...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth >Women’s characteristics and care outcomes of caseload midwifery care in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study
【24h】

Women’s characteristics and care outcomes of caseload midwifery care in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study

机译:荷兰桶装助态照顾妇女的特色和护理结果:回顾性队列研究

获取原文
           

摘要

The maternity care system in the Netherlands is well known for its support of community-based midwifery. However, regular midwifery practices typically do not offer caseload midwifery care – one-to-one continuity of care throughout pregnancy and birth. Because we know very little about the outcomes for women receiving caseload care in the Netherlands, we compared caseload care with regular midwife-led care, looking at maternal and perinatal outcomes, including antenatal and intrapartum referrals to secondary (i.e., obstetrician-led) care. We selected 657 women in caseload care and 1954 matched controls (women in regular midwife-led care) from all women registered in the Dutch Perinatal Registry (Perined) who gave birth in 2015. To be eligible for selection the women had to be in midwife-led antenatal care beyond 28 gestational weeks. Each woman in caseload care was matched with three women in regular midwife-led care, using parity, maternal age, background (Dutch or non-Dutch) and region. These two cohorts were compared for referral rates, mode of birth, and other maternal and perinatal outcomes. In caseload midwifery care, 46.9% of women were referred to obstetrician-led care (24.2% antenatally and 22.8% in the intrapartum period). In the matched cohort, 65.7% were referred (37.4% antenatally and 28.3% in the intrapartum period). In caseload care, 84.0% experienced a spontaneous vaginal birth versus 77.0% in regular midwife-led care. These patterns were observed for both nulliparous and multiparous women. Women in caseload care had fewer inductions of labour (13.2% vs 21.0%), more homebirths (39.4% vs 16.1%) and less perineal damage (intact perineum: 41.3% vs 28.2%). The incidence of perinatal mortality and a low Apgar score was low in both groups. We found that when compared to regular midwife-led care, caseload midwifery care in the Netherlands is associated with a lower referral rate to obstetrician-led care – both antenatally and in the intrapartum period – and a higher spontaneous vaginal birth rate, with similar perinatal safety. The challenge is to include this model as part of the current effort to improve the quality of Dutch maternity care, making caseload care available and affordable for more women.
机译:荷兰的产科护理制度众所周知,众所周知,其支持基于社区的助产方式。然而,定期助产实践通常不提供案例中的助产照顾 - 在整个怀孕和出生过程中一对一的护理连续性。因为我们对荷兰接受案件护理的妇女的成果很少了解,我们将Caseload Care与常规助产士的护理进行比较,看看母亲和围产期结果,包括次要的产蛋和外际推荐(即产科医生 - LED)护理。我们选择了657名妇女在荷兰围村登记处(Pered)的所有妇女在2015年出生的所有妇女的1954名妇女(普通助产士)(常规助产士 - LED护理)。有资格选择妇女必须在助产士超出28个妊娠周的-led产前护理。 Caseload Care中的每个妇女都与三名女性相匹配,常规助产士的护理,使用平价,产妇年龄,背景(荷兰语或非荷兰语)和地区。将这两种群组进行比较,以进行转诊率,出生方式和其他孕产妇和围产期结果。在Caseload助态各种护理中,46.9%的女性被称为产科医生护理(24.2%的直抗,在内,在内时期22.8%)。在匹配的队列中,提及65.7%(在37.4%的直抗和28.3%的内部期间)。在Caseload Care中,84.0%在常规助产车护理中经历了自发性阴道出生率与77.0%。对于无流动和多种妇女来说,观察到这些模式。 Caseload Care的妇女的劳动诱导率较少(13.2%vs 21.0%),更多分娩(39.4%vs 16.1%)和减少的会阴损伤(完整的Perineum:41.3%vs 28.2%)。围产期死亡率和低APGAR评分的发生率在两组中都很低。我们发现与常规助产士的护理相比,荷兰的Caseload助产照顾与产科医生护理的较低的推荐率有关 - 在天然存在和较高的自发性阴道出生率,具有类似的围产期安全。挑战是将此模型包括提高荷兰孕妇护理的质量的一部分,使家用护理能够为更多的女性提供负担得起。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号