Study No | Reference | Country | Setting | Study design | Study period | Participants | Number of participants | Intervention | Comparison groups | Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RCT | ||||||||||
1 | Chambliss et al23 | USA | One university hospital | RCT | Unknown | Low-risk pregnancy | Total: 487 P0: 116 P+: 371 | Birth centre managed by nurse-midwives | Delivery unit managed by physicians |
|
2 | Law and Lam24 | Hong Kong, China | One tertiary hospital | RCT | November 1994–June 1995 | Risks manageable by midwives | Total: 1050 P0: 532 P+: 518 | Midwife-managed birth care | Standard care |
|
3 | Bernitz et al25 26 | Norway | One secondary hospital | RCT | 2006–2010 | Low-risk pregnancy | Total: 1111 P0: 747 P+: 364 | Midwife-led unit | Standard obstetric unit (combined normal and special units) |
|
CBA | ||||||||||
4 | Hofmeyr et al27 | South Africa | One tertiary hospital | CBA | 2011–2013 | Women giving birth in the hospital* | Total: 13 727 P0: Unknown P+: Unknown | Midwife-led birth unit |
|
|
Cohort | ||||||||||
5 | Homer et al28 | Australia | One tertiary hospital | Retrospective cohort | 1995 | Low-risk pregnancy† | Total: 734 P0: Unknown P+: Unknown | Birth centre managed by midwife | Labour ward |
|
6 | Rana et al29 | Nepal | One district hospital | Prospective cohort | November 1997–February 1998 | Low-risk pregnancy‡ | Total: 988 P0: Unknown P+: Unknown | Midwifery unit | Consultant-led unit |
|
7 | Eide et al30§ | Norway | One university hospital | Prospective cohort | November 2001–May 2002 | Low-risk primiparous women¶ | Total: 453 | Midwife-led ward | Conventional delivery ward |
|
8 | Suzuki et al31; Suzuki32 | Japan | Maternity hospital | Retrospective cohort | 2008–2010 | Low-risk pregnancy** | Total: 1031 P0: 506 P+: 525 | Midwife-led care | Obstetric shared care |
|
9 | Cheung et al33 34†† | China | One tertiary hospital | Retrospective cohort | March–September 2008 | Low-risk pregnancy‡‡ | Total: 452 P0: 425 P+: 27 | Midwife-led unit | Standard labour ward |
|
10 | Brocklehurst et al35 §§; Schroeder et al36 | UK | Nationwide | Prospective cohort | 2008–2010 | Low-risk pregnancy¶¶ | Total: 64 538 P0: 28 443 P+: 35 289 | Alongside midwifery unit |
|
|
*No information on maternal characteristics were available.
†Women were of similar age and parity in the intervention and comparison groups; no information on other maternal characteristics was available.
‡Women were a similar age in the intervention and comparison groups; the socioeconomic status (defined by the study authors) of the comparison group was slightly higher than that of the intervention group.
§Adjusted for maternal age, smoking, education and marital status.
¶Women were a similar age in the intervention and comparison groups, but there were significant differences in marital status, maternal education, working during pregnancy and smoking habits between the two groups.
**Women were a similar age in the intervention and comparison groups; there were more primiparous women in the comparison group. No information on other maternal characteristics was available.
††Mixed quantitative and qualitative methods were used for data collection
‡‡Women were a similar age in the intervention and comparison groups; no information on other maternal characteristics was available.
§§Adjusted for maternal age, ethnic group, understanding of English, marital or partner status, body mass index in pregnancy, index of multiple deprivation score, parity and gestational age at birth
¶¶The characteristics of women in the alongside midwifery unit group were generally similar to those of the obstetric unit group.
CBA, controlled before-and-after study; P0, nulliparous women; P+, multiparous women; RCT, randomised controlled trial.