Women Receiving Midwife Care Throughout Pregnancy & Birth Have Better Outcomes ~ Cochrane Library

June 2013

… less likely to lose their babies before 24 weeks or give birth before 37 weeks.

 Women were happier with the care they received, had fewer epidurals, fewer assisted births, and fewer episiotomies

… care provided by midwives was more cost-effective during labour

…. researchers conclude that all women should be offered midwife-led continuity of care unless they have serious medical or obstetric complications

Maternity care that involves a midwife as the main care provider leads to better outcomes for most women, according to a systematic review published in The Cochrane Library.

Researchers found that women who received continued care throughout pregnancy and birth from a small group of midwives were less likely to give birth pre-term and required fewer interventions during labour and birth than when their care was shared between different obstetricians, GPs and midwives.

In many countries, including the UK and Australia, midwives act as the main providers of care for women throughout pregnancy, labour and birth.

In midwife-led care, there is an emphasis on normality, continuity of care and being cared for by a known, trusted midwife during labour. Midwife-led continuity of care is provided in a multi-disciplinary network of consultation and referral with other care providers.

This contrasts with medical-led models of care, where an obstetrician or family physician is primarily responsible for care, and with shared-care, where responsibility is shared between different healthcare professionals. There has been some debate about whether the midwife-led model of care is more effective.

The researchers reviewed data from 13 trials involving a total of 16,242 women. Eight trials included women at low risk of complications and five trials included women at high risk of complications. They looked at outcomes for mothers and babies when midwives were the main providers of care, compared to medical-led or shared care models.

When midwives were the main providers of care throughout, women were less likely to give birth before 37 weeks or lose their babies before 24 weeks. Women were happier with the care they received, had fewer epidurals, fewer assisted births, and fewer episiotomiesAn episiotomy involves making a surgical incision to reduce the risk of a tear.

In addition, women who received midwife-led care were no more likely to have a caesarean birth, but they were in labour for about half an hour longer on average.

Based on these results, the researchers conclude that all women should be offered midwife-led continuity of care unless they have serious medical or obstetric complications.

Women should be encouraged to ask for this option,

said lead researcher Jane Sandall of the Division of Women’s Health at King’s College London in London, UK, who led an interdisciplinary team of researchers from Sheffield Hallam University, The University of Warwick and National University of Ireland Galway.

Policymakers in areas of the world where health systems do not provide midwife-led care should consider the importance of midwives in improving maternity care and how financing of midwife-led services can be reviewed to support this.

Five studies considered the cost of midwife-led compared to shared care. While care provided by midwives was more cost-effective during labour, the results for postnatal care were inconclusive. “There was a lack of consistency in the way that maternity care cost was estimated in the studies, but there seemed to be a trend towards a cost-saving effect of midwife-led care,” said Sandall.

Access the full study on the Wiley Press Room here. (To access PDFs and embargoed stories you must be logged in to the Press Room before clicking the link. Request a login here.)Full citation: Sandall J, Soltani H, Gates S, Shennan A, Devane D.; Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 8. Art. No.: CD004667. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004667.pub3.URL Upon publication: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/14651858. CD004667.pub3Interviews: Lead author Professor Jane Sandall of King’s College London, UK, will be the main representative for this review, but other authors are also available for interview requests.
To arrange an interview with Professor Jane Sandall, or Professor Andrew Shennan, please contact Emma Reynolds, PR Manager at King’s College London, on emma.reynolds@kcl.ac.uk or +44 (0) 207 848 4334.
To arrange an interview with Professor Hora Soltani (Sheffield Hallam University) please contact Sarah Duce, Public Relations Officer, Sheffield Hallam University, on s.duce@shu.ac.uk or +44 (0)114 225 4025.
To arrange an interview with Professor Declan Devane (National University of Ireland Galway) please contact Tomás Ó Síocháin, Acting Press & Information Officer, NUI Galway, on tomas.osiochain@nuigalway.ie or + 353 (0) 91 493542.
To arrange an interview with Dr. Simon Gates (University of Warwick), please contact Luke Harrison, Press Officer for Faculty of Arts and Warwick Medical School, on luke.harrison@warwick.ac.uk +44 (0) 2476 574255/150483.
About The Cochrane Library
The Cochrane Library contains high quality health care information, including the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, from the Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane Systematic Reviews bring together research on the effects of health care and are considered the gold standard for determining the relative effectiveness of different interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration (http://www.cochrane.org) is a UK registered international charity and the world’s leading producer of systematic reviews. It has been demonstrated that Cochrane Systematic Reviews are of comparable or better quality and are updated more often than the reviews published in print journals (Wen J et al; The reporting quality of meta-analyses improves: a random sampling study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2008; 61: 770-775).
In June 2013, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews received an impact factor of 5.703, from Thomson ISI.The Cochrane Library is published by Wiley on behalf of The Cochrane Collaboration.The Cochrane Library Podcasts: a collection of podcasts on a selection of Cochrane Reviews by authors of reviews in this issue will be available from www.cochrane.org/podcasts.


Leave a comment