Outcomes associated with planned place of birth among low-risk pregnancies in Ontario, Canada (2012-2021): A protocol for a population-based propensity score weighted cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that for low-risk pregnancies, planned home births attended by a skilled health professional in settings where such services are well integrated are associated with lower risk of intrapartum interventions and no increase in adverse health outcomes. Monitoring and updating evidence on the safety of planned home births is necessary to inform ongoing clinical and policy decisions. METHODS: This protocol describes a population-based retrospective cohort study which aims to compare risk of (a) neonatal morbidity and mortality, and (b) maternal outcomes and birth interventions, between people at low obstetrical risk with a planned home birth with a midwife, a planned a hospital birth with a midwife, or a planned hospital birth with a physician. The study population will include Ontario residents who gave birth in Ontario, Canada between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2021. We will use data collected prospectively in a provincial perinatal data registry. The primary outcome will be severe neonatal morbidity or mortality, a composite binary outcome that includes one or more of the following conditions: stillbirth during the intrapartum period, neonatal death (death of a liveborn infant in the first 28 completed days of life), five-minute Apgar score <4, or infant resuscitation requiring cardiac compressions. We will conduct a stratified analysis with three strata: nulliparous, parous-no previous caesarean birth, and parous-prior caesarean birth. To reduce the impact of selection bias in estimating the effect of planned place of birth on neonatal and maternal outcomes, we will use propensity score (PS) overlap weighting (OW) and modified Poisson regression to conduct multivariate analyses.

Variation in Episiotomy Use Among Nulliparous Individuals by Maternity Care Provider and Associated Rates of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify variation in the association between episiotomy and obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) by maternity care provider in spontaneous and operative vaginal deliveries (SVDs and OVDs). METHODS: Population-based retrospective cohort study of vaginal, term deliveries among nullipara in Canada (2004-2015). Adjusted rate ratios (ARRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using log-binomial regression to quantify the associations between episiotomy and OASI, stratified by care provider (obstetrician [OB], family physician [FP], or registered midwife [RM]) while adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: The study included 631 642 deliveries. Episiotomy use varied by provider: among SVDs, the episiotomy rate was 19.6%, 14.4%, and 8.4% in the OB, FP, and RM groups, respectively. The rate of OASI was higher among SVDs with versus without episiotomy (5.8% vs 4.6%). Conversely, OASI occurred less frequently in operative vaginal deliveries with episiotomy (15.3%) compared with those without (16.7%). In all provider groups, the ARR for OASI was increased with episiotomy in SVD and decreased with episiotomy with forceps delivery. No differences in these associations were observed by provider except among vacuum delivery (ARR with episiotomy vs. without, OB: 0.88, 95% CI 0.84-0.92; FP: 0.89, 95% CI 0.83-0.96, RM: 1.22, 95% CI 1.02-1.48). CONCLUSIONS: In nullipara, irrespective of maternity care provider, there is a positive association between episiotomy and OASI among SVDs and an inverse association between episiotomy and deliveries with forceps. The relationship between episiotomy and OASI is modified by maternity care providers among vacuum deliveries.