Roseveare M P, Bull M J
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1982 Mar 27;284(6320):958-60. doi: 10.1136/bmj.284.6320.958.
Two systems of general-practitioner obstetric care currently in use in England are compared. In one (Oxford) a large number of doctors, working with community midwives, have autonomous responsibility for the management of patients whose condition conforms with defined booking criteria. In the other (Dulwich) two practitioners, working with hospital midwives, operate a minimal selection policy, but all their patients are reviewed at 36 weeks' gestation by a specialist obstetrician. Despite the differing selection policies which created incongruities in the groups in respect of age, social class, and birthweight distribution, the outcomes in terms of mode of delivery showed no significant differences. The perinatal mortality rates were also similar and appeared to be better than those achieved nationally.
对目前在英国使用的两种全科医生产科护理体系进行了比较。在其中一种体系（牛津体系）中，大量医生与社区助产士合作，对病情符合既定预约标准的患者管理拥有自主责任。在另一种体系（达利奇体系）中，两名从业者与医院助产士合作，实行最低限度的筛选政策，但他们所有的患者在妊娠36周时都由一名产科专家进行检查。尽管不同的筛选政策导致两组在年龄、社会阶层和出生体重分布方面存在不一致，但分娩方式的结果并无显著差异。围产期死亡率也相似，而且似乎优于全国平均水平。
