Birth Outcomes for Planned Home and Licensed Freestanding Birth Center Births in Washington State
Open Access
- 6 October 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Vol. 138 (5) , 693-702
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe rates of maternal and perinatal birth outcomes for community births and to compare outcomes by planned place of birth (home vs state-licensed, freestanding birth center) in a Washington State birth cohort, where midwifery practice and integration mirrors international settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study including all births attended by members of a statewide midwifery professional association that were within professional association guidelines and met eligibility criteria for planned birth center birth (term gestation, singleton, vertex fetus with no known fluid abnormalities at term, no prior cesarean birth, no hypertensive disorders, no prepregnancy diabetes), from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2020. Outcome rates were calculated for all planned community births in the cohort. Estimated relative risks were calculated comparing delivery and perinatal outcomes for planned births at home to state-licensed birth centers, adjusted for parity and other confounders. RESULTS: The study population included 10,609 births: 40.9% planned home and 59.1% planned birth center births. Intrapartum transfers to hospital were more frequent among nulliparous individuals (30.5%; 95% CI 29.2–31.9) than multiparous individuals (4.2%; 95% CI 3.6–4.6). The cesarean delivery rate was 11.4% (95% CI 10.2–12.3) in nulliparous individuals and 0.87% (95% CI 0.7–1.1) in multiparous individuals. The perinatal mortality rate after the onset of labor (intrapartum and neonatal deaths through 7 days) was 0.57 (95% CI 0.19–1.04) per 1,000 births. Rates for other adverse outcomes were also low. Compared with planned birth center births, planned home births had similar risks in crude and adjusted analyses. CONCLUSION: Rates of adverse outcomes for this cohort in a U.S. state with well-established and integrated community midwifery were low overall. Birth outcomes were similar for births planned at home or at a state-licensed, freestanding birth center.Keywords
This publication has 35 references indexed in Scilit:
- Perinatal risks of planned home births in the United StatesAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2015
- Perinatal mortality and morbidity up to 28 days after birth among 743 070 low-risk planned home and hospital births: a cohort study based on three merged national perinatal databasesBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2014
- A Revised Birth Weight Reference for the United StatesObstetrics & Gynecology, 2014
- Executive Summary of the reVITALize InitiativeObstetrics & Gynecology, 2014
- Transfer to hospital in planned home births: a systematic reviewBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2014
- Duration and urgency of transfer in births planned at home and in freestanding midwifery units in England: secondary analysis of the Birthplace national prospective cohort studyBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2013
- A Randomized Trial of Planned Cesarean or Vaginal Delivery for Twin PregnancyNew England Journal of Medicine, 2013
- Outcomes of planned home birth with registered midwife versus planned hospital birth with midwife or physicianCanadian Medical Association Journal, 2009
- Perinatal mortality and morbidity in a nationwide cohort of 529 688 low‐risk planned home and hospital birthsBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2009
- Outcomes of planned home births in Washington State: 1989–1996Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2002