide, while more women in the midwife-led ward received opiates and non-pharmacological pain relief.

Conclusion: We did not find evidence that starting delivery in the midwife-led setting offers the advantage of lower operative delivery rates. However, epidural analgesia, pudental nerve block and episiotomies were less often while non-pharmacological pain relief was often used in the midwife-led ward.

Study Design: QE: pretest-posttest non-equivalent control group

Setting: 1 university hospital

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women who gave birth between November 2001-May 2002 (intervention group) and October 2002 (control group) and did not express desire for epidural analgesia at admission to hospital3

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: Total (n=453) Intervention (n=252) Control (n=201)

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PATIENT/CONSUMER, Childbirth Education Classes, PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Active Management of Labor, Labor Support, Midwifery

Intervention Description: Active management of labor is a multifaceted program that, as implemented at the National Maternity Hospital in Dublin, is associated with a lower rate of cesarean delivery than the rate usually found in the United States. We conducted a randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of this approach in lowering the rate of cesarean section among women delivering their first babies.

Intervention Results: Rate of CS among protocol-eligible women lower in AMOL group vs. control group (10.9% vs. 11.5%; p>0.05) after adjustment for epidural use and adoption of final protocol (three hours for second stage of labor with epidural); (OR=0.9, 95% CI: 0.4–1.9)

Conclusion: Active management of labor did not reduce the rate of cesarean section in nulliparous women but was associated with a somewhat shorter duration of labor and less maternal fever.

Study Design: RCT

Setting: 1 women’s hospital

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women who gave birth between June 10, 1991 and October 17, 1993

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: Total (n=1,915) Intervention (n=1,009) Control (n=906)

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Labor Support, Midwifery, HOSPITAL, Peer Review, Quality Improvement

Intervention Description: In efforts to help reduce the primary C-section rate, the hospital participated in the American College of Nurse-Midwives Healthy Birth Initiative. Strategies employed included use of intermittent auscultation, upright labor positioning, an early labor lounge, one-to-one labor support, and team huddles.

Intervention Results: The baseline nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex cesarean rate in 2015 was 29.3%. In 2016, after 1 year of implementation of the project, the hospital decreased nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex cesarean rate to 26.1%-a reduction of 10%. In 2017, the rate was decreased to 25.3%-a reduction by 3.7%.

Conclusion: The multicomponent bundle incorporated proven quality improvement strategies and engaged numerous champions and stakeholders, including midwifery students.

Setting: Urban academic hospital in the Midwest

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Continuity of Care (Caseload), Midwifery

Intervention Description: This retrospective cohort study compared the cesarean section rate of nulliparous women who received standard midwifery care and those who opted to participate in a caseload midwifery program (CMP) where they would see the same midwife throughout their term. This midwife would remain the “lead,” even if the patient was referred to a physician due to complications. The data was extracted from the records of 19,001 women who gave birth at the hospital from 2011 to 2014. The final study cohort included only nulliparous women and combined the total population of nulliparous women who received care from the CMP (n = 500) and the comparison group that was selected by matching for parity, country of birth, age and body mass index (BMI) on a 1:1 basis.

Intervention Results: Adjusted regression analysis for the primary outcome showed that compared with women who received SMC, women who received care through CMP had an increased rate of normal vaginal birth (69% vs. 50%, OR = 1.79, 95%, CI = 1.38-2.32). Assessment of secondary outcomes showed that the women in CMP group had decreased rates of instrumental birth (15% vs. 26%, OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.35-0.66), episiotomy (23% vs. 40%, OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.33-0.57), epidural analgesia (33% vs. 43%, OR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.50-0.83) and amniotomy (35% vs. 50%, OR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.43-0.72). The CMP group also had greater rates of water immersion (54% vs. 22%, OR = 4.18, 95% CI = 3.17-5.5), physiological 3rd stage (7% vs. 1%, OR = 11.71, 95% CI = 3.56-38.43) and 2nd degree tear (34% vs. 24%, OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.21-2.11). There were no significant differences between the two groups for rates of other secondary outcomes including Caesarean section, cervical ripening procedures, third- and fourth-degree tears, postpartum haemorrhage and neonatal outcomes.

Conclusion: CMP care is associated with increased rate of normal vaginal birth which supports wider implementation of the model. In addition, using routinely collected data and a cohort matching design can be an effective approach to evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Setting: Metropolitan tertiary hospital in Australia

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Continuity of Care (Caseload), Labor Support, POPULATION-BASED SYSTEMS, STATE, Place of Birth, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Midwifery

Intervention Description: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of modified birth center care on obstetric procedures during delivery and on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Intervention Results: The modified birth center group included fewer emergency cesarean sections (primiparas: OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.83; multiparas: OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.23-0.51), and in multiparas the vacuum extraction rate was reduced (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.26-0.67). In addition, epidural analgesia was used less frequently (primiparas: OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.41-0.53; multiparas: OR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.20-0.32). Fetal distress was less frequently diagnosed in the modified birth center group (primiparas: OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.59-0.87; multiparas: OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.29-0.69), but no statistically significant differences were found in neonatal hypoxia, low Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes, or proportion of perinatal deaths (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.14-1.13). Anal sphincter tears were reduced (primiparas: OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.55-0.98; multiparas: OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.20-0.83).

Conclusion: Midwife-led comprehensive care with the same medical guidelines as in standard care reduced medical interventions without jeopardizing maternal and infant health.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort

Setting: 1 large, public hospital

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women admitted to the modified birth center between March 2004 to July 2008 who gave birth at either the modified birth center or in standard delivery ward2

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: Total (n=6,141) Intervention (n=1,263) Control (n=4,878)

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Labor Support, POPULATION-BASED SYSTEMS, State — Place of Birth, STATE, Place of Birth, Childbirth Education Classes, Midwifery, PATIENT_CONSUMER, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE

Intervention Description: We evaluated the effect on perinatal outcomes of an interdisciplinary program designed to promote physiologic birth and encourage active involvement of women and their families in maternity care.

Intervention Results: Compared with women receiving standard care, those in the birth program were more likely to be delivered by a midwife (41.9% v. 7.4%, p < 0.001) instead of an obstetrician (35.5% v. 69.6%, p < 0.001). The program participants were less likely than the matched controls to undergo cesarean delivery (relative risk [RR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.84) and, among those with a previous cesarean delivery, more likely to plan a vaginal birth (RR 3.22, 95% CI 2.25-4.62). Length of stay in hospital was shorter in the program group for both the mothers (mean ± standard deviation 50.6 ± 47.1 v. 72.7 ± 66.7 h, p < 0.001) and the newborns (47.5 ± 92.6 v. 70.6 ± 126.7 h, p < 0.001). Women in the birth program were more likely than the matched controls to be breastfeeding exclusively at discharge (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.85-2.39).

Conclusion: Women attending a collaborative program of interdisciplinary maternity care were less likely to have a cesarean delivery, had shorter hospital stays on average and were more likely to breastfeed exclusively than women receiving standard care.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort

Setting: 1 women’s hospital

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women who gave birth between April 2004 to October 20102

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: Total (n=1,660) Intervention (n=830) Control (n=830)

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Midwifery, PROVIDER/PRACTICE, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE

Intervention Description: The study examines patients cared for by a co-practice of nurse midwives and family physicians at a rural hospital. Data were collected through a retrospective chart audit for all patients whose prenatal care, labor, or delivery was managed by members of the practice in 1990 and 1991.

Intervention Results: Few differences were noted between nurse midwives and family physicians in the management of labor or delivery. The only consistent finding was that family physicians were more likely than midwives to use an episiotomy for delivery (40% vs 30% in primiparous women, P = .02; and 20% vs 10% in multiparous women, P = .007). Despite seemingly similar management styles, primiparous women managed by family physicians were more likely to undergo cesarean section (14% vs 8%, P = .05) resulting from the diagnosis of dystocia. When practice specialty was included in a logistic regression model with parity and the number of preexisting risk factors, the effect of specialty on cesarean sections remained significant with a relative risk of 2.79 for cesarean section if patients had their labor managed by a family physician (P < .001).

Conclusion: Family physicians and nurse midwives managed patients in labor similarly, but nurse midwives were more likely to achieve a vaginal delivery in primiparous women and do so without an episiotomy. Although the differences found would not interfere with a collaborative practice, subtle differences in patient management do exist. Further exploration of these differences may be helpful in understanding the impact of these differences on mixed-specialty practices.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort

Setting: 1 hospital in Kentucky

Population of Focus: Random sample of nulliparous women who gave birth between 1990 and 19912

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: Total (n=371) Intervention (n=185) Control (n=186)

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Continuity of Care (Caseload), Midwifery

Intervention Description: Midwifery group practice (MGP) also known as caseload midwifery, was introduced and embedded in a Western Australian (WA) tertiary maternity hospital. A study conducted between July 2013 and June 2014 assessed the obstetric and neonatal outcomes by parity, women's satisfaction by mode of delivery, and perceptions of care. The study also compared the MGP women against the 2012 WA tertiary hospital birthing population (before the midwife practice was initiatived)

Intervention Results: Phase one included 232 MGP women; 87% achieved a vaginal birth. Phase two included 97% (226 of 232) women, finding 98% would recommend the service. Phase three analysis of 62 interviews revealed an overarching theme ‘Continuity with Midwives’ encompassing six sub-themes: only a phone call away; home away from home; knowing me; a shared view; there for me; and letting it happen. Phase four compared the MGP cohort to 33,393 WA women. Intrapartum MGP women were more likely than the WA population to have a vaginal birth (87% vs 65%, P ≤ 0.001) and intact perineum (49% vs 36%, P ≤ 0.001) and less likely to use epidural/spinal analgesia (34% vs 59%, P ≤ 0.001), or have a caesarean (13% vs 35%, P ≤ 0.001).

Conclusion: Mixed methods enabled systematic examination of this new ‘no exit’ MGP confirming safety and acceptability. Findings contribute to our knowledge of MGP models.

Setting: Tertiary maternity hospital in western Australia

Population of Focus: Primiparous and multiparous women attending MGP (midwifery group practice)

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Technology-Based Support, PATIENT_CONSUMER, Midwifery, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE

Intervention Description: One specific form of support that is under researched is the use of Breastfeeding Support Facebook (BSF) groups that are aimed at supporting women in specific local areas, often with links to face to face support. Initial research highlights that mothers’ value these groups but the role that midwives play in offering support to local mothers through these groups has not been examined. The aim of this study was therefore to examine mothers’ perceptions of midwifery support for breastfeeding delivered through these groups, specifically when midwives played an active role in being a group ‘moderator’ or leader.

Intervention Results: Moderation was an important factor in mothers’ experiences, with trained support associated with greater engagement and more frequent visits, impacting on perceptions of group ethos, reliability and inclusivity. Midwife moderation was uncommon (5% of groups) but valued: midwife moderators offered a high level of support to mothers in their groups, with 87.5% having received midwife support often or sometimes and 97.8% rating this useful or very useful. Access to a midwife moderated group was also associated with viewing local face to face midwifery support for breastfeeding more positively. This is a significant finding, highlighting that online support complements face-to-face support in local settings (67% of groups were linked to a physical group), and improves continuity of care (14% of mothers who had midwife moderators received care from them). As such midwife moderated or supported groups have the potential to add value to local face to face services and improve breastfeeding experiences in communities.

Conclusion: The findings have important implications to support the development of integrated online interventions to improve public health.

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Midwifery

Intervention Description: Low-risk nulliparous women gave birth at interprofessional centers with both midwives and physicians, and this data was compared to low-risk women who gave birth at noninterprofessional centers without midwives. The study is based on Consortium on Safe Labor data from low-risk nulliparous women who birthed in interprofessional (n = 7393) or noninterprofessional centers (n = 6982).

Intervention Results: There was concordance across logistic regression models, the most restrictive and conservative of which were propensity-matched models. With this approach, women at interprofessional medical centers, compared with women at noninterprofessional centers, were 74% less likely to undergo labor induction (risk ratio [RR] 0.26; 95% CI 0.24-0.29) and 75% less likely to have oxytocin augmentation (RR 0.25; 95% CI 0.22-0.29). The cesarean birth rate was 12% lower at interprofessional centers (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.79-0.98). Adverse neonatal outcomes occurred in only 0.3% of births and were thus too rare to be modeled.

Conclusion: The care processes and birth outcomes at interprofessional and noninterprofessional medical centers differed significantly. Nulliparous women receiving care at interprofessional centers were less likely to experience induction, oxytocin augmentation, and cesarean than women at noninterprofessional centers. Labor care and birth outcome differences between interprofessional and noninterprofessional centers may be the result of the presence of midwives and interprofessional collaboration, organizational culture, or both.

Setting: Interprofessional care centers with midwifes; non-interprofessional care centers

Population of Focus: Low-risk nulliparous pregnant women

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Provider Training/Education, Labor Support, Midwifery, HOSPITAL, Chart Audit and Feedback, Peer Review, Quality Improvement

Intervention Description: This quality improvement initiative involved multiple interventions that were monitored over time by statistical process control charts. Components included a nested case-control review of local risk factors, provider and patient education, multidisciplinary reviews based on published guidelines with feedback, provider report cards, commitment to labor duration guidelines, and a focus on natural labor. The nursing team received training and certification in holistic nursing, and certified nurse-midwives were employed and given delivery privileges. The six-bed Karmanos Center for Natural Birth (NBC) was opened in November 2014 for low-risk women who were managed without continuous fetal monitoring, epidural analgesia, and obstetrical interventions.

Intervention Results: Control chart analysis demonstrated that the institutional cesarean delivery rate was due to culture and not "outlier" obstetricians. The primary singleton vertex cesarean rate decreased from 23.4% to 14.1% and the NTSV rate decreased from 34.5% to 19.2% (both p < .0001). There was a decrease in NICU admission but no significant changes in postpartum hemorrhage, chorioamnionitis, stillbirth, or neonatal mortality.

Conclusion: Structured quality improvement initiatives may decrease primary cesarean deliveries without increasing maternal or perinatal morbidity.

Setting: Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, an academic-community hybrid facility in southeastern Michigan

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women with term singleton vertex gestations

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Active Management of Labor, Labor Support, Midwifery, Prolonged Second Stage of Labor, HOSPITAL, Chart Audit and Feedback, Guideline Change and Implementation

Intervention Description: 419 consecutive patients were divided into two groups, with one group (216 patients) receiving “standard management” (with medical acceleration of labor commencing at the ‘‘action line’’ in the case of arrested or protracted labor) and the other group (203 patients) receiving “comprehensive management” (CM) where arrested or protracted labor was considered a warning sign promoting further diagnostic assessment prior to considering intervention. Comprehensive management included the daily audit and discussion of clinical cases by medical and midwifery staff; the introduction of intrapartum ultrasonography alongside traditional clinical assessment to determine fetal head and trunk position accurately; one-on-one labor support facilitated by midwives and/or labor partners; and attention to the psychological well-being of the patient throughout labor and delivery.

Intervention Results: his study included 3283 and 3068 women in the before and after periods, respectively. The groups had similar general and obstetric characteristics. The global cesarean delivery rate decreased significantly from 9.4% in the preguideline to 6.9% in the postguideline period (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-0.85; P < .01). The cesarean delivery rate for arrest of first-stage labor fell by half, from 1.8% to 0.9% (odds ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.81; P < .01) but was significant only among nulliparous women. The cesarean delivery rate for second-stage arrest of labor decreased but not significantly between periods (1.3% vs 1.0%; odds ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.22; P = .2), and the cesarean delivery rate for failure of induction remained similar (3.7% vs 3.5%; odds ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-13.24; P = .88). The median duration of labor before cesarean delivery also became significantly longer among nulliparous women during the later period. Maternal and neonatal outcomes did not differ between the 2 periods, except that the rate of 1 minute Apgar score <7 fell significantly in the later period (8.4% vs 6.9%; odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.97; P = .02).

Conclusion: The modification of our protocol by implementing the new consensus recommendations was associated with a reduction of the rate of primary cesarean delivery performed for arrest of labor with no apparent increase in immediate adverse neonatal outcomes in nulliparous women at term with singleton pregnancies in vertex presentation and with epidural anesthesia. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term maternal and neonatal safety of these policies.

Setting: Obstetric Unit of Sesto San Giovanni Hospital, Milan, Italy, an urban community hospital

Population of Focus: nulliparous women with a single fetus in cephalic presentation, in spontaneous labor at term or induced labor post term.

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Midwifery, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE

Intervention Description: Births to women in centers with interprofessional care that included midwives (n = 48,857) were compared with births in non-interprofessional centers (n = 47,935) using the Robson 10-group classification system that stratifies cesarean birth rates using maternal characteristics. The Robson system categorizes all cesarean birth rates by 6 fixed maternal and/or fetal criteria important to perinatal care decision making: gestational age, parity, fetal lie, number of fetuses, previous cesarean birth, and onset of spontaneous labor.

Intervention Results: Women were less likely to have a cesarean birth (26.1% vs 33.5%, P < .001) in centers with interprofessional care. Nulliparous women with singleton, cephalic, term fetuses (category 2) were less likely to have labor induced (11.1% vs 23.4%, P < .001), and women with a prior uterine scar (category 5) had lower cesarean birth rates (73.8% vs 85.1%, P < .001) in centers with midwives. In centers without midwives, nulliparous women with singleton, cephalic, term fetuses with induction of labor (category 2a) were less likely to have a cesarean birth compared with those in interprofessional care centers in unadjusted comparison (30.3% vs 35.8%, P < .001), but this was reversed after adjustment for maternal comorbidities (adjusted odds ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.12-1.32; P < .001). Cesarean birth rates among women at risk for complications (eg, breech) were similar between groups.

Conclusion: Interprofessional care teams were associated with lower rates of labor induction and overall cesarean utilization as well as higher rates of vaginal birth after cesarean. There was consistency in cesarean rates among women with higher risk for complications.

Setting: Interprofessional care centers with midwifes; non-interprofessional care centers

Population of Focus: 48,857 women in interprofessional care group; 47,935 in the non-interprofessional care group

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Midwifery, HOSPITAL, Quality Improvement, Collaboratives

Intervention Description: Midwives provide intrapartum care to low-risk nulliparous women in hospital settings where obstetricians also care for women during childbirth. This model of care is one of the measurable components of the Obstetrical Care Outcomes Assessment Program, a quality improvement initiative that uses clinical data from maternal and newborn medical records to evaluate the care given to pregnant women during labor, delivery and the postpartum period as the basis for exploring actionable and sustainable improvements. The program uses health care provider specific, chart-abstracted data for quality improvement from all births at participating sites. Multiple hospitals in the Northwest United States, including urban, suburban, and rural centers supported by I, II, III, and IV levels of maternal care participate in this quality improvement collaborative.

Intervention Results: The study cohort comprised 23,100 births (3,816 midwife and 19,284 obstetrician). Compared with obstetricians, midwifery patients had significantly lower intervention rates, an approximately 30% lower risk of cesarean delivery in nulliparous patients (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 0.68; 95th% CI 0.57-0.82), and an approximately 40% lower risk of cesarean in multiparous patients (aRR 0.57; 95th% CI 0.36-0.89). Operative vaginal birth was also less common in nulliparous patients (aRR 0.73; 95th% CI 0.57-0.93) and multiparous patients (aRR 0.30; 95th% CI 0.14-0.63). Shoulder dystocia was more common in multiparous patients receiving midwifery care (aRR 1.42; 95th% CI 1.04-1.92).

Conclusion: In low-risk pregnancies, midwifery care in labor was associated with decreased intervention, decreased cesarean and operative vaginal births, and, in multiparous women, an increased risk for shoulder dystocia. Greater integration of midwifery care into maternity services in the United States may reduce intervention in labor and potentially even cesarean delivery, in low-risk pregnancies. Larger research studies are needed to evaluate uncommon but important maternal and newborn outcomes.

Setting: Hospitals participating in a multi-center quality improvement collaborative (the Obstetrical Care Outcomes Assessment Program)

Population of Focus: Low-risk nulliparous pregnant women

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Quality Improvement/Practice-Wide Intervention, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Midwifery

Intervention Description: We explored breast feeding outcomes of women having a First Nations infant at three sites that introduced a culturally specific continuity of midwife care model.

Intervention Results: Most women (298, 87%) received the culturally specific model. Breast feeding initiation (96%, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.98) was high. At 3 months, 71% were giving ‘any’ (95% CI 0.65 to 0.78) and 48% were giving ‘only’ breast milk (95% CI 0.41 to 0.55). Intending to breast feed 6 months (Adj OR ‘any’: 2.69, 95% CI 1.29 to 5.60; ‘only’: 2.22, 95% CI 1.20 to 4.12), and not smoking in pregnancy (Adj OR ‘any’: 2.48, 95% CI 1.05 to 5.86; ‘only’: 4.05, 95% CI 1.54 to 10.69) were associated with higher odds. Lower education (Adj OR ‘any’: 0.36, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.98; ‘only’: 0.50, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.96) and government benefits as the main household income (Adj OR ‘any’: 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.58) with lower odds.

Conclusion: Breast feeding rates were high in the context of service-wide change. Our findings strengthen the evidence that culturally specific continuity models improve breast feeding outcomes for First Nations women and infants. We recommend implementing and upscaling First Nations specific midwifery continuity models within mainstream hospitals in Australia as a strategy to improve breast feeding.

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Continuity of Care (Caseload), Labor Support, Midwifery

Intervention Description: a cross sectional study examining the risk profile, birth outcomes and cost of care for women booked into one of the three available models of care in a tertiary teaching hospital in Australia between July 1st 2009 December 31st 2010.

Intervention Results: First time ‘low risk’ mothers who received caseload care were more likely to have a spontaneous onset of labour and an unassisted vaginal birth 58.5% in midwifery group practices (MGP) compared to 48.2% for Standard hospital care and 30.8% with Private obstetric care (p < 0.001). They were also significantly less likely to have an elective caesarean section 1.6% with MGP versus 5.3% with Standard care and 17.2% with private obstetric care (p < 0.001). From the public hospital perspective, over one financial year the average cost of care for the standard primipara in MGP was $3903.78 per woman. This was $1375.45 less per woman than those receiving Private obstetric care and $1590.91 less than Standard hospital care per woman (p < 0.001). Similar differences in cost were found in favour of MGP for all women in the study who received caseload care.

Conclusion: Cost reduction appears to be achieved through reorganising the way care is delivered in the public hospital system with the introduction of Midwifery Group Practice or caseload care. The study also highlights the unexplained clinical variation that exists between the three models of care in Australia.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort

Setting: 1 large teaching hospital

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women who gave birth between July 2009 and December 20102

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: Total (n=1,406) Intervention (n=482) Control (n=674)

Age Range: Not Specified

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PATIENT_CONSUMER, Educational Material, HEALTH_CARE_PROVIDER_PRACTICE, Midwifery, Labor Support

Intervention Description: A hospital in Belgium introduced "the cocoon," an alongside midwifery-led care unit. Low-risk pregnant women had the option of choosing the midwifery pathway or attending the traditional care pathway. Patients who chose the Cocoon pathway (62.2 percent nulliparous and 37.8% multiparous) had their pregnancy followed up almost exclusively by midwives, and their care was reviewed by a gynecologist at least twice during their pregnancy. The visits at the Cocoon lasted 45 minutes instead of the standard 20 minutes in the “classic” clinic. Women and their birth partners were encouraged to attend classes provided by midwives from the Cocoon and were given the opportunity to participate in a maximum of seven classes, six of which were group classes.

Intervention Results: In this setting, the cesarean birth rate was 10.3% compared with 16.0% in the traditional care pathway (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] 0.42 [95% CI 0.25-0.69]), the induction rate was 16.3% compared with 30.5% (0.46 [0.30-0.69]), the epidural analgesia rate was 24.9% compared with 59.1% (0.15 [0.09-0.22]), and the episiotomy rate was 6.8% compared with 14.5% (0.31 [0.17-0.56]). There was no increase in adverse neonatal outcomes. Intrapartum and postpartum transfer rates to the traditional pathway of care were 21.1% and 7.1%, respectively.

Conclusion: Women planning their births in the midwifery-led unit, the Cocoon, experienced fewer interventions with no increase in adverse neonatal outcomes. Our study gives initial support for the introduction of similar midwifery-led care pathways in other hospitals in Belgium.

Setting: Alongside midwifery‐led unit within a Belgian hospital

Population of Focus: Nulliparous and multiparous women with low-risk pregnancies