Suppr超能文献

对于低风险初产妇分娩,独立助产单元是产科单元的安全替代选择吗?一项匹配队列研究中按产次分析效应差异。

Are freestanding midwifery units a safe alternative to obstetric units for low-risk, primiparous childbirth? An analysis of effect differences by parity in a matched cohort study.

作者信息

Christensen Louise Fischer, Overgaard Charlotte

机构信息

Department of Health Science and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.

Department of Gynecology & Obstetrics, Aalborg University Hospital, Sdr. Skovvej 15, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark.

出版信息

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Jan 9;17(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-1208-1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Intrapartum complications and the use of obstetric interventions are more common in primiparous childbirth than in multiparous childbirth, leading to concern about out of hospital birth for primiparous women. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the effect of birthplace on perinatal and maternal morbidity and the use of obstetric interventions differed by parity among low-risk women intending to give birth in a freestanding midwifery unit or in an obstetric unit in the North Denmark Region.

METHODS

The study is a secondary analysis of data from a matched cohort study including 839 low-risk women intending birth in a freestanding midwifery unit (primary participants) and 839 low-risk women intending birth in an obstetric unit (individually matched control group). Analysis was by intention-to-treat. Conditional logistic regression analysis was applied to compute odds ratios and effect ratios with 95% confidence intervals for matched pairs stratified by parity.

RESULTS

On no outcome did the effect of birthplace differ significantly between primiparous and multiparous women. Compared with their counterparts intending birth in an obstetric unit, both primiparous and multiparous women intending birth in a freestanding midwifery unit were significantly more likely to have an uncomplicated, spontaneous birth with good outcomes for mother and infant and less likely to require caesarean section, instrumental delivery, augmented labour or epidural analgesia (although for caesarean section this trend did not attain statistical significance for multiparous women). Perinatal outcomes were comparable between the two birth settings irrespective of parity. Compared to multiparas, transfer rates were substantially higher for primiparas, but fell over time while rates for multiparas remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

Freestanding midwifery units appear to confer significant advantages over obstetric units to both primiparous and multiparous mothers, while their infants are equally safe in both settings. Our findings thus support the provision of care in freestanding midwifery units as an alternative to care in obstetric units for all low-risk women regardless of parity. In view of the global rise in caesarean section rates, we consider it an important finding that freestanding midwifery units show potential for reducing first-birth caesarean.

摘要

背景

与经产妇分娩相比,初产妇分娩时的产时并发症和产科干预措施的使用更为常见,这引发了对初产妇院外分娩的担忧。本研究的目的是确定在丹麦北部地区,打算在独立助产机构或产科病房分娩的低风险女性中,分娩地点对围产期和孕产妇发病率以及产科干预措施使用的影响是否因产次而异。

方法

本研究是对一项匹配队列研究的数据进行的二次分析,该研究包括839名打算在独立助产机构分娩的低风险女性(主要参与者)和839名打算在产科病房分娩的低风险女性(个体匹配对照组)。分析采用意向性分析。应用条件逻辑回归分析来计算比值比和效应比,并给出按产次分层的匹配对的95%置信区间。

结果

初产妇和经产妇在分娩地点对任何结局的影响上均无显著差异。与打算在产科病房分娩的女性相比,打算在独立助产机构分娩的初产妇和经产妇更有可能实现简单、自然的分娩,母婴结局良好,且剖宫产、器械助产、引产或硬膜外镇痛的可能性更小(尽管对于剖宫产,经产妇的这一趋势未达到统计学显著性)。无论产次如何,两种分娩环境下的围产期结局相当。与经产妇相比,初产妇的转诊率要高得多,但随着时间的推移有所下降,而经产妇的转诊率保持稳定。

结论

独立助产机构似乎比产科病房为初产妇和经产妇母亲都带来显著优势,同时她们的婴儿在两种环境下同样安全。因此,我们的研究结果支持为所有低风险女性提供独立助产机构的护理,作为产科病房护理的替代方案,而不考虑产次。鉴于全球剖宫产率的上升,我们认为独立助产机构显示出降低初产剖宫产率的潜力是一项重要发现。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4955/5223304/79f907fdb9f4/12884_2016_1208_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验