Dataset Information

Mode of birth and medical interventions among women at low risk of complications: A cross-national comparison of birth settings in England and the Netherlands.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To compare mode of birth and medical interventions between broadly equivalent birth settings in England and the Netherlands.

Methods

Data were combined from the Birthplace study in England (from April 2008 to April 2010) and the National Perinatal Register in the Netherlands (2009). Low risk women in England planning birth at home (16,470) or in freestanding midwifery units (11,133) were compared with Dutch women with planned home births (40,468). Low risk English women with births planned in alongside midwifery units (16,418) or obstetric units (19,096) were compared with Dutch women with planned midwife-led hospital births (37,887).

Results

CS rates varied across planned births settings from 6.5% to 15.5% among nulliparous and 0.6% to 5.1% among multiparous women. CS rates were higher among low risk nulliparous and multiparous English women planning obstetric unit births compared to Dutch women planning midwife-led hospital births (adjusted (adj) OR 1.89 (95% CI 1.64 to 2.18) and 3.66 (2.90 to 4.63) respectively). Instrumental vaginal birth rates varied from 10.7% to 22.5% for nulliparous and from 0.9% to 5.7% for multiparous women. Rates were lower in the English comparison groups apart from planned births in obstetric units. Transfer, augmentation and episiotomy rates were much lower in England compared to the Netherlands for all midwife-led groups. In most comparisons, epidural rates were higher among English groups.

Conclusions

When considering maternal outcomes, findings confirm advantages of giving birth in midwife-led settings for low risk women. Further research is needed into strategies to decrease rates of medical intervention in obstetric units in England and to reduce rates of avoidable transfer, episiotomy and augmentation of labour in the Netherlands.

SUBMITTER: de Jonge A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5531544 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mode of birth and medical interventions among women at low risk of complications: A cross-national comparison of birth settings in England and the Netherlands.

de Jonge Ank A Peters Lilian L Geerts Caroline C CC van Roosmalen Jos J M JJM Twisk Jos W R JWR Brocklehurst Peter P Hollowell Jennifer J

PloS one 20170727 7

<h4>Objectives</h4>To compare mode of birth and medical interventions between broadly equivalent birth settings in England and the Netherlands.<h4>Methods</h4>Data were combined from the Birthplace study in England (from April 2008 to April 2010) and the National Perinatal Register in the Netherlands (2009). Low risk women in England planning birth at home (16,470) or in freestanding midwifery units (11,133) were compared with Dutch women with planned home births (40,468). Low risk English women ...[more]

PMID: 28749944

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWomen experience disrespect and abuse during labour and birth all over the world. While the gravity of many forms of disrespect and abuse is evident, some of its more subtle forms may not always be experienced as upsetting by women. This study examines (1) how often women experience disrespect and abuse during labour and birth in the Netherlands and (2) how frequently they consider such experiences upsetting. We also examine (3) which respondent characteristics (age, ethnicity, educational level and parity) are associated with those experiences of disrespect and abuse that are upsetting, and (4) the associations between upsetting experiences of disrespect and abuse, and women's labour and birth experiences.MethodsWomen who gave birth up to five years ago were recruited through social media platforms to participate in an online survey. The survey consisted of 37 questions about experiences of disrespect and abuse divided into seven categories, dichotomised in (1) not experienced, or experienced but not considered upsetting (2) experienced and considered upsetting. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to examine associated characteristics with upsetting experiences of disrespect and abuse. A Chi-square test was used to investigate the association between upsetting experiences of disrespect and abuse and overall birth experience.Results13,359 respondents started the questionnaire, of whom 12,239 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Disrespect and abuse in terms of 'lack of choices' (39.8%) was reported most, followed by 'lack of communication' (29.9%), 'lack of support' (21.3%) and 'harsh or rough treatment/physical violence' (21.1%). Large variation was found in how frequently certain types of disrespect and abuse were considered upsetting, with 36.3% of women experiencing at least one situation of disrespect and abuse as upsetting. Primiparity and a migrant background were risk factors for experiencing upsetting disrespect and abuse in all categories. Experiencing more categories of upsetting disrespect and abuse was found to be associated with a more negative birth experience.ConclusionsDisrespectful and abusive experiences during labour and birth are reported regularly in the Netherlands, and are often (but not always) experienced as upsetting. This emphasizes an urgent need to implement respectful maternity care, even in high income countries.

Project description:ObjectivesTo estimate the cost effectiveness of alternative planned places of birth.DesignEconomic evaluation with individual level data from the Birthplace national prospective cohort study.Setting142 of 147 trusts providing home birth services, 53 of 56 freestanding midwifery units, 43 of 51 alongside midwifery units, and a random sample of 36 of 180 obstetric units, stratified by unit size and geographical region, in England, over varying periods of time within the study period 1 April 2008 to 30 April 2010.Participants64,538 women at low risk of complications before the onset of labour.InterventionsPlanned birth in four alternative settings: at home, in freestanding midwifery units, in alongside midwifery units, and in obstetric units.Main outcome measuresIncremental cost per adverse perinatal outcome avoided, adverse maternal morbidity avoided, and additional normal birth. The non-parametric bootstrap method was used to generate net monetary benefits and construct cost effectiveness acceptability curves at alternative thresholds for cost effectiveness.ResultsThe total unadjusted mean costs were £1066, £1435, £1461, and £1631 for births planned at home, in freestanding midwifery units, in alongside midwifery units, and in obstetric units, respectively (equivalent to about €1274, $1701; €1715, $2290; €1747, $2332; and €1950, $2603). Overall, and for multiparous women, planned birth at home generated the greatest mean net benefit with a 100% probability of being the optimal setting across all thresholds of cost effectiveness when perinatal outcomes were considered. There was, however, an increased incidence of adverse perinatal outcome associated with planned birth at home in nulliparous low risk women, resulting in the probability of it being the most cost effective option at a cost effectiveness threshold of £20 000 declining to 0.63. With regards to maternal outcomes in nulliparous and multiparous women, planned birth at home generated the greatest mean net benefit with a 100% probability of being the optimal setting across all thresholds of cost effectiveness.ConclusionsFor multiparous women at low risk of complications, planned birth at home was the most cost effective option. For nulliparous low risk women, planned birth at home is still likely to be the most cost effective option but is associated with an increase in adverse perinatal outcomes.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare perinatal outcomes, maternal outcomes, and interventions in labour by planned place of birth at the start of care in labour for women with low risk pregnancies.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingEngland: all NHS trusts providing intrapartum care at home, all freestanding midwifery units, all alongside midwifery units (midwife led units on a hospital site with an obstetric unit), and a stratified random sample of obstetric units.Participants64,538 eligible women with a singleton, term (≥37 weeks gestation), and "booked" pregnancy who gave birth between April 2008 and April 2010. Planned caesarean sections and caesarean sections before the onset of labour and unplanned home births were excluded.Main outcome measureA composite primary outcome of perinatal mortality and intrapartum related neonatal morbidities (stillbirth after start of care in labour, early neonatal death, neonatal encephalopathy, meconium aspiration syndrome, brachial plexus injury, fractured humerus, or fractured clavicle) was used to compare outcomes by planned place of birth at the start of care in labour (at home, freestanding midwifery units, alongside midwifery units, and obstetric units).ResultsThere were 250 primary outcome events and an overall weighted incidence of 4.3 per 1000 births (95% CI 3.3 to 5.5). Overall, there were no significant differences in the adjusted odds of the primary outcome for any of the non-obstetric unit settings compared with obstetric units. For nulliparous women, the odds of the primary outcome were higher for planned home births (adjusted odds ratio 1.75, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.86) but not for either midwifery unit setting. For multiparous women, there were no significant differences in the incidence of the primary outcome by planned place of birth. Interventions during labour were substantially lower in all non-obstetric unit settings. Transfers from non-obstetric unit settings were more frequent for nulliparous women (36% to 45%) than for multiparous women (9% to 13%).ConclusionsThe results support a policy of offering healthy women with low risk pregnancies a choice of birth setting. Women planning birth in a midwifery unit and multiparous women planning birth at home experience fewer interventions than those planning birth in an obstetric unit with no impact on perinatal outcomes. For nulliparous women, planned home births also have fewer interventions but have poorer perinatal outcomes.

Dataset Information

Mode of birth and medical interventions among women at low risk of complications: A cross-national comparison of birth settings in England and the Netherlands.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Mode of birth and medical interventions among women at low risk of complications: A cross-national comparison of birth settings in England and the Netherlands.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets