Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2022
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2022
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Research

Outcomes of planned home birth with registered midwife versus planned hospital birth with midwife or physician

Patricia A. Janssen, Lee Saxell, Lesley A. Page, Michael C. Klein, Robert M. Liston and Shoo K. Lee
CMAJ September 15, 2009 181 (6-7) 377-383; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.081869
Patricia A. Janssen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lee Saxell
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lesley A. Page
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael C. Klein
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert M. Liston
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shoo K. Lee
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background: Studies of planned home births attended by registered midwives have been limited by incomplete data, nonrepresentative sampling, inadequate statistical power and the inability to exclude unplanned home births. We compared the outcomes of planned home births attended by midwives with those of planned hospital births attended by midwives or physicians.

Methods: We included all planned home births attended by registered midwives from Jan. 1, 2000, to Dec. 31, 2004, in British Columbia, Canada (n = 2889), and all planned hospital births meeting the eligibility requirements for home birth that were attended by the same cohort of midwives (n = 4752). We also included a matched sample of physician-attended planned hospital births (n = 5331). The primary outcome measure was perinatal mortality; secondary outcomes were obstetric interventions and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Results: The rate of perinatal death per 1000 births was 0.35 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00–1.03) in the group of planned home births; the rate in the group of planned hospital births was 0.57 (95% CI 0.00–1.43) among women attended by a midwife and 0.64 (95% CI 0.00–1.56) among those attended by a physician. Women in the planned home-birth group were significantly less likely than those who planned a midwife-attended hospital birth to have obstetric interventions (e.g., electronic fetal monitoring, relative risk [RR] 0.32, 95% CI 0.29–0.36; assisted vaginal delivery, RR 0.41, 95% 0.33–0.52) or adverse maternal outcomes (e.g., third- or fourth-degree perineal tear, RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.28–0.59; postpartum hemorrhage, RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49–0.77). The findings were similar in the comparison with physician-assisted hospital births. Newborns in the home-birth group were less likely than those in the midwife-attended hospital-birth group to require resuscitation at birth (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.14–0.37) or oxygen therapy beyond 24 hours (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.24–0.59). The findings were similar in the comparison with newborns in the physician-assisted hospital births; in addition, newborns in the home-birth group were less likely to have meconium aspiration (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.21–0.93) and more likely to be admitted to hospital or readmitted if born in hospital (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.09–1.85).

Interpretation: Planned home birth attended by a registered midwife was associated with very low and comparable rates of perinatal death and reduced rates of obstetric interventions and other adverse perinatal outcomes compared with planned hospital birth attended by a midwife or physician.

View Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 181 (6-7)
CMAJ
Vol. 181, Issue 6-7
15 Sep 2009
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Outcomes of planned home birth with registered midwife versus planned hospital birth with midwife or physician
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Outcomes of planned home birth with registered midwife versus planned hospital birth with midwife or physician
Patricia A. Janssen, Lee Saxell, Lesley A. Page, Michael C. Klein, Robert M. Liston, Shoo K. Lee
CMAJ Sep 2009, 181 (6-7) 377-383; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.081869

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Outcomes of planned home birth with registered midwife versus planned hospital birth with midwife or physician
Patricia A. Janssen, Lee Saxell, Lesley A. Page, Michael C. Klein, Robert M. Liston, Shoo K. Lee
CMAJ Sep 2009, 181 (6-7) 377-383; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.081869
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Interpretation
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Dans ce numéro
  • Highlights
  • The safety of home birth: Is the evidence good enough?
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Routine use of episiotomy with forceps should not be encouraged
  • The authors respond to "Routine use of episiotomy with forceps should not be encouraged"
  • Intrapartum and neonatal mortality among low-risk women in midwife-led versus obstetrician-led care in the Amsterdam region of the Netherlands: a propensity score matched study
  • Mortality in Infants Affected by Preterm Birth and Severe Small-for-Gestational Age Birth Weight
  • Outcomes associated with planned place of birth among women with low-risk pregnancies
  • Childbirth Education Prior to Pregnancy? Survey Findings of Childbirth Preferences and Attitudes Among Young Women
  • Institutional and Cultural Perspectives on Home Birth in Israel
  • Unassisted childbirth: why mothers are leaving the system
  • The effect of maternal age and planned place of birth on intrapartum outcomes in healthy women with straightforward pregnancies: secondary analysis of the Birthplace national prospective cohort study
  • The Context and Consequences of Professional Indemnification of Home Birth Midwifery in Ireland
  • Severe adverse maternal outcomes among low risk women with planned home versus hospital births in the Netherlands: nationwide cohort study
  • Planned Home Birth
  • Expert Workshop Assesses the Significance of Birth Location on Maternal and Infant Outcomes
  • For women with term low-risk pregnancies, risk of perinatal mortality and intrapartum morbidity similar across planned places of birth
  • Cost effectiveness of alternative planned places of birth in woman at low risk of complications: evidence from the Birthplace in England national prospective cohort study
  • Perinatal and maternal outcomes by planned place of birth for healthy women with low risk pregnancies: the Birthplace in England national prospective cohort study
  • Home Birth: A Story of "Infinite Love and Enormous Rejection"
  • The Necessity and Challenge of International Midwifery Science
  • Correction: Research
  • Smoking status and planned hospital births
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • The risk of death or unplanned readmission after discharge from a COVID-19 hospitalization in Alberta and Ontario
  • The link between medical conditions and fatal drownings in Canada: a 10-year cross-sectional analysis
  • Projected estimates of cancer in Canada in 2022
Show more Research

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Obstetrics & gynecology

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Accessibiity
  • CMA Civility Standards
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2022, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

Powered by HighWire