Planned Place of Birth in New Zealand: Does it Affect Mode of Birth and Intervention Rates Among Low-Risk Women?

Birth

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 111-119

  Davis, Deborah ^a   Baddock, Sally ^c   Pairman, Sally ^d   Hunter, Marion ^e   Benn, Cheryl ^f   Wilson, Don ^a   Dixon, Lesley ^g   Herbison, Peter ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

^c School of Midwifery   (New Zealand)

^d OTAGO POLYTECHNIC   (New Zealand)

^e AUCKLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (New Zealand)

^f MASSEY UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

^g New Zealand College of Midwives   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Cesarean section; Childbirth; Intrapartum intervention; Place of birth

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DELIVERY; DELIVERY ROOM; FEMALE; HUMAN; MATERNITY WARD; MIDWIFE; NEW ZEALAND; NURSING; PATIENT SELECTION; POSTNATAL CARE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME;

ADULT; BIRTHING CENTERS; DELIVERY ROOMS; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDWIFERY; NEW ZEALAND; PATIENT SELECTION; POSTNATAL CARE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME;

EID: 79956227556     PISSN: 07307659     EISSN: 1523536X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00458.x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Johanson R, Newburn M, Macfarlane A. Has the medicalisation of childbirth gone too far? BMJ 2002;324:892-895.
2. New Zealand Health Information Service. Report on Maternity: Maternal and Newborn Information 2004. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Health, 2007.
3. Ananth C, Smulian J, Vintzileos A. The association of placenta previa with history of cesarean delivery and abortion: A metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;177:1071-1078.
4. Coulter-Smith SD, Hollohan M, Darling MRN. Previous cesarean section: A risk factor for major obstetric hemorrhage. J Obstet Gynecol 1996;16:349-352.
5. Greene R, Gardeit F, Turner MJ. Long-term implications of cesarean sections. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;176:254-255.
6. Hall MH, Bewley S. Maternal mortality and mode of delivery. Lancet 1999;354:776.
7. Hemminki E, Merilainen J. Long-term effects of cesarean sections: Ectopic pregnancies and placental problems. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174:1569-1574.
8. Tracy SK, Tracy MB. Costing the cascade: Estimating the cost of increased obstetric intervention in childbirth using population data. BJOG 2003;110:717-724.
9. Olsen O. Meta-analysis of the safety of home birth. Birth 1997;24:4-13.
10. Eksmyr R. Two geographically defined populations with different organization of medical care. Cause specific analysis for early neonatal deaths. Acta Paediatr Scand 1986;75:10-16.
11. Rooks JP, Weatherby NL, Ernst EK, et al. Outcomes of care in birth centers. The National Birth Center Study. N Engl J Med 1989;321:1804-1811.
12. Viisainen K, Gissler M, Hemminki E. Birth outcomes by level of obstetric care in Finland: A catchment area based analysis. J Epidemiol Community Health 1994;48:400-405.
13. Hutton E, Reitsma A. Outcomes associated with planned home and planned hospital births in low-risk women attended by midwives in Ontario, Canada. 2003-2006: A retrospective cohort study. Birth 2009;36:180-189.
14. de Jonge A, van der Goes BY, Ravelli AC, et al. Perinatal mortality and morbidity in a nationwide cohort of 529, 688 low-risk planned home and hospital births. BJOG 2009;116:1177-1184.
15. Wax JR, Lucas FL, Lamont M, et al. Maternal and newborn outcomes in planned home birth vs planned hospital births: A metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:243, e1-e8.
16. Hundley VA, Cruickshank FM, Lang GD, et al. Midwife managed delivery unit: A randomized controlled comparison with consultant led care. BMJ 1994;309:1400-1404.
17. MacVicar J, Dobbie G, Owen-Johnstone L, et al. Simulated home delivery in hospital: A randomised controlled trial. BJOG 1993;100:316-323.
18. Hodnett ED, Downe S, Walsh D, Weston J. Alternative versus conventional institutional settings for birth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 9. Art. No.: CD000012. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000012.pub3. Available at: Accessed November 5, 2010.
19. Ackermann-Liebrich U, Voegeli T, Gunter-Witt K, et al. Home versus hospital deliveries: Follow up study of matched pairs for procedures and outcome. Zurich Study Team. BMJ 1996;313:1313-1318.
20. Byrne JP, Crowther CA, Moss JR. A randomised controlled trial comparing birthing centre care with delivery suite care in Adelaide, Australia. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2000;40:268-274.
21. Dowswell T, Thornton JG, Hewison J, et al. Should there be a trial of home versus hospital delivery in the United Kingdom? BMJ 1996;312:753-757.
22. Tracy SK, Sullivan E, Dahlen H, et al. Does size matter: A population-based study of birth in lower volume maternity hospitals for low risk women. BJOG 2006;113:86-96.
23. Hendrix M, Van Horck M, Moreta D, et al. Why women do not accept randomisation for place of birth: Feasibility of a RCT in the Netherlands. BJOG 2009;116:537-544.
24. Ministry of Health. Notice Pursuant to Section 88 of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act 2000. Maternity Services. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Health, 2002.
25. Statistics New Zealand. Births and Deaths. Available at: Accessed November 5, 2010.
26. Stata (version 10). Data Analysis and Statistical Software. College Station, Texas: StataCorp LP, 2007.
27. Janssen PA, Saxell L, Page LA, et al. Outcomes of planned home birth with registered midwife versus planned hospital birth with midwife or physician. CMAJ 2009;181:377-383.
28. Miller S. First birth at home or in hospital in Aotearoa/New Zealand: Intrapartum midwifery care and related outcomes, Unpublished master's thesis. Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University, 2009.
29. Hunter M. Autonomy, clinical freedom and responsibility. In: Kirkham M, ed. Birth Centers: A Social Model for Maternity Care. London: Books for Midwives, 2003:239-248.
30. Davis D, Walker K. The corporeal, the social and space/place: Exploring intersections from a midwifery perspective. Gender, Place Culture 2010;17:377-391.
31. Crabtree S. Midwives constructing "normal birth." In: Downe S, ed. Normal Childbirth. Evidence and Debate. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 2005:85-100.
32. De Botton A. The Architecture of Happiness. London: Pantheon Books, 2006.
33. Ulrich R, Zimring C, Zhu X, et al. A review of the research literature on evidence-based healthcare design. Health Environ Res Design J 2008;1:61-125.
34. Dilani A. Architecture and design, health care buildings as supportive environments. Int Hospital Federation J 2000;36:55-59.
35. Ulrich RA. View from the window may influence recovery from surgery. Sci Am 1984;224(4647):420-421.
36. Walsh D, Downe SM. Outcomes of free-standing, midwife-led birth centers: A structured review. Birth 2004;31:222-229.
37. Newburn M, Singh D. Are Women Getting the Birth Environment they Need? A Report of a National Survey of Women's Experiences. London: National Childbirth Trust, 2005.
38. Lock LR, Gibb HJ. The power of place. Midwifery 2003;19:132-139.
39. Symon A, Paul J, Butchart M, et al. Maternity unit design study part 2: Perceptions of space and layout. Br J Midwifery 2008;16:110-114.
40. Lepori B. Freedom of movement in birth places. Child Environ 1994;11:81-87.
41. Foureur M. Creating birth space to enable undisturbed birth. In: Fahy K, Foureur M, Hastie C, eds. Birth Territory and Midwifery Guardianship: Theory for Practice, Education and Research. Oxford: Elsevier, 2008:57-77.