Walker Deborah S, Schmunk Susanne Brooks, Summers Lisa
College of Nursing, School of Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2004 Sep-Oct;49(5):443-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2004.03.010.
The number of midwife-attended births is increasing as reported on birth certificates in the United States. However, there is some evidence that births attended by certified nurse-midwives (CNMs) may not be accurately recorded. In this exploratory study, data on birth attendants for those clients giving birth during the study period were compared by using four sources: the client's hospital chart, the CNM birth log, hospital birth certificate records, and state vital statistics records. Researchers sought to determine the accuracy of birth attendant data as reflected in these four sources and whether other providers were listed as the birth attendant for actual CNM-attended births. During the study period, the CNM birth log showed that CNMs attended 97 vaginal births, whereas the client hospital charts for these same births noted 92 births as attended by CNMs (the other five were operative vaginal births). Hospital birth certificate and state vital statistics data during the study time period credited 88 and 82 of the client's births, respectively, to the CNMs. Exploration of the inaccurately reported birth attendant data, implications for practice, and recommendations for accurately recording birth certificate data are discussed.
正如美国出生证明上所报告的那样,由助产士接生的分娩数量正在增加。然而,有证据表明,由认证护士助产士(CNM)接生的分娩可能没有被准确记录。在这项探索性研究中,通过使用四个来源对研究期间分娩的客户的接生人员数据进行了比较:客户的医院病历、CNM的分娩记录、医院出生证明记录和州生命统计记录。研究人员试图确定这四个来源所反映的接生人员数据的准确性,以及在实际由CNM接生的分娩中,是否有其他提供者被列为接生人员。在研究期间,CNM的分娩记录显示,CNM接生了97例阴道分娩,而这些相同分娩的客户医院病历记录显示,有92例分娩由CNM接生(另外5例是阴道助产分娩)。在研究时间段内,医院出生证明和州生命统计数据分别将客户的88例和82例分娩记为由CNM接生。本文讨论了对接生人员数据报告不准确的情况进行探索、对实践的影响以及准确记录出生证明数据的建议。