Find Established Evidence

Displaying records 1 through 10 (10 total).

Campbell DA, Lake MF, Falk M, Backstrand JR. A randomized control trial of continuous support in labor by a lay doula. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2006;35(4):456-464. doi:10.1111/j.1552-6909.2006.00067.x

Link: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.562.952&rep=rep1&type=pdf

NPM: 2: Low-Risk Cesarean Deliveries
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Labor Support, PROVIDER/PRACTICE

Intervention Results:

Rate of CS higher in doula vs. control group (18.9% vs. 17.9%, p>0.05)

Frigoletto FD, Lieberman E, Lang JM, et al. A clinical trial of active management of labor. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(12):745-750. doi:10.1056/nejm199509213331201

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7643880

NPM: 2: Low-Risk Cesarean Deliveries
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 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)

Gagnon AJ, Waghorn K. One-to-one nurse labor support of nulliparous women stimulated with oxytocin. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 1999;28(4):371-376.

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10438081

NPM: 2: Low-Risk Cesarean Deliveries
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Labor Support, PROVIDER/PRACTICE

Intervention Results:

Rate of CS lower in nursing support group vs. control group (13.9% vs. 16.2%; RR=0.86, 95% CI: 0.54–1.36)

Gottvall K, Waldenström U, Tingstig C, Grunewald C. In-hospital birth center with the same medical guidelines as standard care: a comparative study of obstetric interventions and outcomes. Birth. 2011;38(2):120-128.

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21599734

NPM: 2: Low-Risk Cesarean Deliveries
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Continuity of Care (Caseload), Labor Support, State — Place of Birth, POPULATION-BASED SYSTEMS, STATE, Place of Birth

Intervention Results:

Rate of CS lower in MBCC group vs. standard care group (18.9% vs. 25.6%; OR=0.61, 95% CI: 0.52–0.72); adjusted for maternal age, country of birth, education, income, smoking before pregnancy, elective cesarean section, and gestational age

Harris SJ, Janssen PA, Saxell L, Carty EA, MacRae GS, Petersen KL. Effect of a collaborative interdisciplinary maternity care program on perinatal outcomes. CMAJ. 2012;184(17):1885- 1892. doi:10.1503/cmaj.111753

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22966055

NPM: 2: Low-Risk Cesarean Deliveries
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

Intervention Results:

Rate of CS lower in SCBP group vs. standard care group (24.1% vs. 32.4%; RR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.72–0.91)

Hodnett ED, Lowe NK, Hannah ME, et al. Effectiveness of nurses as providers of birth labor support in North American hospitals: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;288(11):1373- 1381.

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12234231

NPM: 2: Low-Risk Cesarean Deliveries
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Labor Support

Intervention Results:

Rate of CS higher in continuous labor support group vs. usual care group (19.7% vs. 19.5%; p>0.05)

Kennell J, Klaus M, McGrath S, Robertson S, Hinkley C. Continuous emotional support during labor in a US hospital. a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1991;265(17):2197-2201.

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2013951

NPM: 2: Low-Risk Cesarean Deliveries
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Labor Support

Intervention Results:

Rate of CS lower in supported group vs. observed group (8% vs. 13%; p<0.05)
Rate of CS lower in supported group vs. control group (8% vs. 18%; p<0.05)

McGrath SK, Kennell JH. A randomized controlled trial of continuous labor support for middle-class couples: effect on cesarean delivery rates. Birth. 2008;35(2);92-97. doi:10.1111/j.1523-536X.2008.00221.x

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18507579

NPM: 2: Low-Risk Cesarean Deliveries
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Labor Support

Intervention Results:

Rate of CS lower in doula group vs. control group (13.4% vs. 25.0%; p<0.05)

Tracy SK, Welsh A, Hall B, Hartz D, Lainchbury A, Bisits A, Tracy MB. Caseload midwifery compared to standard or private obstetric care for first time mothers in a public teaching hospital in Australia: a cross sectional study of cost and birth outcomes. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:46. doi:10.1186/1471-2393-14-46

Link: https://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2393-14-46

Intervention Results:

Rate of CS lower in MGP group (15.4%) vs. standard hospital care (19.5%) vs. private obstetric care (17.6%); (p>0.05)

Kozhimannil, K. B., Hardeman, R. R., Alarid‐Escudero, F., Vogelsang, C. A., Blauer‐Peterson, C., & Howell, E. A. (2016). Modeling the cost‐effectiveness of doula care associated with reductions in preterm birth and cesarean delivery. Birth, 43(1), 20-27.

Link: https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.12218

NPM: 2: Low-Risk Cesarean Deliveries
Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): PROVIDER/PRACTICE, Labor Support

Intervention Results:

Women who received doula support had lower preterm and cesarean birth rates than Medicaid beneficiaries regionally (4.7 vs 6.3%, and 20.4 vs 34.2%). After adjustment for covariates, women with doula care had 22 percent lower odds of preterm birth (AOR 0.77 [95% CI 0.61–0.96]). Cost‐effectiveness analyses indicate potential savings associated with doula support reimbursed at an average of $986 (ranging from $929 to $1,047 across states).