Abstract
A controlled clinical trial was carried out to assess whether a birth room setting would influence the care of mothers and newborns. Of the 163 low-risk women enrolled, 49 (30%) manifested some prenatal risk and were excluded. The remaining 114 were allocated by strict alternation to a birth room or a conventional setting. Of the 56 women allocated to the birth room, 63% of the primiparas and 19% of the multiparas were later transferred. The numbers in the two settings who had oxytocin stimulation, epidural anesthesia, forceps delivery or cesarean section did not show statistically significant differences. The episiotomy rates were slightly lower in the birth room than in the conventional setting, and the rates of an intact perineum were higher in the birth room. Neither the Apgar scores nor the morbidity rates of the infants showed statistically significant differences related to the setting to which the mother had been allocated, although more infants from the conventional setting were admitted to a special care unit. Both "experimental" groups of women less often received routine perineal shaving, enemas or intravenous infusions than did an obstetrically similar nonexperimental comparison group. Despite the apparent inability in this setting for the birth room to influence the rate of major obstetric procedures (except for episiotomy) and outcomes, the authors believe that a birth room is desirable in tertiary care centres as well as in community hospitals.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Adamson G. D., Gare D. J. Home or hospital births? JAMA. 1980 May 2;243(17):1732–1736. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Barton J. J., Mungerson G. W. Family-centered obstetric care: development and implementation of an alternative birthing center. QRB Qual Rev Bull. 1978 Sep;4(9):7–10. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Barton J. J., Rovner S., Puls K., Read P. A. Alternative birthing center: experience in a teaching obstetric service. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980 Jun 1;137(3):377–384. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(80)90923-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bennetts A. B., Lubic R. W. The free-standing birth centre. Lancet. 1982 Feb 13;1(8268):378–380. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(82)91401-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dobbs K. B., Shy K. K. Alternative birth rooms and birth options. Obstet Gynecol. 1981 Nov;58(5):626–630. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Faison J. B., Pisani B. J., Douglas R. G., Cranch G. S., Lubic R. W. The childbearing center: an alternative birth setting. Obstet Gynecol. 1979 Oct;54(4):527–532. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Goodlin R. C. Low-risk obstetric care for low-risk mothers. Lancet. 1980 May 10;1(8176):1017–1019. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(80)91449-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Klein M., Westreich R. Birth room transfer and procedure rates--what do they tell about the setting? Birth. 1983 Summer;10(2):93–97. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-536x.1983.tb01407.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Laube D. W. Experience with an alternative birth center in a university hospital. J Reprod Med. 1983 Jun;28(6):391–396. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Petravage J. B. Outcomes of three birthing rooms. J Fam Pract. 1983 May;16(5):929–933. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rollins A. J., Kaplan J. A., Ratkay M. E., Goodlin R. C., Shaw J. S., Wennberg R. P. A homestyle delivery program in a university hospital. J Fam Pract. 1979 Sep;9(3):407–414. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sackett D. L., Gent M. Controversy in counting and attributing events in clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 1979 Dec 27;301(26):1410–1412. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197912273012602. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sumner P. E., Wheeler J. P., Smith S. G. The home-like labor-delivery room. Conn Med. 1976 May;40(5):319–322. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Symposium on innovative planning of perinatal centers. Clin Perinatol. 1983 Feb;10(1):1–282. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]