Re: Home delivery - end of discussion?
From: Efrain Ramirez (eramirezt@coqui.net)
Wed Jul 31 21:46:33 2002
Kathi - of course it is not the end of the discussion - and I am not
passing any judgement - nor did I comment anything -
FYIO -here is the complete text --
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Research
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 2002
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volume 100, Number 2
Pages 253 - 259
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outcomes of Planned Home Births in Washington State: 1989-1996
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jenny W.Y. Pang, MD, MPH,a,c James D. Heffelfinger, MD, MPH,a,d Greg
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Huang, DMD, MPH,a Thomas J. Benedetti, MD, MHA,b and Noel S. Weiss,
MD, DrPHa
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objective: To determine whether there was a difference between planned
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
home births and planned hospital births in Washington State with regard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to certain adverse infant outcomes (neonatal death, low Apgar score,
need for ventilator support) and maternal outcomes (prolonged labor,
postpartum bleeding).
Methods: We examined birth registry information from Washington State
during 1989-1996 on uncomplicated singleton pregnancies of at least 34
weeks' gestation that either were delivered at home by a health
professional (N = 5854) or were transferred to medical facilities after
attempted delivery at home (N = 279). These intended home births were
compared with births of singletons planned to be born in hospitals (N 10,593) during the same years.
Results: Infants of planned home deliveries were at increased risk of
neonatal death (adjusted relative risk [RR] 1.99, 95% confidence
interval [CI] 1.06, 3.73), and Apgar score no higher than 3 at 5 minutes
(RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.29, 4.16). These same relationships remained when
the analysis was restricted to pregnancies of at least 37 weeks'
gestation. Among nulliparous women only, these deliveries also were
associated with an increased risk of prolonged labor (RR 1.73, 95% CI
1.28, 2.34) and postpartum bleeding (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.74, 4.36).
Conclusion: This study suggests that planned home births in Washington
State during 1989-1996 had greater infant and maternal risks than did
hospital births.
aDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington School of Public
Health and Community Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA
bDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington
School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA
cDepartment of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital and Regional Medical
Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
dEpidemiology Program Office, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
We thank the Washington State Department of Health for providing access
to birth certificate data, Paul Doria-Rose and Susan Nielson-Searles for
their editorial assistance, and William O'Brien from the University of
Washington for his computer programming assistance.
(Obstet Gynecol 2002:100:253-259. © 2002 by The American College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the resurgence of interest in planned out-of-hospital deliveries in
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the past 30 years, there has been much debate about the safety of home
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
deliveries. The results of studies comparing neonatal and perinatal
mortality associated with intended home deliveries and with hospital
deliveries have been conflicting, and these studies often have not been
able to fully separate the influence of delivery location from other
determinants of pregnancy outcome with which delivery location may be
associated. Studies done in Missouri, North Carolina, and Australia1-3
observed an elevated risk of neonatal death in intended home births
delivered by professional providers, whereas a study done in Washington
State on intended home births found no increased risk of neonatal
mortality.4 All four studies included comparison groups of hospital
births attended by health professionals. However, only one of the
studies sought to differentiate whether a hospital birth was intended to
occur at home at the onset of labor.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the risk of neonatal death
for intended home deliveries by professional providers compared with
that of intended hospital deliveries. We also evaluated whether planned
home deliveries were associated with an altered risk of postneonatal
death, neonatal respiratory distress, very low Apgar score at 5 minutes,
prolonged labor, and postpartum hemorrhage.
Materials and Methods
We conducted a population-based cohort study using Washington State
birth certificate data from 1989 to 1996. The birth certificate data
were linked to the Washington State infant death certificates to
identify cases of neonatal death and postneonatal death. Other outcomes
such as postpartum bleeding, prolonged labor, neonatal respiratory
distress (defined as postdelivery ventilation for more than 30 minutes),
and a very low Apgar score (3) at 5 minutes were identified through
information provided by birth certificates. Because Washington State
birth certificates do not identify which home births are planned, we
defined planned home births as those singleton newborns of at least 34
weeks' gestation who were delivered at home and who had a midwife,
nurse, or physician listed as either the birth attendant or certifier on
the birth certificate (if an attendant is not listed on the birth
certificate, then the person listed as the certifier attended the
delivery). In addition, singleton newborns with gestational age of at
least 34 weeks who were born after transfer from home to a medical
facility were considered to be planned home births if their birth
certificates indicated that delivery was initially attempted at home by
a health care professional. The gestational age of an infant was
recorded by the attendant of record at each birth. The cohort of
intended home births consisted of 7518 newborns (approximately 1% of all
deliveries in Washington State during the study period), 7019 of whom
were born at home, and 499 of whom were born in hospitals after transfer
from home. For comparison, the birth certificate records of 14,038
singletons who were of at least 34 weeks' gestation and born in
hospitals (with no indication on the birth certificate that the delivery
was initially attempted at home) were selected at random, except for
frequency matching by year of birth to the infants intended to be born
at home. To minimize misclassification of intended and unintended home
births, the main analysis was confined to births in which there were no
recorded pregnancy-related complications (6133 home births, 10,593
hospital births), because it is unlikely that women with one or more of
these complications actually intended to deliver at home (Figure 1). Two
hundred seventy-nine of the 6133 home deliveries were births attempted
at home before transfer to a hospital. Pregnancy-related complications
included 18 specific diagnoses: anemia (hematocrit <30% or hemoglobin
<10 mg/dL), cardiac disease, acute or chronic lung disease, diabetes,
polyhydramnios, oligohydramnios, genital herpes, hemoglobinopathy,
chronic hypertension, pregnancy-induced hypertension, eclampsia,
incompetent cervix, previous preterm or small for gestational age
infant, macrosomia in a previous birth (>4000 g), renal disease, Rh
sensitization, syphilis, and hepatitis B infection. Secondary analyses
were performed after further restricting the study subjects to infants
weighing at least 2500 g at birth or of at least 37 weeks' gestation,
again in an effort to minimize the possibility of including births at
home that were high risk and thus not planned to take place there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 1. Selection criteria and analysis scheme used for comparing
planned home births to hospital births. *Total numbers for birth weight
greater than or equal to 2500 g. Pang. Washington State Home Births.
Obstet Gynecol 2002.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To assess the influence of planned location of birth apart from that of
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
other factors, the relative risk (RR) for each outcome was estimated by
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
stratified analysis using the Cochran Mantel-Haenszel method. All
biostatistical calculations were done through use of SAS software (6.12
TS050; SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Variables that were considered as
potential confounders or effect modifiers included maternal age (10-19
years, 20-29 years, 30+ years), race (white, black, Asian, and other),
marital status (married, unmarried), educational level (high school or
less, more than high school), payer status (indigent,
insured/self-paying), smoking (yes, no), county of birth (King County,
Pierce County, Snohomish County, Spokane County, and other counties),
residence (urban, rural), prenatal care (initial visit during first,
second, or third trimester), parity (0, 1+), and birth weight (less than
2500 g, 2500+ g). A factor was considered in the final model if it
altered the crude relative risk by at least 10%.
Analysis of Washington State birth certificate data from unidentified
participants was approved for research purposes through the University
of Washington institutional review board and in agreement with the
Washington State Department of Health.
Results
Relative to women intending to deliver in hospital, those intending to
deliver at home were, on average, older, more likely to be married,
white, nonsmokers, and parous (Table 1). They also tended to be more
highly educated; however, data on education were not collected for
mothers giving birth before 1992 (almost 50% of both of the home birth
and hospital birth cohorts). Women intending to deliver at home were
slightly less likely to reside in an urban area, to live in King County,
to have initiated prenatal care during the first trimester, and to
deliver infants weighing less than 2500 g. Among women who had birth
certificate data on ultrasound use, 34% of those who chose home births
had at least one ultrasound done during their pregnancies as compared
with 35% of the women who chose hospital births (data not shown). Women
who intended to deliver at home were also less likely to be indigent as
identified by payer status, though data on payer status was missing for
more than 30% of women.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infants born to women who planned to deliver at home had lower Apgar
scores at 5 minutes than infants born to women who planned to deliver in
hospitals, and a greater proportion of these infants died during the
neonatal period or had respiratory distress at delivery (Table 2). The
proportions of infants dying in the postneonatal period were similar for
the two groups. Compared with women delivering in hospitals, a slightly
higher percentage of women with planned home deliveries had prolonged
labor and postpartum bleeding.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The risk of neonatal death was almost twice as high for infants born to
women intending to deliver at home as for infants born to women
delivering in hospitals (RR 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06,
3.73), after adjustment for parity (Table 3). Adjustment for either
maternal education or payer status led to a very slight increase in the
RR. The association between place of intended delivery and neonatal
death was not affected appreciably by adjustment for any other potential
confounding factors described above. Similar findings were seen when
further restricting the analysis to infants of at least 37 weeks'
gestation (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.09, 3.97, after adjusting for maternal age)
(Table 3) and to infants with birth weight of at least 2500 g.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The association between intent to deliver at home and neonatal death was
particularly strong in previously nulliparous women (RR 2.73, 95% CI
1.06, 7.06). This relative risk remained elevated when the analysis was
further restricted to infants with gestational age of 37 weeks or
greater (RR 2.99, 95% CI 1.12, 7.94).
Infants born to women intending a home delivery were more than twice as
likely to have a very low Apgar score at 5 minutes (RR adjusted for
maternal age 2.31, 95% CI 1.29, 4.16) (Table 3). The size of the
relative risk was similar for infants born to nulliparous or to parous
women.
Infants born to nulliparous women who intended to deliver at home
appeared to have an increased risk of neonatal respiratory distress
relative to infants of other nulliparous women (RR 2.79, 95% CI 0.98,
7.93). Restriction of the analysis to infants of at least 37 weeks'
gestation gave a similar result (RR 3.17, 95% CI 1.07, 9.42).
Nulliparous women intending a home delivery were more likely to have
prolonged labor (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.28, 2.34) and to have postpartum
hemorrhage (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.74, 4.36) than nulliparous women
delivering in hospitals. Similar results were observed when further
restricting the analysis to infants of at least 37 weeks' gestation. No
association between these two maternal complications and intended
location of delivery was seen among parous women; among pregnancies of
at least 34 weeks' gestation, the respective relative risks were 1.09
(95% CI 0.67, 1.77) and 1.05 (95% CI 0.68, 1.60). Among pregnancies of
at least 37 weeks' gestation, the respective relative risks were 1.07
(95% CI 0.66, 1.74) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.63, 1.50).
Deaths from congenital heart disease and respiratory distress, two
causes that might be expected to be amenable to prevention in the
hospital setting, occurred with a relatively higher frequency among
infants whose births were planned at home (Table 4).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discussion
Although mothers intending to deliver infants at home were more likely
to be at least 20 years old, married, nonsmokers, and insured than
mothers who delivered in hospitals, planned home births were associated
with an elevated risk of neonatal mortality and very low Apgar score at
5 minutes in this study. Planned home births were also associated with
increased risk of prolonged labor and postpartum bleeding among
nulliparous women. The incidence of neonatal mortality was 3.5 out of
1000 live births for planned home births and 1.7 out of 1000 live births
for hospital births. Planned home births were associated with a
two-fold increase in the risk of having a very low Apgar score at 5
minutes, a 50% increase in the risk of prolonged labor, and a 58%
increase in the risk of postpartum bleeding.
This study has several limitations that are related to the reliance on
birth certificate data. These include the potential for misclassifying
unplanned home births as planned home births and for misclassifying
various outcomes and covariates. In addition, data were missing for
some potential confounders and effect modifiers. Several of the
outcomes of interest were relatively uncommon, leading to results with
wide confidence intervals. Lastly, the specific content of prenatal
care for each pregnancy and its use for screening or for diagnosis of
adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes could not be ascertained through
use of birth certificates.
In previous studies, neonatal mortality among unplanned home births was
high (73 of 1000 to 120 of 1000 live births).2,5 A proportion of home
births are unplanned, and a large number of unplanned home births occur
in women who have complicated pregnancies and/or who deliver preterm
infants.5 Therefore, misclassification of any unplanned home births as
planned home births in this study would result in inflated risk
estimates of neonatal mortality and other outcomes for planned home
births.6 We sought to minimize misclassification of intended location of
delivery in this study by excluding infants born at less than 34 weeks'
gestation and by excluding births in which complications were identified
during pregnancy. This source of misclassification likely was further
decreased when we restricted the analysis to infants with birth weight
of at least 2500 g or to infants of at least 37 weeks' gestation.
Because information on birth weight was missing more often for home than
hospital births, we gave primary emphasis to the analyses that did not
consider birth weight.
Several of the outcomes in this study may have been misclassified,
namely respiratory distress requiring assisted ventilation for more than
30 minutes, prolonged labor, and postpartum hemorrhage. The likelihood
of misclassification might be greater in a home setting than in a
hospital, but the magnitude and direction of any such bias cannot be
predicted and so caution should be used when interpreting the results
for these outcomes.
Misclassification of potential confounders and effect modifiers will
occur to the extent that ascertainment and reporting of these factors is
incomplete on birth certificates. A study in Tennessee found that
demographic characteristics and birth weight were accurately obtained on
birth certificates, in contrast to data concerning complications of
labor and delivery, abnormal conditions of neonates, and congenital
anomalies.7 However, there is no reason to expect that there would be a
difference in the ascertainment or reporting of these factors between
home and hospital births in which professional providers were present.
Because Washington State birth certificates did not solicit information
on maternal education or payment source before 1992, we were not able to
fully assess the influence of these two factors on the association
between planned location of birth and the outcomes of interest. That
influence is likely to be minimal, however, because none of the risk
estimates of the outcomes changed appreciably after restriction of the
analysis to births occurring during 1992-1996 that permitted adjustment
for these factors. Results of previous studies suggest that planned
home births are not associated with an increased risk of a having a low
Apgar score at 5 minutes.4,8-13 However, these studies have defined a
"low" score as less than 7 or 8. Because there is considerable
potential for subjective variation in assessment of Apgar scores between
5 and 8, it is possible that this outcome was misclassified. In
addition, the clinical importance of Apgar scores between 5 and 8 on
other infant outcomes is unclear. We defined a low Apgar score as one
that was less than or equal to 3 to minimize potential misclassification
and also because Apgar scores less than or equal to 3 are more strongly
associated with adverse outcomes.
The safety of intended home births remains controversial. In one
population-based cohort study of 3067 intended home deliveries in
Missouri, there was a two-fold increase in the overall risk of neonatal
death in babies delivered at home compared with hospital deliveries
attended by physicians.3 Providers of all levels of training attended
the intended home deliveries, with higher risk estimates associated with
lower levels of attendant training. A second cohort study of 934 home
deliveries in North Carolina observed that the risk of neonatal death
was four of 1000 live births in planned home deliveries attended by lay
midwives, 30 of 1000 live births when the home delivery was attended by
a provider other than a physician or lay midwife, and 12 of 1000 live
births that took place in hospitals.2 Thus, there was a suggestion in
both studies that the level of training of the home birth attendant may
partly determine the outcome of the birth. However, neither study
adjusted for antenatal complications of pregnancy or for low birth
weight, both of which are more common among hospital births. Failure to
adjust for one or both of these variables would be expected to result in
artificially low estimates of the risk of planned home births when
compared with hospital birth cohorts.14,15 An Australian study,
comparing death rates of intended home births where the neonates weighed
2500 grams or more to national Australian rates for infants of
comparable birth weight, observed a 1.6-fold increase in the former
group (95% CI 1.1, 2.4).1 A fourth study comparing 6456 out-of-hospital
births attended by licensed midwives to 23,956 hospital births attended
by physicians in Washington State during 1980-1990 observed that
out-of-hospital deliveries were associated with a comparable rate of
neonatal death as hospital deliveries.4 This study addressed possible
confounding by maternal age, ethnicity, marital status, occupation,
parity, adequacy of prenatal care, classification of residence, and
pregnancy-related complications on neonatal mortality in both groups.
However, information allowing more accurate determination of the
intended location of delivery became available from Washington State
birth certificates only at the end of the period included in this study,
limiting the ability of the authors to remove potential bias from the
misclassification of infants of planned home deliveries who were born
after transfer from home to medical facilities as hospital births.
The proportion of physicians attending home births in this cohort was
too small (7.6% of all home births) to examine pregnancy outcomes for
this group alone. Unlike the previous study done in Washington State,
ours did not address the influences of different types of nonphysician
attendants in the outcomes of home delivery because we could not readily
verify this information on the Washington State birth certificates. A
study done by Myers et al showed that birth certificate data correctly
identified attendant type for out-of-hospital births 30% of the time.5
The major source of attendant misclassification was between the various
types of midwives. The proportion of misclassification between
professional and nonprofessional providers was not assessed.
The results of our study suggest that planned home births are associated
with an increased risk of adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes,
particularly among nulliparous women. Nonetheless, more light needs to
be shed on this controversial topic before practitioners and expectant
parents can be fairly counseled about the safety of planned home births.
Future observational studies using a study design that accurately
assesses the intention to deliver at home, adverse pregnancy outcomes,
and relevant confounding factors are needed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Bastian H, Keirse MJ, Lancaster PA. Perinatal death associated with
planned home birth in Australia: Population based study [see comments].
BMJ 1998;317:384-8.
2. Burnett CA, Jones JA, Rooks J, Chen CH, Tyler CW Jr, Miller CA. Home
delivery and neonatal mortality in North Carolina. JAMA
1980;244:2741-5.
3. Schramm WF, Barnes DE, Bakewell JM. Neonatal mortality in Missouri
home births, 1978-84. Am J Public Health 1987;77:930-5.
4. Janssen PA, Holt VL, Myers SJ. Licensed midwife-attended,
out-of-hospital births in Washington state: Are they safe? Birth
1994;21:141-8.
5. Myers SJ, St. Clair PA, Gloyd SS, Salzberg P, Myers-Ciecko J.
Unlicensed midwifery practice in Washington state. Am J Public Health
1990;80:726-8.
6. Hinds MW, Bergeisen GH, Allen DT. Neonatal outcome in planned v
unplanned out-of-hospital births in Kentucky. JAMA 1985;253:1578-82.
7. Piper JM, Mitchel EF Jr, Snowden M, Hall C, Adams M, Taylor P.
Validation of 1989 Tennessee birth certificates using maternal and
newborn hospital records. Am J Epidemiol 1993;137:758-68.
8. Duran AM. The safety of home birth: The farm study. Am J Public
Health 1992;82:450-3.
9. Woodcock HC, Read AW, Bower C, Stanley FJ, Moore DJ. A matched
cohort study of planned home and hospital births in Western Australia
1981-1987 [published erratum appears in Midwifery 1995 Jun;11:99].
Midwifery 1994;10:125-35.
10. Olsen O. Meta-analysis of the safety of home birth. Birth
1997;24:4-13; discussion 14-6.
11. Anderson RE, Murphy PA. Outcomes of 11,788 planned home births
attended by certified nurse-midwives. A retrospective descriptive
study. J Nurse Midwifery 1995;40:483-92.
12. Murphy PA, Fullerton J. Outcomes of intended home births in
nurse-midwifery practice: A prospective descriptive study. Obstet
Gynecol 1998;92:461-70.
13. Declercq ER, Paine LL, Winter MR. Home birth in the United States,
1989-1992. A longitudinal descriptive report of national birth
certificate data. J Nurse Midwifery 1995;40:474-82.
14. Buehler JW, Kleinman JC, Hogue CJ, Strauss LT, Smith JC. Birth
weight-specific infant mortality, United States, 1960 and 1980. Public
Health Rep 1987;102:151-61.
15. Buehler JW, Strauss LT, Hogue CJ, Smith JC. Birth weight-specific
causes of infant mortality, United States, 1980. Public Health Rep
1987;102:162-71.
Address reprint requests to: Jenny Pang, MD, MPH, University of
Washington School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Box
357236, Seattle, Washington 98195; E-mail: jwpang@u.washington.edu
Received October 25, 2001.
Received in revised form February 15, 2002.
Accepted March 14, 2002.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 2002 by The American College of Obstetricians and
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gynecologists
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Published by Elsevier Science Inc.
Visit Obstetrics & Gynecology online at http://www.greenjournal.org
>At Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Kathi Wilson wrote:
>I would never pass judgement one way or the other until I'd read the
>study. Abstracts are crap, pure and simple. Personally, I'm a "show me
>the money" type of gal. I won't comment until I read the text.
>
>The interesting thing I find is that you entitle this "the end of the
>discussion". How come the halting of the WHI trial on hormone replacement
>therapy wasn't "the end of the discussion"?
>
>*****************************
>Kathi Wilson, BHSc, RM
>
>--
>*****************************
>Thames Valley Midwives
>346 Platts Lane,
>London, Ontario, Canada
>http://tvm.on.ca
>mailto:wilsonk@gtn.on.ca
>
--
"Life is neither the notes nor the silence between the notes, but the music that
arises out of sound and silence felt as a living whole. Stop choosing...between
chaos and order, and live at the boundary between them, where rest and action
move together..." David Whyte