Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32894082›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020

Women's characteristics and care outcomes of caseload midwifery care in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study.

Pien Offerhaus, Suze Jans, Chantal Hukkelhoven, Raymond de Vries, Marianne Nieuwenhuijze

Abstract readComparative Study
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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Pien OfferhausResearch Centre for Midwifery Science, Midwifery Education and Studies Maastricht, ZUYD University, Universiteitssingel 60, 6229 ER, Maastricht, the Netherlands. p.offerhaus@av-m.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3772-6158
Suze JansTNO, Department of Child Health, Schipholweg 77, 2316 ZL, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Chantal HukkelhovenPerined, Mercatorlaan 1200, 3528 BL, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Raymond de VriesResearch Centre for Midwifery Science, Midwifery Education and Studies Maastricht, ZUYD University, Universiteitssingel 60, 6229 ER, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Marianne NieuwenhuijzeResearch Centre for Midwifery Science, Midwifery Education and Studies Maastricht, ZUYD University, Universiteitssingel 60, 6229 ER, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe maternity care system in the Netherlands is well known for its support of community-based midwifery. However, regular midwifery practices typically do not offer caseload midwifery care - one-to-one continuity of care throughout pregnancy and birth. Because we know very little about the outcomes for women receiving caseload care in the Netherlands, we compared caseload care with regular midwife-led care, looking at maternal and perinatal outcomes, including antenatal and intrapartum referrals to secondary (i.e., obstetrician-led) care.

methodsWe selected 657 women in caseload care and 1954 matched controls (women in regular midwife-led care) from all women registered in the Dutch Perinatal Registry (Perined) who gave birth in 2015. To be eligible for selection the women had to be in midwife-led antenatal care beyond 28 gestational weeks. Each woman in caseload care was matched with three women in regular midwife-led care, using parity, maternal age, background (Dutch or non-Dutch) and region. These two cohorts were compared for referral rates, mode of birth, and other maternal and perinatal outcomes.

resultsIn caseload midwifery care, 46.9% of women were referred to obstetrician-led care (24.2% antenatally and 22.8% in the intrapartum period). In the matched cohort, 65.7% were referred (37.4% antenatally and 28.3% in the intrapartum period). In caseload care, 84.0% experienced a spontaneous vaginal birth versus 77.0% in regular midwife-led care. These patterns were observed for both nulliparous and multiparous women. Women in caseload care had fewer inductions of labour (13.2% vs 21.0%), more homebirths (39.4% vs 16.1%) and less perineal damage (intact perineum: 41.3% vs 28.2%). The incidence of perinatal mortality and a low Apgar score was low in both groups.

conclusionsWe found that when compared to regular midwife-led care, caseload midwifery care in the Netherlands is associated with a lower referral rate to obstetrician-led care - both antenatally and in the intrapartum period - and a higher spontaneous vaginal birth rate, with similar perinatal safety. The challenge is to include this model as part of the current effort to improve the quality of Dutch maternity care, making caseload care available and affordable for more women.

Indexed as

AdultCohort StudiesDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHumansMaternal Health ServicesMidwiferyNetherlandsPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultBirth outcomesCaseload midwiferyContinuity of carePrimary health care

Identifiers

PMID32894082
PMCPMC7487921

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.