• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

与打算在医院分娩的低产科风险女性相比,打算在家分娩的女性围产期或新生儿死亡率:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

Perinatal or neonatal mortality among women who intend at the onset of labour to give birth at home compared to women of low obstetrical risk who intend to give birth in hospital: A systematic review and meta-analyses.

作者信息

Hutton Eileen K, Reitsma Angela, Simioni Julia, Brunton Ginny, Kaufman Karyn

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Midwifery Education Program, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

EClinicalMedicine. 2019 Jul 25;14:59-70. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2019.07.005. eCollection 2019 Sep.

DOI:10.1016/j.eclinm.2019.07.005
PMID:31709403
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6833447/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

More women are choosing to birth at home in well-resourced countries. Concerns persist that out-of-hospital birth contributes to higher perinatal and neonatal mortality. This systematic review and meta-analyses determines if risk of fetal or neonatal loss differs among low-risk women who begin labour intending to give birth at home compared to low-risk women intending to give birth in hospital.

METHODS

In April 2018 we searched five databases from 1990 onward and used R to obtain pooled estimates of effect. We stratified by study design, study settings and parity. The primary outcome is any perinatal or neonatal death after the onset of labour. The study protocol is peer-reviewed, published and registered (PROSPERO No.CRD42013004046).

FINDINGS

We identified 14 studies eligible for meta-analysis including ~ 500,000 intended home births. Among nulliparous women intending a home birth in settings where midwives attending home birth are well-integrated in health services, the odds ratio (OR) of perinatal or neonatal mortality compared to those intending hospital birth was 1.07 (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.65); and in less integrated settings 3.17 (95% CI, 0.73 to 13.76). Among multiparous women intending a home birth in well-integrated settings, the estimated OR compared to those intending a hospital birth was 1.08 (95% CI, 0.84 to 1.38); and in less integrated settings was 1.58 (95% CI, 0.50 to 5.03).

INTERPRETATION

The risk of perinatal or neonatal mortality was not different when birth was intended at home or in hospital.

FUNDING

Partial funding: Association of Ontario Midwives open peer reviewed grant.

RESEARCH IN CONTEXT

Although there is increasing acceptance for intended home birth as a choice for birthing women, controversy about its safety persists. The varying responses of obstetrical societies to intended home birth provide evidence of contrasting views. A Cochrane review of randomised controlled trials addressing this topic included one small trial and noted that in the absence of adequately sized randomised controlled trials on the topic of intended home compared to intended hospital birth, a peer reviewed protocol be published to guide a systematic review and meta-analysis including observational studies. Reviews to date have been limited by design or methodological issues and none has used a protocol published a priori. Individual studies are underpowered to detect small but potentially important differences in rare outcomes. This study uses a published peer-reviewed protocol and is the largest and most comprehensive meta-analysis comparing outcomes of intended home and hospital birth. We take study design, parity and jurisdictional support for home birth into account. Our study provides much needed information to policy makers, care providers and women and families when planning for birth. Women who are low risk and who intend to give birth at home do not appear to have a different risk of fetal or neonatal loss compared to a population of similarly low risk women intending to give birth in hospital.

摘要

背景

在资源丰富的国家,越来越多的女性选择在家分娩。人们一直担心院外分娩会导致围产期和新生儿死亡率升高。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在确定,与打算在医院分娩的低风险女性相比,打算在家分娩的低风险女性发生胎儿或新生儿死亡的风险是否存在差异。

方法

2018年4月,我们检索了1990年以来的五个数据库,并使用R软件获得效应的合并估计值。我们按研究设计、研究地点和产次进行分层。主要结局是分娩开始后的任何围产期或新生儿死亡。该研究方案已通过同行评审、发表并注册(PROSPERO编号:CRD42013004046)。

结果

我们确定了14项符合荟萃分析条件的研究,其中包括约50万例计划在家分娩的案例。在助产士参与家庭分娩且与卫生服务充分整合的地区,打算在家分娩的初产妇发生围产期或新生儿死亡的比值比(OR)为1.07(95%置信区间[CI],0.70至1.65);在整合程度较低的地区,该比值比为3.17(95%CI,0.73至13.76)。在助产士参与家庭分娩且与卫生服务充分整合的地区,打算在家分娩的经产妇与打算在医院分娩的经产妇相比,估计的OR为1.08(95%CI,0.84至1.38);在整合程度较低的地区,该比值比为1.58(95%CI,0.50至5.03)。

解读

计划在家分娩或在医院分娩时,围产期或新生儿死亡风险并无差异。

资金来源

部分资金:安大略省助产士协会开放同行评审资助。

研究背景

尽管越来越多的人接受在家分娩作为产妇的一种选择,但关于其安全性的争议依然存在。产科协会对在家分娩的不同反应证明了观点的差异。一项关于该主题的Cochrane随机对照试验综述包括一项小型试验,并指出在缺乏关于计划在家分娩与计划在医院分娩这一主题的足够大规模随机对照试验的情况下,应发表同行评审方案以指导包括观察性研究在内的系统评价和荟萃分析。迄今为止的综述受到设计或方法学问题的限制,且均未使用事先发表的方案。个别研究的样本量不足以检测罕见结局中虽小但可能重要的差异。本研究使用了已发表的同行评审方案,是比较计划在家分娩和在医院分娩结局的最大规模、最全面的荟萃分析。我们考虑了研究设计、产次和家庭分娩的辖区支持情况。我们的研究为政策制定者、医疗服务提供者以及计划分娩的女性和家庭提供了急需的信息。与打算在医院分娩的低风险女性群体相比,打算在家分娩的低风险女性发生胎儿或新生儿死亡的风险似乎并无差异。

相似文献

1
Perinatal or neonatal mortality among women who intend at the onset of labour to give birth at home compared to women of low obstetrical risk who intend to give birth in hospital: A systematic review and meta-analyses.与打算在医院分娩的低产科风险女性相比,打算在家分娩的女性围产期或新生儿死亡率:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
EClinicalMedicine. 2019 Jul 25;14:59-70. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2019.07.005. eCollection 2019 Sep.
2
Maternal outcomes and birth interventions among women who begin labour intending to give birth at home compared to women of low obstetrical risk who intend to give birth in hospital: A systematic review and meta-analyses.与打算在医院分娩的低产科风险女性相比,打算在家分娩的女性的孕产妇结局和分娩干预措施:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
EClinicalMedicine. 2020 Apr 5;21:100319. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100319. eCollection 2020 Apr.
3
Protocol: systematic review and meta-analyses of birth outcomes for women who intend at the onset of labour to give birth at home compared to women of low obstetrical risk who intend to give birth in hospital.方案:对打算在分娩开始时在家分娩的女性与低产科风险且打算在医院分娩的女性的分娩结局进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
Syst Rev. 2014 May 29;3:55. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-55.
4
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
5
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
6
7
Assessment and support during early labour for improving birth outcomes.分娩早期的评估与支持以改善分娩结局
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 20;4(4):CD011516. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011516.pub2.
8
Immersion in water during labour and birth.分娩过程中浸泡在水中。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 16;5(5):CD000111. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000111.pub4.
9
Induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks: A systematic review and an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised trials.41 周引产或 42 周期待管理:随机试验的系统评价和个体参与者数据荟萃分析。
PLoS Med. 2020 Dec 8;17(12):e1003436. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003436. eCollection 2020 Dec.
10
Perinatal outcomes of women intending to give birth in birth centers in Australia.澳大利亚分娩中心孕妇的围产儿结局。
Birth. 2010 Mar;37(1):28-36. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2009.00375.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Perinatal outcomes following nonadherence to guideline-based screening for gestational diabetes: A population-based cohort study.未遵循基于指南的妊娠期糖尿病筛查的围产期结局:一项基于人群的队列研究。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2025 May;104(5):839-849. doi: 10.1111/aogs.15098. Epub 2025 Mar 17.
2
Twin home birth: Outcomes of 100 sets of twins in the care of a single practitioner.双胞胎家庭分娩:由一名从业者护理的100对双胞胎的结局。
PLoS One. 2024 Dec 11;19(12):e0313941. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313941. eCollection 2024.
3
The relationship between ethnicity and place of birth in England: a mixed-methods study.

本文引用的文献

1
Maternal and perinatal outcomes by planned place of birth among women with low-risk pregnancies in high-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.高收入国家低风险妊娠女性的计划分娩地点与孕产妇及围产期结局:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Midwifery. 2018 Jul;62:240-255. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2018.03.024. Epub 2018 Apr 3.
2
Home birth integration into the health care systems of eleven international jurisdictions.将家庭分娩纳入11个国际司法管辖区的医疗保健系统。
Birth. 2018 Sep;45(3):311-321. doi: 10.1111/birt.12339. Epub 2018 Feb 13.
3
Differences in optimality index between planned place of birth in a birth centre and alternative planned places of birth, a nationwide prospective cohort study in The Netherlands: results of the Dutch Birth Centre Study.
英格兰的种族和出生地之间的关系:一项混合方法研究。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024 Nov 27;24(1):798. doi: 10.1186/s12884-024-06977-z.
4
Social support network of Brazilian Amazonian women to subsidise the decision-making power of planned home birth: a qualitative study.巴西亚马孙地区女性的社会支持网络,以补充计划家庭分娩的决策权:一项定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2024 Nov 21;14(11):e080662. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080662.
5
Planned Home Births in the United States Have Outcomes Comparable to Planned Birth Center Births for Low-Risk Birthing Individuals.美国的计划家庭分娩在低风险分娩个体的分娩中心分娩结果相当。
Med Care. 2024 Dec 1;62(12):820-829. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000002074. Epub 2024 Nov 8.
6
Cost minimisation analyses of birth care in low-risk women in Norway: a comparison between planned home birth and birth in a standard obstetric unit.挪威低危产妇分娩护理成本最小化分析:计划家庭分娩与标准产科单位分娩的比较。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Sep 30;24(1):1150. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11631-7.
7
Outcomes associated with planned place of birth among low-risk pregnancies in Ontario, Canada (2012-2021): A protocol for a population-based propensity score weighted cohort study.加拿大安大略省低危妊娠计划分娩结局研究(2012-2021 年):基于人群的倾向评分加权队列研究方案。
PLoS One. 2024 May 13;19(5):e0302489. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302489. eCollection 2024.
8
Exploring Women's Reasons for Choosing Home Birth with the Help of Their Untrained Family Members: A Qualitative Research.探究女性在未经训练的家庭成员帮助下选择家庭分娩的原因:一项定性研究。
Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2023 Apr;11(2):72-84. doi: 10.30476/IJCBNM.2023.97491.2186.
9
Planned hospital birth compared with planned home birth for pregnant women at low risk of complications.计划在医院分娩与计划在家分娩对低风险并发症孕妇的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Mar 8;3(3):CD000352. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000352.pub3.
10
A true choice of place of birth? Swiss women's access to birth hospitals and birth centers.真正的分娩地点选择?瑞士妇女获得分娩医院和分娩中心的途径。
PLoS One. 2022 Jul 6;17(7):e0270834. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0270834. eCollection 2022.
荷兰全国性前瞻性队列研究:出生中心计划分娩地点与其他计划分娩地点的最优性指数差异:荷兰出生中心研究结果
BMJ Open. 2017 Nov 16;7(11):e016958. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016958.
4
Planned home compared with planned hospital births: mode of delivery and Perinatal mortality rates, an observational study.计划在家分娩与计划在医院分娩的比较:分娩方式和围产期死亡率,一项观察性研究。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Jun 8;17(1):177. doi: 10.1186/s12884-017-1348-y.
5
Effect of planned place of birth on obstetric interventions and maternal outcomes among low-risk women: a cohort study in the Netherlands.计划分娩地点对低风险女性产科干预措施及孕产妇结局的影响:荷兰的一项队列研究
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016 Oct 28;16(1):329. doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-1130-6.
6
The Safety of Home Birth.家庭分娩的安全性。
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2016 Apr;38(4):331-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jogc.2016.02.005.
7
Planned Out-of-Hospital Birth and Birth Outcomes.计划中的院外分娩与分娩结局
N Engl J Med. 2015 Dec 31;373(27):2642-53. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1501738.
8
Outcomes associated with planned place of birth among women with low-risk pregnancies.低风险妊娠女性计划分娩地点相关的结局
CMAJ. 2016 Mar 15;188(5):E80-E90. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.150564. Epub 2015 Dec 22.
9
Outcome of planned home and hospital births among low-risk women in Iceland in 2005-2009: a retrospective cohort study.2005 - 2009年冰岛低风险女性计划在家分娩和医院分娩的结局:一项回顾性队列研究
Birth. 2015 Mar;42(1):16-26. doi: 10.1111/birt.12150. Epub 2015 Jan 23.
10
Perinatal mortality and morbidity up to 28 days after birth among 743 070 low-risk planned home and hospital births: a cohort study based on three merged national perinatal databases.743070例低风险计划在家分娩和医院分娩的围产期死亡率及出生后28天内的发病率:一项基于三个合并的国家围产期数据库的队列研究
BJOG. 2015 Apr;122(5):720-8. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13084. Epub 2014 Sep 10.