Midwifery · 2024
Outcome of induction of labour at 41 weeks with foley catheter in midwifery-led care.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Velthuijs Eva L M, Jacod Benoit C, Videler-Sinke Lizette, Kooij Caroline, van Rheenen-Flach Leonie E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Assess the outcome of induction of labour (IOL) with a Foley catheter in pregnancies at 41 weeks in midwifery-led care setting compared to consultant-led care setting.
DESIGN: Mixed-methods cohort study at a midwifery - hospital partnership in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospectively, women undergoing IOL in midwifery-led care were recruited at a secondary hospital. This group was compared to a retrospective cohort, in which IOL was exclusively performed under consultant-led care.
MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: We compared 320 women whose induction started in midwifery-led care to a historical cohort of 320 women induced for the same reason under consultant-led care. Both groups exhibited similar rates of spontaneous vaginal births (64.2 %vs62.5 %). Caesarean section and assisted vaginal birth rates did not significantly differ. Maternal adverse outcomes were comparable, while neonatal adverse outcomes were significantly higher in the midwifery-led care group (8.1 %vs3.8 %; OR 2.27, 95 % CI 1.12-4.58). The use of pain relief was significantly lower in midwife-led care (65.3 %vs75.3 %; OR 0.62, 95 % CI 0.44-0.87). 20.6 % of births occurred in midwife-led care.
KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In this single-centre study, spontaneous vaginal birth rates following IOL with a Foley catheter were similar between midwife- and consultant-led care. However, the midwife-led group showed a higher risk of adverse neonatal outcomes, mainly early onset neonatal sepsis, with a minority eventually delivering under midwife-led care. Implications highlight the need for broader research, validation across diverse settings and exploration of patient and healthcare worker perspectives to refine the evolving midwifery-led care model.
DESIGN: Mixed-methods cohort study at a midwifery - hospital partnership in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospectively, women undergoing IOL in midwifery-led care were recruited at a secondary hospital. This group was compared to a retrospective cohort, in which IOL was exclusively performed under consultant-led care.
MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: We compared 320 women whose induction started in midwifery-led care to a historical cohort of 320 women induced for the same reason under consultant-led care. Both groups exhibited similar rates of spontaneous vaginal births (64.2 %vs62.5 %). Caesarean section and assisted vaginal birth rates did not significantly differ. Maternal adverse outcomes were comparable, while neonatal adverse outcomes were significantly higher in the midwifery-led care group (8.1 %vs3.8 %; OR 2.27, 95 % CI 1.12-4.58). The use of pain relief was significantly lower in midwife-led care (65.3 %vs75.3 %; OR 0.62, 95 % CI 0.44-0.87). 20.6 % of births occurred in midwife-led care.
KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In this single-centre study, spontaneous vaginal birth rates following IOL with a Foley catheter were similar between midwife- and consultant-led care. However, the midwife-led group showed a higher risk of adverse neonatal outcomes, mainly early onset neonatal sepsis, with a minority eventually delivering under midwife-led care. Implications highlight the need for broader research, validation across diverse settings and exploration of patient and healthcare worker perspectives to refine the evolving midwifery-led care model.