Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29037175›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2017

A ten-year study of midwife-led care at an Austrian tertiary care center: a retrospective analysis with special consideration of perineal trauma.

Barbara Bodner-Adler, Oliver Kimberger, Julia Griebaum, Peter Husslein, Klaus Bodner

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Frontiers in psychology · 2020
    Article
  13. Utility of the 5-Minute Apgar Score as a Research Endpoint.American journal of epidemiology · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Barbara Bodner-AdlerDepartment of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. Barbara.Bodner-Adler@meduniwien.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2120-5550
Oliver KimbergerDepartment of Anesthesiology, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria.
Julia GriebaumDepartment of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Peter HussleinDepartment of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Klaus BodnerDepartment of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Medical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn contrast to other countries, Austria rarely offers alternative models to medical led-care. In an attempt to improve the facilities, a midwife-led care service was incorporated within the Department of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine. The aim of the present study was to analyze the maternal and neonatal outcomes of this approach.

methodsOver a 10-years period, a total of 2123 low-risk women receiving midwife-led care were studied. Among these women, 148 required obstetric referral. Age- and parity matched low-risk women with spontaneous vaginal birth overseen by an obstetrician-led team were used as controls to ensure comparability of data.

resultsMidwife-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%).

conclusionsThe 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.

Indexed as

Practice Patterns, Nurses'AdultAustriaDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMidwiferyObstetric Labor ComplicationsPerinatal CarePerineumPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeRetrospective StudiesTertiary Care CentersTime FactorsDoctor-led careLow-risk maternityMidwife-led carePerineal trauma

Identifiers

PMID29037175
PMCPMC5644072
OpenAlexW2765691698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.