Child and maternal benefits and risks of caseload midwifery - a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lotta Wassén, Beata Borgström Bolmsjö, Sophia Frantz, Anna Hagman, Marie Lindroth, Christine Rubertsson, Annika Strandell, Therese Svanberg, Anna Wessberg, Susanna M Wallerstedt
Author Information
  1. Lotta Wassén: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  2. Beata Borgström Bolmsjö: Department Research and education, HTA syd, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
  3. Sophia Frantz: Department Research and education, HTA syd, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
  4. Anna Hagman: Regional Healthcare, Region Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  5. Marie Lindroth: Midwifery Clinic in Primary Care, Region Skåne, Malmö, Sweden.
  6. Christine Rubertsson: Department of Health Science, Medical faculty, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
  7. Annika Strandell: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  8. Therese Svanberg: Medical library, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Region Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  9. Anna Wessberg: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  10. Susanna M Wallerstedt: HTA-centrum, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Region Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden. susanna.wallerstedt@pharm.gu.se.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It has been reported that caseload midwifery, which implies continuity of midwifery care during pregnancy, childbirth, and the postnatal period, improves the outcomes for the mother and child. The aim of this study was to review benefits and risks of caseload midwifery, compared with standard care comparable to the Swedish setting where the same midwife usually provides antenatal care and the checkup postnatally, but does not assist during birth and the first week postpartum.
METHODS: Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and the Cochrane Library were searched (Nov 4th, 2021) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Retrieved articles were assessed and pooled risk ratios calculated when possible, using random-effects meta-analyses. Certainty of evidence was assessed according to GRADE.
RESULTS: In all, 7,594 patients in eight RCTs were included, whereof five RCTs without major risk of bias, including 5,583 patients, formed the basis for the conclusions. There was moderate certainty of evidence for little or no difference regarding the risk of Apgar ≤ 7 at 5 min, instrumental birth, and preterm birth. There was low certainty of evidence for little or no difference regarding the risk of perinatal mortality, neonatal intensive care, perineal tear, bleeding, and acute caesarean section. Caseload midwifery may reduce the overall risk of caesarean section. Regarding breastfeeding after hospital discharge, maternal mortality, maternal morbidity, health-related quality of life, postpartum depression, health care experience/satisfaction and confidence, available studies did not allow conclusions (very low certainty of evidence). For severe child morbidity and Apgar ≤ 4 at 5 min, there was no literature available.
CONCLUSIONS: When caseload midwifery was compared with models of care that resembles the Swedish one, little or no difference was found for several critical and important child and maternal outcomes with low-moderate certainty of evidence, but the risk of caesarean section may be reduced. For several outcomes, including critical and important ones, studies were lacking, or the certainty of evidence was very low. RCTs in relevant settings are therefore required.

Keywords

References

  1. BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Jun;6(6): [PMID: 34130991]
  2. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020 Apr;99(4):546-554 [PMID: 31713236]
  3. Women Birth. 2019 Feb;32(1):58-63 [PMID: 29773474]
  4. Midwifery. 2018 Jul;62:220-229 [PMID: 29723790]
  5. Women Birth. 2016 Jun;29(3):214-22 [PMID: 26603016]
  6. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 28;4:CD004667 [PMID: 27121907]
  7. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018 Apr;97(4):466-476 [PMID: 29172245]
  8. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018 Dec 6;18(1):481 [PMID: 30522453]
  9. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003 Feb;13(2):119-27 [PMID: 12735413]
  10. BJOG. 2012 Nov;119(12):1483-92 [PMID: 22830446]
  11. Lancet. 2013 Nov 23;382(9906):1723-32 [PMID: 24050808]
  12. Women Birth. 2022 Jul;35(4):e397-e407 [PMID: 34257046]
  13. BJOG. 2016 Feb;123(3):465-74 [PMID: 26498455]
  14. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016 Feb 03;16:28 [PMID: 26841782]
  15. Midwifery. 2002 Jun;18(2):102-12 [PMID: 12139908]
  16. Women Birth. 2022 May;35(3):e294-e301 [PMID: 34103270]
  17. PLoS Med. 2020 Oct 6;17(10):e1003350 [PMID: 33022010]
  18. BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71 [PMID: 33782057]
  19. PLoS One. 2021 Apr 21;16(4):e0248588 [PMID: 33882059]
  20. Midwifery. 2000 Dec;16(4):295-302 [PMID: 11080465]
  21. BMJ. 2004 Jun 19;328(7454):1490 [PMID: 15205295]
  22. BJOG. 2001 Jan;108(1):16-22 [PMID: 11212998]

MeSH Term

Female
Pregnancy
Infant, Newborn
Humans
Child
Midwifery
Delivery, Obstetric
Cesarean Section
Mothers
Risk Assessment

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0midwiferycareriskevidencecertaintycaseloadRCTsmaternaloutcomeschildreviewbirthlittledifferencelowcaesareansectionbenefitsriskscomparedSwedishpostpartumassessedGRADEpatientsincludingconclusionsregarding5 minmortalityCaseloadmaymorbidityavailablestudiesseveralcriticalimportantBACKGROUND:reportedimpliescontinuitypregnancychildbirthpostnatalperiodimprovesmotheraimstudystandardcomparablesettingmidwifeusuallyprovidesantenatalcheckuppostnatallyassistfirstweekMETHODS:MedlineEmbaseCinahlCochraneLibrarysearchedNov4th2021randomizedcontrolledtrialsRetrievedarticlespooledratioscalculatedpossibleusingrandom-effectsmeta-analysesCertaintyaccordingRESULTS:7594eightincludedwhereoffivewithoutmajorbias5583formedbasismoderateApgar ≤ 7instrumentalpretermperinatalneonatalintensiveperinealtearbleedingacutereduceoverallRegardingbreastfeedinghospitaldischargehealth-relatedqualitylifedepressionhealthexperience/satisfactionconfidenceallowsevereApgar ≤ 4literatureCONCLUSIONS:modelsresemblesonefoundlow-moderatereducedoneslackingrelevantsettingsthereforerequiredChild-systematicmeta-analysisCaremodelMeta-analysisSystematic

Similar Articles

Cited By