• 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

一所大学附属独立分娩中心的发展历程与经验

Development and experience of a university-based, freestanding birthing center.

作者信息

Garite T J, Snell B J, Walker D L, Darrow V C

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California Irvine Birthing Center, USA.

出版信息

Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Sep;86(3):411-6. doi: 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00156-L.

DOI:10.1016/0029-7844(95)00156-L
PMID:7651653
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To describe our experience with a freestanding birthing center established in conjunction with a university medical center, and to determine the safety and effectiveness of such a program.

METHODS

The University of California Irvine Medical Center opened a freestanding birthing center 2 miles from the hospital. The unit provides prenatal, labor, delivery, postpartum and well-baby care 24 hours/day. All direct patient care is provided by certified nurse-midwives. Data were collected prospectively to provide a descriptive account and to evaluate maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality to determine the safety and efficacy of this approach.

RESULTS

During the first 20 months of operation, the University of California Irvine Birthing Center cared for 1830 patients. Approximately 90% were indigent, 85% were Hispanic, and 35% were nulliparas. Of the total patients, 12% were transferred antenatally for high-risk conditions and 19% were transferred intrapartum. The cesarean rate for all patients was 10% (6.5% for those whose intrapartum care began at the birthing center). The perinatal mortality rate was six per 1000. Neonatal morbidity rates, neonatal intensive care unit admissions, and maternal complications were not greater than expected.

CONCLUSION

The first 20 months of experience with a university-based, freestanding birthing center suggests that this alternative is safe for delivering obstetric and newborn care to low-risk patients.

摘要

目的

描述我们与一所大学医学中心联合设立的独立分娩中心的经验,并确定该项目的安全性和有效性。

方法

加利福尼亚大学欧文医学中心在距离医院2英里处开设了一家独立分娩中心。该科室提供每天24小时的产前、分娩、产后及新生儿护理服务。所有直接的患者护理均由认证的助产士提供。前瞻性收集数据以进行描述性记录,并评估孕产妇和围产期的发病率及死亡率,以确定这种方法的安全性和有效性。

结果

在运营的前20个月里,加利福尼亚大学欧文分娩中心照料了1830名患者。约90%为贫困患者,85%为西班牙裔,35%为初产妇。在所有患者中,12%因高危情况在产前转诊,19%在产时转诊。所有患者的剖宫产率为10%(在分娩中心开始产时护理的患者为6.5%)。围产期死亡率为每1000例中有6例。新生儿发病率、新生儿重症监护病房收治率及孕产妇并发症均未高于预期。

结论

基于大学的独立分娩中心的前20个月经验表明,这种方式对于为低风险患者提供产科和新生儿护理是安全的。

相似文献

1
Development and experience of a university-based, freestanding birthing center.一所大学附属独立分娩中心的发展历程与经验
Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Sep;86(3):411-6. doi: 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00156-L.
2
A free-standing low-risk maternity unit in the United Kingdom: does it have a role?英国一家独立的低风险产科病房:它有作用吗?
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004 Jun;24(4):360-6. doi: 10.1080/01443610410001685448.
3
Outcomes of the first midwife-led birth centre in Italy: 5 years' experience.意大利首个由助产士主导的分娩中心的成果:5年经验。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2007 Oct;276(4):333-7. doi: 10.1007/s00404-007-0358-9. Epub 2007 Apr 5.
4
OB-GYN Consultants and Sharp the BirthPlace: an exemplar of nurse-midwife and obstetrician interdependence and integration.妇产科顾问与夏普分娩中心:助产士与产科医生相互依存与整合的典范。
Adv Pract Nurs Q. 1995 Fall;1(2):40-8.
5
Reduction in very low birth weight deliveries and perinatal mortality in a specialized, multidisciplinary twin clinic.在一家专业的多学科双胎诊所中,极低出生体重儿分娩率和围产期死亡率的降低情况。
Obstet Gynecol. 1993 Mar;81(3):387-91.
6
An out-of-hospital birth center using university referral.
Obstet Gynecol. 1981 Dec;58(6):703-7.
7
A homestyle delivery program in a university hospital.大学医院的家庭式分娩项目。
J Fam Pract. 1979 Sep;9(3):407-14.
8
Child births in a modified midwife managed unit: selection and transfer according to intended place of delivery.改良助产士管理单元中的分娩:根据预期分娩地点进行选择和转诊
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2001 Mar;80(3):206-12.
9
Cost-effectiveness analysis: birth center vs. hospital care.成本效益分析:分娩中心与医院护理对比
Nurs Econ. 1995 Sep-Oct;13(5):299-308.
10
Do all hospitals need cesarean delivery capability? An outcomes study of maternity care in a rural hospital without on-site cesarean capability.所有医院都需要具备剖宫产能力吗?一项关于一家没有现场剖宫产能力的农村医院产科护理结局的研究。
J Fam Pract. 2002 Feb;51(2):129-34.

引用本文的文献

1
Progress in supercapacitors: roles of two dimensional nanotubular materials.超级电容器的进展:二维纳米管材料的作用
Nanoscale Adv. 2019 Oct 31;2(1):70-108. doi: 10.1039/c9na00307j. eCollection 2020 Jan 22.
2
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.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。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Jan 9;17(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-1208-1.
3
Physician-led, hospital-linked, birth care centers can decrease cesarean section rates without increasing rates of adverse events.
以医生为主导、与医院相联系的分娩护理中心可以在不增加不良事件发生率的情况下降低剖宫产率。
Birth. 2013 Sep;40(3):155-63. doi: 10.1111/birt.12051.
4
Freestanding midwifery units versus obstetric units: does the effect of place of birth differ with level of social disadvantage?独立助产士单位与产科单位:分娩地点的效果是否因社会劣势程度而异?
BMC Public Health. 2012 Jun 22;12:478. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-478.
5
Outcomes, safety, and resource utilization in a collaborative care birth center program compared with traditional physician-based perinatal care.与传统的基于医生的围产期护理相比,协作式护理分娩中心项目的结局、安全性和资源利用情况。
Am J Public Health. 2003 Jun;93(6):999-1006. doi: 10.2105/ajph.93.6.999.
6
Characteristics of current hospital-sponsored and nonhospital birth centers.当前医院资助的和非医院分娩中心的特点。
Matern Child Health J. 1997 Jun;1(2):89-99. doi: 10.1023/a:1026270306793.
7
Attitudes of Canadian women toward birthing centres and midwife care for childbirth.加拿大女性对分娩中心及助产士接生护理的态度。
CMAJ. 1999 Sep 21;161(6):708-9.