Marit L Bovbjerg, Melissa Cheyney, Lauren Hoehn-Velasco, Diana Jolles, Jennifer Brown, Jennifer Stapleton, Courtney Everson, Susan Stapleton, Saraswathi Vedam
{"title":"美国计划内家庭分娩与计划内分娩中心分娩对低风险分娩者的效果相当。","authors":"Marit L Bovbjerg, Melissa Cheyney, Lauren Hoehn-Velasco, Diana Jolles, Jennifer Brown, Jennifer Stapleton, Courtney Everson, Susan Stapleton, Saraswathi Vedam","doi":"10.1097/MLR.0000000000002074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>There are lingering concerns in the United States about home birth. We used 2 large (n = 50,043; n = 62,984), national community birth registries to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes for planned home versus planned birth center births.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To compare outcomes by intended birth site, we used logistic regressions, controlling for demographic and pregnancy risk variables. Maternal outcomes included intrapartum or postpartum transfer to hospital, hospitalization, cesarean, and hemorrhage; neonatal outcomes included neonatal transfer, hospitalization, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and intrapartum or neonatal death. Analyses were conducted twice, once in each dataset.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Individuals who planned home births had a lower incidence of all types of transfers, compared with those who planned birth center births, but in one dataset only, experienced more cesareans [adjusted odds ratio (95% CI): 1.32 (1.02-1.70); 0.95 (0.88-1.03)]. Planned home birth was associated with lower adjusted odds of maternal hospitalization in one dataset but not the other [0.97 (0.54-1.74); 0.85 (0.76-0.95)], and was not associated with hemorrhage. Neonatal outcomes likewise were either not associated with a planned birthplace or suggested home birth was safer: hospitalization [0.77 (0.53-1.11), 0.90 (0.82-0.98)], neonatal intensive care unit admission [0.54 (0.28-1.00), 0.97 (0.86-1.10)]. There was no observable association with intrapartum or neonatal death: 1.07 (0.68-1.67; only calculated once because of small numbers of events).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Planned home births are as safe as planned birth center births for low-risk pregnancies. Current guidelines advising against planned home births are not supported by these data.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11542973/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Planned Home Births in the United States Have Outcomes Comparable to Planned Birth Center Births for Low-Risk Birthing Individuals.\",\"authors\":\"Marit L Bovbjerg, Melissa Cheyney, Lauren Hoehn-Velasco, Diana Jolles, Jennifer Brown, Jennifer Stapleton, Courtney Everson, Susan Stapleton, Saraswathi Vedam\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MLR.0000000000002074\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>There are lingering concerns in the United States about home birth. We used 2 large (n = 50,043; n = 62,984), national community birth registries to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes for planned home versus planned birth center births.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To compare outcomes by intended birth site, we used logistic regressions, controlling for demographic and pregnancy risk variables. Maternal outcomes included intrapartum or postpartum transfer to hospital, hospitalization, cesarean, and hemorrhage; neonatal outcomes included neonatal transfer, hospitalization, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and intrapartum or neonatal death. Analyses were conducted twice, once in each dataset.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Individuals who planned home births had a lower incidence of all types of transfers, compared with those who planned birth center births, but in one dataset only, experienced more cesareans [adjusted odds ratio (95% CI): 1.32 (1.02-1.70); 0.95 (0.88-1.03)]. Planned home birth was associated with lower adjusted odds of maternal hospitalization in one dataset but not the other [0.97 (0.54-1.74); 0.85 (0.76-0.95)], and was not associated with hemorrhage. Neonatal outcomes likewise were either not associated with a planned birthplace or suggested home birth was safer: hospitalization [0.77 (0.53-1.11), 0.90 (0.82-0.98)], neonatal intensive care unit admission [0.54 (0.28-1.00), 0.97 (0.86-1.10)]. There was no observable association with intrapartum or neonatal death: 1.07 (0.68-1.67; only calculated once because of small numbers of events).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Planned home births are as safe as planned birth center births for low-risk pregnancies. Current guidelines advising against planned home births are not supported by these data.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11542973/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"88\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000002074\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000002074","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
Planned Home Births in the United States Have Outcomes Comparable to Planned Birth Center Births for Low-Risk Birthing Individuals.
Objective: There are lingering concerns in the United States about home birth. We used 2 large (n = 50,043; n = 62,984), national community birth registries to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes for planned home versus planned birth center births.
Methods: To compare outcomes by intended birth site, we used logistic regressions, controlling for demographic and pregnancy risk variables. Maternal outcomes included intrapartum or postpartum transfer to hospital, hospitalization, cesarean, and hemorrhage; neonatal outcomes included neonatal transfer, hospitalization, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and intrapartum or neonatal death. Analyses were conducted twice, once in each dataset.
Results: Individuals who planned home births had a lower incidence of all types of transfers, compared with those who planned birth center births, but in one dataset only, experienced more cesareans [adjusted odds ratio (95% CI): 1.32 (1.02-1.70); 0.95 (0.88-1.03)]. Planned home birth was associated with lower adjusted odds of maternal hospitalization in one dataset but not the other [0.97 (0.54-1.74); 0.85 (0.76-0.95)], and was not associated with hemorrhage. Neonatal outcomes likewise were either not associated with a planned birthplace or suggested home birth was safer: hospitalization [0.77 (0.53-1.11), 0.90 (0.82-0.98)], neonatal intensive care unit admission [0.54 (0.28-1.00), 0.97 (0.86-1.10)]. There was no observable association with intrapartum or neonatal death: 1.07 (0.68-1.67; only calculated once because of small numbers of events).
Conclusions: Planned home births are as safe as planned birth center births for low-risk pregnancies. Current guidelines advising against planned home births are not supported by these data.