Background A recent Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation report evaluated the four‐year Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns Initiative, which sought to improve maternal and newborn outcomes through exploration of three enhanced, evidence‐based care models. This paper reports the socio‐demographic characteristics, care processes, and outcomes for mothers and newborns engaged in care with American Association of Birth Centers (AABC) sites. Methods The authors examined data for 6424 Medicaid or Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) beneficiaries in birth center care who gave birth between 2013 and 2017. Using data from the AABC Perinatal Data Registry™, descriptive statistics were used to evaluate socio‐behavioral and medical risks, and core perinatal quality outcomes. Comparisons are made between outcomes in the AABC sample and national data during the study period. Results Childbearing mothers enrolled at AABC sites had diverse socio‐behavioral risk factors similar to the national profile. The AABC sites exceeded national quality benchmarks for low birthweight (3.28%), preterm birth (4.42%), and primary cesarean birth (8.56%). Racial disparities in perinatal indicators were present within the Strong Start sample; however, they were at narrower margins than in national data. The enhanced model of care was notable for use of midwifery‐led prenatal, labor, and birth care and decreased hospital admission. Conclusions Birth center care improves population health, patient experience, and value. The model demonstrates the potential to decrease racial disparity and improve population health. Reduction of regulatory barriers and implementation of sustainable reimbursement are warranted to move the model to scale for Medicaid beneficiaries nationwide.

BackgroundVariations in care for pregnant women have been reported to affect pregnancy outcomes.MethodsThis study examined data for all 3136 Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled at American Association of Birth Centers (AABC) Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation Strong Start sites who gave birth between 2012 and 2014. Using the AABC Perinatal Data Registry, descriptive statistics were used to evaluate socio‐behavioral and medical risks, and core perinatal quality outcomes. Next, the 2082 patients coded as low medical risk on admission in labor were analyzed for effective care and preference sensitive care variations. Finally, using binary logistic regression, the associations between selected care processes and cesarean delivery were explored.ResultsMedicaid beneficiaries enrolled at AABC sites had diverse socio‐behavioral and medical risk profiles and exceeded quality benchmarks for induction, episiotomy, cesarean, and breastfeeding. Among medically low‐risk women, the model demonstrated effective care variations including 82% attendance at prenatal education classes, 99% receiving midwifery‐led prenatal care, and 84% with midwifery‐ attended birth. Patient preferences were adhered to with 83% of women achieving birth at their preferred site of birth, and 95% of women using their preferred infant feeding method. Elective hospitalization in labor was associated with a 4‐times greater risk of cesarean birth among medically low‐risk childbearing Medicaid beneficiaries.ConclusionsThe birth center model demonstrates the capability to achieve the triple aims of improved population health, patient experience, and value.

In 2018, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation in the United States (US) released report demonstrating birth centers as the appropriate level of care for most Medicaid beneficiaries. A pilot project conducted at 34 American Association of Birth Centers (AABC) Strong Start sites included 553 beneficiaries between 2015 and 2016 to explore client perceptions of high impact components of care. Participants used the AABC client experience of care registry to report knowledge, values, and experiences of care. Data were linked to more than 300 process and outcome measures within the AABC Perinatal Data Registry™. Descriptive statistics, t tests, χ2 analysis, and analysis of variance were conducted. Participants demonstrated high engagement with care and trust in pregnancy, birth, and parenting. Beneficiaries achieved their preference for vaginal birth (89.9%) and breastfeeding at discharge through 6 weeks postpartum (91.7% and 87.6%). Beneficiaries reported having time for questions, felt listened to, spoken to in a way they understood, being involved in decision making, and treated with respect. There were no variations in experience of care, cesarean birth, or breastfeeding by race. Medicaid beneficiaries receiving prenatal care at AABC Strong Start sites demonstrated high levels of desired engagement and reported receiving respectful, accessible care and high-quality outcomes. More investment and research using client-reported data registries are warranted as the US works to improve the experience of perinatal care nationwide.

Continued emphasis on the specific needs of low-risk childbearing women is necessary to decrease unwarranted variation in the use of cesarean birth in the United States. Specific attention to the costs of unwarranted variation in cesarean birth is imperative.

Consumer demand for water birth has grown within an environment of professional controversy. Access to nonpharmacologic pain relief through water immersion is limited within hospital settings across the United States due to concerns over safety. The study is a secondary analysis of prospective observational Perinatal Data Registry (PDR) used by American Association of Birth Center members (AABC PDR). All births occurring between 2012 and 2017 in the community setting (home and birth center) were included in the analysis. Descriptive, correlational, and relative risk statistics were used to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes. Of 26 684 women, those giving birth in water had more favorable outcomes including fewer prolonged first- or second-stage labors, fetal heart rate abnormalities, shoulder dystocias, genital lacerations, episiotomies, hemorrhage, or postpartum transfers. Cord avulsion occurred rarely, but it was more common among water births. Newborns born in water were less likely to require transfer to a higher level of care, be admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit, or experience respiratory complication. Among childbearing women of low medical risk, personal preference should drive utilization of nonpharmacologic care practices including water birth. Both land and water births have similar good outcomes within the community setting.

No abstract

Purpose To explore the role of the birth center model of care in rural health and maternity care delivery in the United States. Methods All childbearing families enrolled in care at an American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data RegistryTM user sites between 2012 and 2020 are included in this descriptive analysis. Findings Between 2012 and 2020, 88 574 childbearing families enrolled in care with 82 American Association of Birth Centers Perinatal Data RegistryTM user sites. Quality outcomes exceeded national benchmarks across all geographic regions in both rural and urban settings. A stable and predictable rate of transfer to a higher level of care was demonstrated across geographic regions, with over half of the population remaining appropriate for birth center level of care throughout the perinatal episode of care. Controlling for socio demographic and medical risk factors, outcomes were as favorable for clients in rural areas compared with urban and suburban communities. Conclusions Rural populations cared for within the birth center model of care experienced high‐quality outcomes. Health Policy Implications A major focus of the United States maternity care reform should be the expansion of access to birth center models of care, especially in underserved areas such as rural communities.

No abstract