The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2009
The St. George Homebirth Program: an evaluation of the first 100 booked women.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
McMurtrie Jane, Catling-Paull Christine, Teate Ali, Caplice Shea, Chapman Michael, Homer Caroline
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The St. George Homebirth Program was the first publicly funded homebirth model of care set up in New South Wales. This program provides access to selected women at low obstetric risk the option of having their babies at home. There are only four other publicly funded homebirth programs operating in Australia.
AIMS: To report the outcomes of the first 100 women booked at the St. George Homebirth Program.
METHODS: A prospective descriptive study was undertaken. Data were collected on the first 100 women who gave birth between November 2005 and March 2009. Two databases were accessed and missing data were followed up by review of the relevant charts.
RESULTS: Of the first 100 booked women, 63 achieved a homebirth, 30 were transferred to hospital or independent midwifery care in the antenatal period and seven were transferred intrapartum. Two women were transferred to hospital in the early postnatal period, one for a postpartum haemorrhage and one for hypotension. One baby suffered mild respiratory distress, was treated in the emergency department and was discharged home within four hours.
CONCLUSION: The St. George Hospital homebirth program has provided reassuring outcomes for the first 100 women it has cared for over the past four years. Wider availability of this service could be achieved provided there is the appropriate close collaboration between providers and effective processes for consultation, referral and transfer. The outcomes of women and babies in publicly funded homebirth programs deserve further study, and the development of a national prospective database of all planned homebirth would contribute to this knowledge.
AIMS: To report the outcomes of the first 100 women booked at the St. George Homebirth Program.
METHODS: A prospective descriptive study was undertaken. Data were collected on the first 100 women who gave birth between November 2005 and March 2009. Two databases were accessed and missing data were followed up by review of the relevant charts.
RESULTS: Of the first 100 booked women, 63 achieved a homebirth, 30 were transferred to hospital or independent midwifery care in the antenatal period and seven were transferred intrapartum. Two women were transferred to hospital in the early postnatal period, one for a postpartum haemorrhage and one for hypotension. One baby suffered mild respiratory distress, was treated in the emergency department and was discharged home within four hours.
CONCLUSION: The St. George Hospital homebirth program has provided reassuring outcomes for the first 100 women it has cared for over the past four years. Wider availability of this service could be achieved provided there is the appropriate close collaboration between providers and effective processes for consultation, referral and transfer. The outcomes of women and babies in publicly funded homebirth programs deserve further study, and the development of a national prospective database of all planned homebirth would contribute to this knowledge.