Pregnant women at low risk of complications can safely be offered a choice of where to give birth

Women with low risk pregnancies should be able to choose where they give birth, concludes a study published in the British Medical Journal today. Although it shows that first-time mums who opt for a home birth are at a higher risk of adverse outcomes, the overall risk is low in all birth settings.

The researchers say their results "support a policy of offering with low risk pregnancies a choice of birth setting" and will enable women and their partners to have informed discussions with health professionals about planned place of birth.

The benefits and risks of birth in different settings have been widely debated in recent years, but there is a lack of good quality evidence comparing the risk of rare but serious perinatal adverse outcomes in these settings.

Perinatal refers to the period just before, during or shortly after birth.

So a team led by Professor Peter Brocklehurst from the University of Oxford for the Birthplace in England Collaborative Group set out to compare perinatal outcomes and interventions in labour by planned place of birth across all NHS trusts in England.

Planned place of birth included home, freestanding midwifery units, midwife-led units on a hospital site with obstetric services, and obstetric units.

Serious adverse outcomes included stillbirth after start of care in labour, early , (encephalopathy), in the lungs (meconium aspiration syndrome), and injuries to the upper arm or shoulder during birth.

A total of 64,538 single, full term infants born to women with low risk pregnancies were involved in the study. Factors, such as , ethnic group, and deprivation score were taken into account.

Overall, the rate of adverse outcomes was low in all birth settings (4.3 per 1,000 births) and there were no significant differences in the odds of an adverse outcome for any of the non-obstetric unit settings compared with obstetric units.

For women giving birth for the first time (nulliparous women), the risk of an adverse outcome was higher (9.3 per 1,000 births) for planned home births compared with obstetric units, but not for either midwifery unit settings. In contrast, for women who had given birth before (multiparous women), there were no significant differences in the rate of adverse outcomes between birth settings.

The results also show that interventions during labour, such as epidural, forceps delivery or caesarean section, were substantially lower in all non-obstetric unit settings. Transfers from non-obstetric unit settings were also much higher (up to 45%) for nulliparous women than for multiparous women (up to 13%).

"These results will enable women and their partners to have informed discussions with health professionals in relation to clinical outcomes and planned place of birth," say the authors. "For policy makers, the results are important to inform decisions about service provision and commissioning."

They add that a cost effectiveness analysis of the different settings is currently being carried out, and they suggest that further research on this issue is needed, particularly into the effect of staffing and service configuration on outcomes, and more detailed analysis of transfers from non-obstetric settings.

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

New study finds home birth safe

Sep 18, 2009

(PhysOrg.com) -- A new study by McMaster University researchers has found low-risk women who have midwives in attendance during birth have positive outcomes regardless of where the delivery takes place.

Home birth: Proceed with caution

Jul 29, 2010

The risks associated with home birth are discussed in the lead Editorial in this week's Lancet, which says that while women have the right to choose how and where to give birth, they do not have the right to put their baby a ...

Recommended for you

Independent safety investigation needed in the NHS

5 hours ago

The NHS should follow the lead of aviation and other safety-critical industries and establish an independent safety investigation agency, according to a paper published today by the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. The au ...

Sexual fantasies: Are you normal?

9 hours ago

Hoping for sex with two women is common but fantasizing about golden showers is not. That's just one of the findings from a research project that scientifically defines sexual deviation for the first time ever. It was undertaken ...

User comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.