Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34969368›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021

Model of care and chance of spontaneous vaginal birth: a prospective, multicenter matched-pair analysis from North Rhine-Westphalia.

Sophia L Tietjen, Marie-Therese Schmitz, Andrea Heep, Andreas Kocks, Lydia Gerzen, Matthias Schmid, Ulrich Gembruch, Waltraut M Merz

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

8 authors.

Sophia L TietjenDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany. s4sotiet@uni-bonn.de.
Marie-Therese SchmitzDepartment 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.
Andreas KocksDirectorate of Nursing, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Lydia GerzenDepartment 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.
Waltraut M MerzDepartment 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

backgroundAdvantages of midwife-led models of care have been reported; these include a higher vaginal birth rate and less interventions. In Germany, 98.4% of women are giving birth in obstetrician-led units. We compared the outcome of birth planned in alongside midwifery units (AMU) with a matched group of low-risk women who gave birth in obstetrician-led units.

methodsA prospective, controlled, multicenter study was conducted. Six of seven AMUs in North Rhine-Westphalia participated. Healthy women with a singleton term cephalic pregnancy booking for birth in AMU were eligible. For each woman in the study group a control was chosen who would have been eligible for birth in AMU but was booking for obstetrician-led care; matching for parity was performed. Mode of birth was chosen as primary outcome parameter. Secondary endpoints included a composite outcome of adverse outcome in the third stage and / or postpartum hemorrhage; higher-order obstetric lacerations; and for the neonate, a composite outcome (5-min Apgar < 7 and / or umbilical cord arterial pH < 7.10 and / or transfer to specialist neonatal care). Statistical analysis was by intention to treat. A non-inferiority analysis was performed.

resultsFive hundred eighty-nine case-control pairs were recruited, final analysis was performed with 391 case-control pairs. Nulliparous women constituted 56.0% of cases. For the primary endpoint vaginal birth superiority was established for the study group (5.66%, 95%-CI 0.42% - 10.88%). For the composite newborn outcome (1.28%, 95%-CI -1.86% - -4.47%) and for higher-order obstetric lacerations (2.33%, 95%-CI -0.45% - 5.37%) non-inferiority was established. Non-inferiority was not present for the composite maternal outcome (-1.56%, 95%-CI -6.69% - 3.57%). The epidural anesthesia rate was lower (22.9% vs. 41.1%), and the length of hospital stay was shorter in the study group (p < 0.001 for both). Transfer to obstetrician-led care occurred in 51.2% of cases, with a strong association to parity (p < 0.001). Request for regional anesthesia was the most common cause for transfer (47.1%).

conclusionOur comparison between care in AMU and obstetrician-led care with respect to mode of birth and other outcomes confirmed the superiority of this model of care for low-risk women. This pertains to AMU where admission and transfer criteria are in place and adhered to.

Indexed as

MidwiferyParturitionPerinatal CareCase-Control StudiesDelivery, ObstetricDelivery RoomsFemaleGermanyHumansInfant, NewbornLength of StayMatched-Pair AnalysisObstetric Labor ComplicationsParityPatient TransferPregnancyCase-control studiesDelivery roomsMidwiferyObstetricsParturitionPregnancyProspective studies

Identifiers

PMID34969368
PMCPMC8719397

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.