4.2 Article

Team midwifery care in a tertiary level obstetric service:: A randomized controlled trial

期刊

BIRTH-ISSUES IN PERINATAL CARE
卷 27, 期 3, 页码 168-173

出版社

BLACKWELL SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-536x.2000.00168.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: In 1996 a new model of maternity care characterized by continuity of midwifery care from early pregnancy through to the postpartum period was implemented for women attending Monash Medical Centre, a tertiary level obstetric service, in Melbourne, Australia. The objective of this study was to compare the new model of care with standard maternity care. Methods: In a randomized controlled trial, 1000 women who booked at the antenatal clinic and met the eligibility criteria were randomly allocated to receive continuity of midwifery care (team care) from a group of seven midwives in collaboration with obstetric staff or care from a variety of midwives and obstetric staff (standard care). The primary outcome measures were procedures in labor maternal outcomes, neonatal outcomes, and length of hospital stay. Results: Women assigned to the team care group experienced less augmentation of label; less electronic fetal monitoring, less use of narcotic and epidural analgesia, and fewer episiotomies brit more unsutured rears. Team care women stayed in hospital 7 hours less than women in standard care. More babies of standard care mothers were admitted to the special care nurseries for more than 5 days because of preterm birth, and more babies of team care mothers were admitted to the nurseries for more than 5 days with intrauterine growth retardation. No differences occurred in perinatal mortality between the two groups. Conclusions: Continuity of midwifery care was associated with a reduction in medical procedures in labor and a shorter length of stay without compromising maternal and perinatal safety. Continuity of midwifery care is realistically achievable in a tertiary obstetric referral service.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据