ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2024
Severe adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes according to the planned birth setting being midwife-led birth centers or obstetric-led units.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Planned Community Birth and Birth Outcomes.JAMA pediatrics · 2026Article
- Severe adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes according to the planned birth setting being midwife-led birth centers or obstetric-led units.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe establishment of midwife-led birth centers (MLBCs) is still being debated. The study aimed to compare severe adverse outcomes and mode of birth in low-risk women according to their birth planned in MLBCs or in obstetric-led units (OUs) in France. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe used nationwide databases to select low-risk women at the start of care in labor in MLBCs (n = 1294) and in OUs (n = 5985). Using multilevel logistic regression, we compared severe adverse maternal and neonatal morbidity as a composite outcome and as individual outcomes. These include severe postpartum hemorrhage (≥1000 mL of blood loss), obstetrical anal sphincter injury, maternal admission to an intensive care unit, maternal death, a 5-minute Apgar score <7, neonatal resuscitation at birth, neonatal admission to an intensive care unit, and stillbirth or neonatal death. We also studied the mode of birth and the role of prophylactic administration of oxytocin at birth in the association between birth settings and severe postpartum hemorrhage.
resultsSevere adverse maternal and neonatal outcome indicated a slightly higher rate in women in MLBCs compared to OUs according to unadjusted analyses (4.6% in MLBCs vs. 3.4% in OUs; cOR 1.36; 95%CI [1.01-1.83]), but the difference was not significant between birth settings after adjustment (aOR 1.37 [0.92-2.05]). Severe neonatal morbidity alone was not different (1.7% vs. 1.6%; aOR 1.17 [0.55-2.47]). However, severe maternal morbidity was significantly higher in MLBCs than in OUs (3.0% vs. 1.9%; aOR 1.61 [1.09-2.39]), mainly explained by higher risks of severe postpartum hemorrhage (2.4 vs. 1.1%; aOR 2.37 [1.29-4.36]), with 2 out of 5 in MLBCs partly explained by the low use of prophylactic oxytocin. Cesarean and operative vaginal births were significantly decreased in women with a birth planned in MLBCs.
conclusionsIn France, 3 to 4% of low-risk women experienced a severe adverse maternal or neonatal outcome regardless of the planned birth setting. Results were favorable for MLBCs in terms of mode of birth but not for severe postpartum hemorrhage, which could be partly addressed by revising practices of prophylactic administration of oxytocin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.