Designing a Midwife-Led Birth Center Program Based on the MAP-IT Model: A Sequential Explanatory Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades, medical supervision of the labor and delivery process has expanded beyond its boundaries to the extent that in many settings, childbirth has become a medical event. This situation has influenced midwifery care. One of the significant barriers to midwives providing care to pregnant women is the medicalization of childbirth. So far, the policies and programs of the Ministry of Health to reduce medical interventions and cesarean section rates have not been successful. Therefore, the current study aims to be conducted with the purpose of "Designing a Midwife-Led Birth Center Program Based on the MAP-IT Model". METHODS/DESIGN: The current study is a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design by using the MAP-IT model includes 5 steps: Mobilize, Assess, Plan, Implement, and Track, providing a framework for planning and evaluating public health interventions in a community. It will be implemented in three stages: The first phase of the research will be a cross-sectional descriptive study to determine the attitudes and preferences towards establishing a midwifery-led birthing center focusing on midwives and women of childbearing age by using two researcher-made questionnaires to assess the participants' attitudes and preferences toward establishing a midwifery-led birthing center. Subsequently, extreme cases will be selected based on the participants' average attitude scores toward establishing a midwifery-led birthing center in the quantitative section. In the second stage of the study, qualitative in-depth interviews will be conducted with the identified extreme cases from the first quantitative phase and other stakeholders (the first and second steps of the MAP-IT model, namely identifying and forming a stakeholder coalition, and assessing community resources and real needs). In this stage, the conventional qualitative content analysis approach will be used. Subsequently, based on the quantitative and qualitative data obtained up to this stage, a midwifery-led birthing center program based on the third step of the MAP-IT model, namely Plan, will be developed and validated using the Delphi method. DISCUSSION: This is the first study that uses a mixed-method approach for designing a midwife-led maternity care program based on the MAP-IT model. This study will fill the research gap in the field of improving midwife-led maternity care and designing a program based on the needs of a large group of pregnant mothers. We hope this program facilitates improved eligibility of midwifery to continue care to manage and improve their health easily and affordably. ETHICAL CODE: IR.MUMS.NURSE.REC. 1403. 014.

In recent decades, medical management of the labor and delivery process has extended beyond its limitations to the extent that in many settings, childbirth has become a medical event. This situation has influenced midwifery care. The global midwifery situation indicates that one in every five women worldwide gives birth without the support of a skilled attendant. One of the significant barriers to midwives providing care to pregnant women is the medicalization of childbirth. In industrialized countries, maternal and infant mortality rates have decreased over the past 60 years due to medical or social reasons. So far, the policies and programs of the Ministry of Health to diminish medical interventions and cesarean section rates have not been successful. Midwifery models in hospital care contain midwives who support women's choices and diverse ideas about childbirth on the one hand, and on the other hand, they must adhere to organizational guidelines as employees, primarily based on a medical and pathological approach rather than a health-oriented and midwifery perspective. Therefore, the current study aims to be conducted with the purpose of "Designing a midwifery-led birth centered maternity program based on the MAP-IT model". It is a Model for Implementing Healthy People 2030, (Mobilize, Assess, Plan, Implement, Track), a step-by-step method for creating healthy communities. Using MAP-IT can help public health professionals and community changemakers implement a plan that is tailored to a community's needs and assets.

A case study analysis of a successful birth center in northern Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Mothers and infants continue to die at alarming rates throughout the Global South. Evidence suggests that high-quality midwifery care significantly reduces preventable maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. This paper uses a case study approach to describe the social and institutional model at one birth center in Northern Uganda where, in over 20,000 births, there have been no maternal deaths and the neonatal mortality rate is 11/1000-a rate that is lower than many high-resource countries. METHODS: This case study combined institutional ethnographic and narrative methods to explore key maternal and neonatal outcomes. The sample included birthing people who intended to or had given birth at the center, as well as the midwives, staff, stakeholders, and community health workers affiliated with the center. Data were collected through individual and small group interviews, participant observation, field notes, data and document reviews. Iterative and systematic analytical steps were followed, and all data were organized and managed with Atlas.ti software. RESULTS: Findings describe the setting, an overview of the birth center's history, how it is situated within the community, its staffing, administration, clinical outcomes, and model of care. A synthesis of contextual variables and key outcomes as they relate to the components of the evidence-informed Quality Maternal and Newborn Care (QMNC) framework are presented. Three overarching themes were identified: (a) community knowledge and understanding, (b) community integrated care, and (c) quality care that is respectful, accessible, and available. CONCLUSIONS: This birth center is an example of care that embodies the findings and anticipated outcomes described in the QMNC framework. Replication of this model in other childbearing settings may help alleviate unnecessary perinatal morbidity and mortality.

Intrapartum time intervals and transfer of nulliparae from community births to maternity care units in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Over one-third of nulliparae planning births either at home or in freestanding midwife-led birthing centers (community births) in high-income countries are transferred during labor. Perinatal data are reported each year in Germany for women planning community birth. So far, data sets have not been linked to describe time-related factors associated with nulliparous transfer to hospital. OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of referral for nulliparae and assess maternal and labor characteristics associated with intrapartum transfer. METHODS: Perinatal data from 2010 to 2015 were linked (n = 26,115). Women were reviewed with respect to international eligibility criteria for community birth; 1997 women were excluded (7.6%). Descriptive statistics were reported; unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) tested the predictive effect of demographic and labor factors on rates of intrapartum transfer. RESULTS: One in three nulliparous women (30.6%) were transferred to hospital. Compared with community births, transferred women were significantly more likely to experience longer time intervals during labor: from rupture of membranes (ROM) until birth lasting 5 to 18 h (OR 6.05, CI 5.53-6.61) and 19 to 24 h (OR 10.83, CI 9.45-12.41) compared to one to 4 h; and from onset of labor until birth 11 to 24 h (OR 6.72, CI 6.24-7.23) and 25 to 29 h (OR 26.62, CI 22.77-31.11) compared to one to 10 h. When entering all factors into the model, we found the strongest predictors of transfer to be fetal distress, longer time intervals between ROM until birth and onset of labor until birth. CONCLUSIONS: Nulliparous transfer rates were similar to rates in other high-income countries; 94% of referrals were non-urgent. Time was found to be an independent risk factor for the transfer of nulliparae planning community birth.

An alternative model of maternity care for low-risk birth: Maternal and neonatal outcomes utilizing the midwifery-based birth center model.

OBJECTIVE: To assess key birth outcomes in an alternative maternity care model, midwifery-based birth center care. DATA SOURCES: The American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data Registry and birth certificate files, using national data collected from 2009 to 2019. STUDY DESIGN: This observational cohort study compared key clinical birth outcomes of women at low risk for perinatal complications, comparing those who received care in the midwifery-based birth center model versus hospital-based usual care. Linear regression analysis was used to assess key clinical outcomes in the midwifery-based group as compared with hospital-based usual care. The hospital-based group was selected using nearest neighbor matching, and the primary linear regressions were weighted using propensity score weights (PSWs). The key clinical outcomes considered were cesarean delivery, low birth weight, neonatal intensive care unit admission, breastfeeding, and neonatal death. We performed sensitivity analyses using inverse probability weights and entropy balancing weights. We also assessed the remaining role of omitted variable bias using a bounding methodology. DATA COLLECTION: Women aged 16-45 with low-risk pregnancies, defined as a singleton fetus and no record of hypertension or cesarean section, were included. The sample was selected for records that overlapped in each year and state. Counties were included if there were at least 50 midwifery-based birth center births and 300 total births. After matching, the sample size of the birth center cohort was 85,842 and the hospital-based cohort was 261,439. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Women receiving midwifery-based birth center care experienced lower rates of cesarean section (-12.2 percentage points, p < 0.001), low birth weight (-3.2 percentage points, p < 0.001), NICU admission (-5.5 percentage points, p < 0.001), neonatal death (-0.1 percentage points, p < 0.001), and higher rates of breastfeeding (9.3 percentage points, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports midwifery-based birth center care as a high-quality model that delivers optimal outcomes for low-risk maternal/newborn dyads.

The impact of transfer from an alongside midwifery unit to labor and delivery on birthing women: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore laboring women's thoughts, feelings, and experiences of transferring from an Alongside Midwifery Unit or free-standing birth center to labor and delivery. DESIGN: A qualitative online survey was used for this research. SETTING: An Alongside Midwifery Unit in the southwestern United States. PARTICIPANTS: Eight women over the age of eighteen who had transferred to labor and delivery from either the AMU or free-standing birth center. FINDINGS: Five themes emerging from the women's transfer experiences. It was important for the women to maintain their physiologic birth ideals. The initiation of transfer, even a discussion, altered the atmosphere in the birthing room. Women experienced a range of emotions surrounding the transfer. The stories spoke to mourning the loss of physiologic birth experience. Some women expressed guilt about the potential effects on their infants. Post-birth women had realizations about their mental and physical capabilities and limitations. KEY CONCLUSIONS: This pertinent study addressed the effect on women when a transfer needs to occur from an Alongside Midwifery Unit or free-standing Birth Center to the Labor and Delivery Unit. Regardless of the reason, a transfer affected all participants. The psychological impact can have significant consequences on mother and baby's wellbeing. Women need an opportunity to share their story. The fifth theme of learning about themselves mentally and physically is new and not identified in other studies. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Clinical recommendations are proposed to improve understanding and integrate into one's mindset, care processes, and clinical practice. Post-birth care should continue for these women until they completely process and come to a resolution of their experience of transferring to labor and delivery.

Quality indicators of public maternity units in the governorate of Monastir (Tunisia).

INTRODUCTION: Increasing access to healthcare for expectant mothers is a national goal. In Monastir, Tunisia, some Peripheral Maternity Units (PMUs) required assessment. Our goals were to describe the delivery activities in MUs (maternity units) and to assess whether some of PMUs need to have their activities replaced. METHOD: We analyzed aggregate data of deliveries in Monastir from 2015 to 2020. The gouvernorate's seven public MUs were included. Only the morning activity was allotted for obstetricians and gynecologists, in RMUs 1 and 2, whereas they were not available in all PMUs. Data was gathered from the reports of the National Perinatal Program. Both the availability of Comprehensive Essential Obstetric Care (CEOC) and Basic Essential Obstetric Care (BEOC) were calculated. Trends were calculated using Joinpoint software. The Annual Percent Change (APC) was calculated. RESULTS: The number of births decreased from 2015 to 2020 (APC= -4.3%: 95%CI : -6; -2.4; p = 0.003). The largest significant decreases in APCs of deliveries were reported in PMU 2 (APC = -12.6% (95%CI : -20; -4.4; p = 0.014), in PMU 3 (APC = -29.3% (95%CI : -36.5; -21.4; p = 0.001), and in PMU 4 (APC = -32.9% (95%CI: -49.1; -11.5); p = 0.016). If PMU 3 and 4 were no longer operating as maternity facilities, BEOC and CEOC standards would still be adequat. For accessibility, both PMU 3 and PMU 2 are accessible from PMU 4 and PMU 1, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women prefer to give birth in obstetric services with ability to perform emergency caesarean at the expense of PMU. Nowadays, it appears that accessibility is less important than the presence of qualified human resources when a pregnant woman choose a maternity hospital.

The first alongside midwifery unit in Spain: A retrospective cohort study of maternal and neonatal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Midwife-led units have been shown to be safer and reduce interventions for women at low risk of complications at birth. In 2017, the first alongside birth center was opened in Spain. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes for women with uncomplicated pregnancies giving birth in the Midwife-led unit (MLU) and in the Obstetric unit (OU) of the same hospital. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study comparing birth outcomes between low-risk women, depending on their planned place of birth. Data were analyzed with an intention-to-treat approach for women that gave birth between January 2018 and December 2020. RESULTS: A total of 878 women were included in the study, 255 women chose to give birth in the MLU and 623 in the OU. Findings showed that women in the MLU were more likely to have a vaginal birth (91.4%) than in the OU (83.8%) (aOR 2.98 [95%CI 1.62-5.47]), less likely to have an instrumental delivery, 3.9% versus 11.2% (0.25 [0.11-0.55]), to use epidural analgesia, 19.6% versus 77.9% (0.15 [0.04-0.17]) and to have an episiotomy, 7.4% versus 15.4% (0.27 [0.14-0.53]). There were no differences in rates of postpartum hemorrhage, retained placenta, or adverse neonatal outcomes. Intrapartum and postpartum transfer rates from the MLU to the OU were 21.1% and 2.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The high rate of obstetric interventions in Spain could be reduced by implementing midwife-led units across the whole system, without an increase in maternal or neonatal complications.

Examining respect, autonomy, and mistreatment in childbirth in the US: do provider type and place of birth matter?

BACKGROUND: Analyses of factors that determine quality of perinatal care consistently rely on clinical markers, while failing to assess experiential outcomes. Understanding how model of care and birth setting influence experiences of respect, autonomy, and decision making, is essential for comprehensive assessment of quality. METHODS: We examined responses (n = 1771) to an online cross-sectional national survey capturing experiences of perinatal care in the United States. We used validated patient-oriented measures and scales to assess four domains of experience: (1) decision-making, (2) respect, (3) mistreatment, and (4) time spent during visits. We categorized the provider type and birth setting into three groups: midwife at community birth, midwife at hospital-birth, and physician at hospital-birth. For each group, we used multivariate logistic regression, adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics, to estimate the odds of experiential outcomes in all the four domains. RESULTS: Compared to those cared for by physicians in hospitals, individuals cared for by midwives in community settings had more than five times the odds of experiencing higher autonomy (aOR: 5.22, 95% CI: 3.65-7.45), higher respect (aOR: 5.39, 95% CI: 3.72-7.82) and lower odds of mistreatment (aOR: 0.16, 95% CI: 0.10-0.26). We found significant differences across birth settings: participants cared for by midwives in the community settings had significantly better experiential outcomes than those in the hospital settings: high- autonomy (aOR: 2.97, 95% CI: 2.66-4.27), respect (aOR: 4.15, 95% CI: 2.81-6.14), mistreatment (aOR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.11-0.34), time spent (aOR: 8.06, 95% CI: 4.26-15.28). CONCLUSION: Participants reported better experiential outcomes when cared for by midwives than by physicians. And for those receiving midwifery care, the quality of experiential outcomes was significantly higher in community settings than in hospital settings. Care settings matter and structures of hospital-based care may impair implementation of the person-centered midwifery care model.

The impact of birth settings on pregnancy outcomes in the United States.

In the United States, 98.3% of patients give birth in hospitals, 1.1% give birth at home, and 0.5% give birth in freestanding birth centers. This review investigated the impact of birth settings on birth outcomes in the United States. Presently, there are insufficient data to evaluate levels of maternal mortality and severe morbidity according to place of birth. Out-of-hospital births are associated with fewer interventions such as episiotomies, epidural anesthesia, operative deliveries, and cesarean deliveries. When compared with hospital births, there are increased rates of avoidable adverse perinatal outcomes in out-of-hospital births in the United States, both for those with and without risk factors. In one recent study, the neonatal mortality rates were significantly elevated for all planned home births: 13.66 per 10,000 live births (242/177,156; odds ratio, 4.19; 95% confidence interval, 3.62-4.84; P<.0001) vs 3.27 per 10,000 live births for in-hospital Certified Nurse-Midwife-attended births (745/2,280,044; odds ratio, 1). These differences increased further when patients were stratified by recognized risk factors such as breech presentation, multiple gestations, nulliparity, advanced maternal age, and postterm pregnancy. Causes of the increased perinatal morbidity and mortality include deliveries of patients with increased risks, absence of standardized criteria to exclude high-risk deliveries, and that most midwives attending out-of-hospital births in the United States do not meet the gold standard for midwifery regulation, the International Confederation of Midwives' Global Standards for Midwifery Education. As part of the informed consent process, pregnant patients interested in out-of-hospital births should be informed of its increased perinatal risks. Hospital births should be supported for all patients, especially those with increased risks.

Policies and Practices on Out-of-Hospital Birth: a Review of Qualitative Studies in the Time of Coronavirus.

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on out-of-hospital births (at home or in an independent birth center) in high-income countries in the time of coronavirus. Qualitative studies published between 2020 and 2022 providing findings on women's and health providers' perspectives and experiences, as well as policies and practices implemented, are synthetized. Recent Findings: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of women choosing the home or a birth center to deliver has grown considerably. Main reasons for this choice include fear of contagion in facilities and restrictions during delivery and the post-partum period, especially women's separation from their companion of choice and their newborn. Findings suggest that homebirth within a public model has several advantages in the experience of birth for both women and professionals during the pandemic period, maintaining the benefits of biomedicine when needed. Summary: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the interest in out-of-hospital birth increased in high-income countries, and the number of women choosing the home or a birth center to deliver has grown considerably. This review aims to give a more in-depth understanding of women's and health providers' perspectives on and experiences of out-of-hospital birth services during this period. Twenty-five studies in different countries, including the USA, Canada, Australia, Switzerland, the Netherlands, the UK, Spain, Croatia, and Norway, were reviewed. Findings stress that out-of-hospital birth has allowed women to deliver according to their wishes and needs. In addition, the pandemic experience represents an opportunity for policy to better support and integrate out-of-hospital services in the health care system in the future.

Prenatal care in US birth centers: Midwives' perceptions of contributors to birthing People's confidence in physiologic birth.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe US freestanding birth center models of prenatal care and to examine how the components of this care contribute to birthing people's confidence in their ability to have a physiologic birth. DESIGN: This was a qualitative descriptive study utilizing semi-structured interviews with birth center midwives. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, constant comparative method and consensus coding to ensure rigor. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Midwives from six urban and rural freestanding birth centers in a Midwestern US state were interviewed. Twelve birth center midwives participated. FINDINGS: Six themes emerged: the birth center physical space and organization of care, dimensions of midwifery care within the birth center, continuity of care and seamless service, the empowered birthing person, physiologic birth as normative, and the hospital paradigm and US cultures of birth. KEY CONCLUSIONS: We identified significant components of birth center models of prenatal care that midwives believe enhance birthing people's confidence for physiologic childbirth. These components may be considered for application to other settings and may improve perinatal care and outcomes.

A Model of True CHOICES: Learnings from a Comprehensive Sexual and Reproductive Health Clinic in Tennessee that Provides Abortions and Opened the City's First Birth Center.

CHOICES: Memphis Center for Reproductive Health staff is passionate about ensuring that everyone has access to the full continuum of comprehensive reproductive health care (including abortion, gender-affirming care, miscarriage management, and community birth) regardless of race, gender identity, sexual orientation, HIV status, economic status, or religious beliefs. Memphis, Tennessee, has a history of limited community birth options (birthing outside of hospital walls). In 2017, when home birth services were added to CHOICES and plans for opening Memphis' first freestanding birth center were being imagined, it was intentional to create a model in which midwifery care could be accessible for patients who may be eligible for state-funded health care services, those considered at higher health risk than traditional low-risk midwifery patients, or both. In fact, individuals and their families with limited out-of-pocket funds and those historically marginalized would purposely receive holistic, individualized care based on their unique health care needs and personal desires, driven by a reproductive justice framework. In this article, we outline the success and challenges of addressing the reproductive health needs of marginalized communities, including the benefits of a nonprofit business model, operationalizing reproductive justice concepts, and the reclamation of Black midwifery. We also discuss the challenges of caring for Black birthing people and providing abortion and gender-affirming care in a politically hostile environment. Although individuals have complex needs, at its core, CHOICES believes that every person must be seen as whole human beings and that each can be cared for by a midwife. The CHOICES approach is informed by evidence-based information, clinical judgment, and an intentional partnership with and investment in a people who have historically been and are presently pushed to the margins, neglected, and blamed for poor health outcomes and demise. Striving to adapt the CHOICES model of care in other parts of the country is important now more than ever following the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Contrasting Birth Preferences to Practices in El Paso, Texas.

Despite calls for increased access to midwifery and a reduction in unnecessary labor interventions by the World Health Organization, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, and the American Public Health Association, for many birthing parents in the United States, this model remains out of reach. Only 10% of U.S. births are attended by midwives, and in Texas, which leads the nation in maternal morbidity and mortality, that number is <7%. This study examines an unmet demand for personalized, low-intervention midwifery care in El Paso, Texas and the surrounding area through surveys and focus groups aimed at exploring women's perceptions of their birthing experiences and access to different models of perinatal care. Resulting data suggests a high level of satisfaction with midwifery among those who were able to access it, while those who had used obstetric care often reported limited options and feelings of trauma.

A Qualitative Study of US Women's Perspectives on Confidence for Physiologic Birth in the Birth Center Model of Prenatal Care.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to increase understanding of the components of the US birth center model of prenatal care and how the birth center prenatal care model contributes to birthing people's confidence for physiologic childbirth. METHODS: This was a qualitative descriptive study using semistructured interviews with individuals who gave birth in freestanding birth centers. Birthing people were recruited from freestanding birth centers in a Midwestern US state and were between the ages of 18 and 42, were English-speaking, and had experienced a birth center birth within the previous 6 months. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using Glaser's constant comparative method. RESULTS: Twelve women who gave birth in birth centers, representing urban and rural settings, participated. Four core categories were identified encompassing the components of birth center prenatal care and how the birth center model contributes to women's confidence for physiologic birth: birth center culture and processes, midwifery model of care within the birth center, internal influences, and outside influences. DISCUSSION: Women who gave birth in birth centers believed that the birth center culture and environment, the midwifery model of care in the birth center, internal influences including the belief that birth is a normal physiologic process, and outside influences including family support and positive birth stories contributed to their confidence for physiologic birth.

Planned Place of Birth-Impact of Psychopathological Risk Factors on the Choice of Birthplace and Its Postpartum Effect on Psychological Adaption: An Exploratory Study.

The choice of birthplace may have an important impact on a woman's health. In this longitudinal study, we investigated the psychopathological risk factors that drive women's choice of birthplace, since their influence is currently not well understood. The research was conducted in 2011/12 and we analyzed data of 177 women (obstetric unit, n = 121; free standing midwifery unit, n = 42; homebirth, n = 14). We focused antepartally (M = 34.3 ± 3.3) on sociodemographic and risk factors of psychopathology, such as prenatal distress (Prenatal Distress Questionnaire), depressiveness (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale), birth anxiety (Birth Anxiety Scale), childhood trauma (Childhood Trauma Questionnaire), and postpartally (M = 6.65 ± 2.6) on birth experience (Salmon's Item List), as well as psychological adaption, such as postpartum depressive symptoms (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale) and birth anxiety felt during birth (modified Birth Anxiety Scale). Women with fear of childbirth and the beginning of birth were likely to plan a hospital birth. In contrast, women with fear of touching and palpation by doctors and midwives, as well as women with childhood trauma, were more likely to plan an out-of-hospital birth. Furthermore, women with planned out-of-hospital births experienced a greater relief of their birth anxiety during the birth process than women with planned hospital birth. Our results especially show that women with previous mental illnesses, as well as traumatic experiences, seem to have special needs during childbirth, such as a safe environment and supportive care.

"Putting the baby back in the body": The re-embodiment of pregnancy to enhance safety in a free-standing birth center.

The general discourse in most countries is that technological surveillance during pregnancy and childbirth is synonymous with safety, while women's individual experiences are less likely regarded as critical. The aim of this ethnographic study at a birth center in Germany was to describe how midwives and their clients construct risk and safety. The data collection methods included participant observation and semi-structured interviews. 'Putting the baby back in the body' was the major theme that emerged, supported by three sub-themes. The women in this study relied on scans at the beginning of pregnancy to make their baby real to them, but became more confident in their capacity to sense their baby after experiencing the first fetal movements. The midwives fostered this confidence by using interactive palpation of the abdomen with the women, thus supporting their individual sensory experience, and, in the midwives' view, enhancing overall safety during pregnancy and at birth.

The Impact of Culturally-Centered Care on Peripartum Experiences of Autonomy and Respect in Community Birth Centers: A Comparative Study.

OBJECTIVE: National studies report that birth center care is associated with reduced racial and ethnic disparities and reduced experiences of mistreatment. In the US, there are very few BIPOC-owned birth centers. This study examines the impact of culturally-centered care delivered at Roots, a Black-owned birth center, on the experience of client autonomy and respect. METHODS: To investigate if there was an association between experiences of autonomy and respect for Roots versus the national Giving Voice to Mothers (GVtM) participants, we applied Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for the overall sample and stratified by race. RESULTS: Among BIPOC clients in the national GVtM sample and the Roots sample, MADM and MORi scores were statistically higher for clients receiving culturally-centered care at Roots (MADM p < 0.001, MORi p = 0.011). No statistical significance was found in scores between BIPOC and white clients at Roots Birth Center, however there was a tighter range among BIPOC individuals receiving care at Roots showing less variance in their experience of care. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our study confirms previous findings suggesting that giving birth at a community birth center is protective against experiences of discrimination when compared to care in the dominant, hospital-based system. Culturally-centered care might enhance the experience of perinatal care even further, by decreasing variance in BIPOC experience of autonomy and respect. Policies on maternal health care reimbursement should add focus on making community birth sustainable, especially for BIPOC provider-owners offering culturally-centered care.

Maternity Care Preferences for Future Pregnancies Among United States Childbearers: The Impacts of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted maternity care decisions, including plans to change providers or delivery location due to pandemic-related restrictions and fears. A relatively unexplored question, however, is how the pandemic may shape future maternity care preferences post-pandemic. Here, we use data collected from an online convenience survey of 980 women living in the United States to evaluate how and why the pandemic has affected women's future care preferences. We hypothesize that while the majority of women will express a continued interest in hospital birth and OB/GYN care due to perceived safety of medicalized birth, a subset of women will express a new interest in out-of-hospital or "community" care in future pregnancies. However, factors such as local provider and facility availability, insurance coverage, and out-of-pocket cost could limit access to such future preferred care options. Among our predominately white, educated, and high-income sample, a total of 58 participants (5.9% of the sample) reported a novel preference for community care during future pregnancies. While the pandemic prompted the exploration of non-hospital options, the reasons women preferred community care were mostly consistent with factors described in pre-pandemic studies, (e.g. a preference for a natural birth model and a desire for more person-centered care). However, a relatively high percentage (34.5%) of participants with novel preference for community care indicated that they expected limitations in their ability to access these services. These findings highlight how the pandemic has potentially influenced maternity care preferences, with implications for how providers and policy makers should anticipate and respond to future care needs.

Relationships and trust: Two key pillars of a well-functioning freestanding midwifery unit.

BACKGROUND: Despite strong evidence supporting the expansion of midwife-led unit provision, as a result of optimal maternal and perinatal outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and positive service user and staff experiences, scaling-up has been slow. Systemic barriers associated with gender, professional, economic, cultural, and social factors continue to constrain the expansion of midwifery as a public health intervention globally. This article aimed to explore relationships and trust as key components of a well-functioning freestanding midwifery unit (FMU). METHOD(S): A critical realist ethnographic study of an FMU located in East London, England, was conducted over a period of 15 months. Recruitment of the 82 participants was purposive. Data collection included participant observation and semi-structured interviews, and data were analyzed thematically along with relevant local guidelines and documents. RESULTS: Twelve themes emerged. Relationships and Trust were identified as a core theme. The other 11 themes were grouped into six families, three of which: Ownership, Autonomy, and Continuous Learning; Team Spirit, Interdependency, and Power Relations; and Salutogenesis will be covered in this paper. The remaining three families: Friendly Environment; Having Time and Mindfulness; and Social Capital, will be covered in a separate paper. CONCLUSIONS: A relationship-based model of care was crucial for both the functioning of the FMU and service users' satisfaction and may offer a compelling response to high levels of stress and burnout among midwives.

Birth Outcomes of Women with Obesity Enrolled for Care at Freestanding Birth Centers in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Current US guidelines for the care of women with obesity generalize obesity-related risks to all women regardless of overall health status and assume that birth will occur in hospitals. Perinatal outcomes for women with obesity in US freestanding birth centers need documentation. METHODS: Pregnancies recorded in the American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data Registry were analyzed (n = 4,455) to form 2 groups of primiparous women (n = 964; 1:1 matching of women with normal body mass indices [BMIs] and women with obese BMIs [>30]), using propensity score matching to address the imbalance of potential confounders. Groups were compared on a range of outcomes. Differences between groups were evaluated using χ2 test for categorical variables and Student's t test for continuous variables. Paired t test and McNemar's test evaluated the differences among the matched pairs. RESULTS: The majority of women with obese BMIs experienced uncomplicated perinatal courses and vaginal births. There were no significant differences in antenatal complications, proportion of prolonged pregnancy, prolonged first and second stage labor, rupture of membranes longer than 24 hours, postpartum hemorrhage, or newborn outcomes between women with obese BMIs and normal BMIs. Among all women with intrapartum referrals or transfers (25.3%), the primary indications were prolonged first stage or second stage (55.4%), inadequate pain relief (14.8%), client choice or psychological issue (7.0%), and meconium (5.3%). Primiparous women with obesity who started labor at a birth center had a 30.7% transfer rate and an 11.1% cesarean birth rate. DISCUSSION: Women with obese BMIs without medical comorbidity can receive safe and effective midwifery care at freestanding birth centers while anticipating a low risk for cesarean birth. The risks of potential, obesity-related perinatal complications should be discussed with women when choosing place of birth; however, pregnancy complicated by obesity must be viewed holistically, not simply through the lens of obesity.