Characteristics of nurse-midwife patients and visits, 1991

American Journal of Public Health

Volumn 89, Issue 6, 1999, Pages 906-909

  Paine, Lisa L ^a   Lang, Janet M ^a   Strobino, Donna M ^b   Johnson, Timothy R B ^c   DeJoseph, Jeanne F ^d   Declercq, Eugene R ^a   Gagnon, David R ^a   Scupholme, Anne ^e   Ross, Alan ^b  

^a BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONSULTATION; DEMOGRAPHY; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; INCOME; MATERNAL CARE; MIDWIFE; NURSE; PATIENT; PATIENT SELECTION; POPULATION;

EID: 0033052261     PISSN: 00900036     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.89.6.906     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Nurse Practitioners, Physician Assistants, and Certified Nurse-Midwives: A Policy Analysis. Washington, DC: Office of Technology Assessment; 1986. Health Technology Case Study 37.
2. Office of the Inspector General. A Survey of Certified Nurse-Midwives. Washington, DC: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 1992.
3. Fowkes V, Gamel N, Garcia RD, et al. Assessment of Physician Assistant (PA), Nurse Practitioner (NP), and Nurse-Midwife (CNM) Training on Meeting Health-Care Needs of the Underserved. Rockville, Md: Bureau of Health Professions, US Dept of Health and Human Services; 1993. Final report no. 240-91-0050.
4. Hoffman C. Improving Access Through Nonphysician Practitioners. Report of the Physician Payment Review Commission. Washington, DC: Physician Payment Review Commission; 1993.
5. Gabay M, Wolfe SM. Nurse-midwifery: the beneficial alternative. Public Health Rep. 1997;112;386-394.
6. Oakley D, Murray ME, Murtland T, et al. Comparison of outcomes of maternity care by obstetricians and certified nurse-midwives. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;88:823-829.
7. Turnbull D, Holmes A, Shields N, et al. Randomized controlled trial of efficacy of midwife-managed care. Lancet. 1996;348:213-218.
8. Strobino D, Baruffi G, Dellinger W, Ross A. Variations in pregnancy outcomes and use of obstetrics procedures in two institutions with divergent philosophies of maternity care. Med Care. 1988;26:337-347.
9. Brown SA, Grimes DE. A meta-analysis of nurse-practitioners and nurse-midwives in primary care. Nurs Res. 1995;44:332-339.
10. Renfrew MJ. Midwife vs medical/shared care. In: Enkin MW, Keirse MJNC, Renfrew MJ, Neilson JP, eds. Pregnancy and Childbirth Module, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: Review No. 03295, August 12 1992; Disk Issue I. Cochrane Updates on Disk. Oxford, England: Update Software; 1995.
11. Rosenblatt RA, Dobie SA, Hart LG, et al. Interspecialty differences in obstetric care of low-risk women. Am J Public Health. 1997;87:344-351.
12. MacDorman MF, Singh GK. Midwifery care, social and medical risk factors, and birth outcomes in the USA. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52:310-317.
13. Mullan F, Rivo ML, Politzer RM. Doctors, dollars, and determination: making physician workforce policy. Health Aff. 1993;12(suppl):138-151.
14. Stuart A. Basic ideas in scientific sampling. In: Griffin s Statistical Monographs and Courses. No. 4. New York, NY: Hafner Publishing Co; 1962.
15. Scupholme A, DeJoseph J, Strobino D, Paine LL. Nurse-midwifery care to vulnerable populations, I: demographic characteristics of the national CNM sample. J Nurse Midwifery. 1992;37:341-348.
16. Scupholme A, Paine LL, Lang J, Kumar S, DeJoseph J. Time associated with components of clinical services rendered by nurse-midwives: sample data from phase II of "nurse-midwifery care for vulnerable populations." J Nurse Midwifery. 1994;39:5-12.
17. Walsh LV, DeJoseph J. Findings of the 1991 annual American College of Nurse-Midwives membership survey. J Nurse Midwifery. 1993;38:35-41.
18. Greener DL, Paine LL, LeeDecker C, Gray CA. Nurse-midwives speak out on the ACNM: results of the 1987-88 needs assessment survey, part I. J Nurse Midwifery. 1989;34:21-30.
19. Shah BV, Barnwell BG, Gayle SB. SUDAAN User's Manual: Software for Analysis of Correlational Data, Release 6.40. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute; 1995.
20. Aday LA. At Risk in America: The Health Care Needs of Vulnerable Populations in the United States. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1993.
21. Rooks J, Fischman S. American nurse-midwifery practice in 1976-1977: reflections of 50 years of growth and development. Am J Public Health. 1980;70:990-996.
22. Levy BS, Wilinson FS, Marine WM. Reducing neonatal mortality rate with nurse-midwives. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971;109:50-58.
23. Breckenridge M. A frontier nursing service. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1928;15:867-872.
24. Davis AR. The Division of Nursing and its relationship to nurse practitioner education. J Am Acad Nurs Pract. 1992;4:162-166.
25. Sekscenski ES, Sansom S, Bazell C, Salmon ME, Mullan F. State practice environments and the supply of physician assistants, nurse-practitioners, and certified nurse-midwives. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1266-1271.
26. Hoffman C. Medicaid payment for nonphysician practitioners: an access issue. Health Aff. 1994;13:140-152.
27. Safriet BJ. Health care dollars and regulatory sense: the role of advanced practice nursing. Yale J Regul. 1992;9:417-487.
28. Declercq ER, Paine LL, Simmes D, DeJoseph JF. State regulation, payment policies, and nurse-midwife services. Health Aff. 1998;17: 190-200.