Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32375692›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020

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

Waltraut M Merz, Laura Tascon-Padron, Marie-Therese Puth, Andrea Heep, Sophia L Tietjen, Matthias Schmid, Ulrich Gembruch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Woman-Centered Care: Standardized Outcomes Measure.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors.

Waltraut M MerzDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Laura Tascon-PadronDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany. laura.tascon@ukbonn.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9941-9001
Marie-Therese PuthDepartment of Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Andrea HeepDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Sophia L TietjenDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Matthias SchmidDepartment of Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Ulrich GembruchDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor 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.

methodsWe 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.

resultsSix 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.

conclusionCompared 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.

Indexed as

AdultBirth WeightCase-Control StudiesCohort StudiesDelivery, ObstetricDelivery RoomsEpisiotomyFemaleGermanyHumansInfant, NewbornLabor, ObstetricLacerationsMidwiferyObstetric Labor ComplicationsParityAlongside midwifery unitLow-risk pregnancyMaternal healthcare provisionMidwife-led careMode of birthObstetric interventionObstetric serviceTransfer rate

Identifiers

PMID32375692
PMCPMC7201515

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.