Publicly funded homebirth in Australia: a review of maternal and neonatal outcomes over 6 years

Ieraci, Susan; Tuteur, Amy B.

doi:10.5694/mja13.10863

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Formula feed 2 (0.3) 0 (0) 2 (0.7) †Valid n varies owing to missing data (not stated/inadequately described/data unavailable for women who did not birth at this health service). ‡Country of birth other: next most prevalent New Zealand (52), United Kingdom (26), United States (14), and Germany (10). §Other: anaemia, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, seizures, hypothermia *Results should be interpreted with caution as some subgroups compared in the analysis were small While we have compared the clinical outcomes of women who achieved a homebirth with those who did not, interpretation must be made with caution as the groups are not comparable due to the clinical conditions that arose during pregnancy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research consistently shows that homebirth is a safe and effective model for women of low‐risk pregnancy status 5–9 . Despite this, publicly funded homebirth in Australia has remained contentious with advocates for and against this model of care 6,7,10–15 . There are only 15 health services currently offering a homebirth program on Australia 16 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 Despite this, publicly funded homebirth in Australia has remained contentious with advocates for and against this model of care. 6 , 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 There are only 15 health services currently offering a homebirth program on Australia. 16 In 2009 the Victorian Government commenced a homebirth pilot program across two sites, including the midwifery group practice (MGP) service at Western Health.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ten years of a publicly funded homebirth service in Victoria: Maternal and neonatal outcomes

Sweet

Wynter

O'Driscoll

et al. 2022

Aust NZ J Obst Gynaeco

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Method: Retrospective analysis of clinical outcome data including neonatal outcomes of women who requested a homebirth at a large metropolitan health service in Victoria, Australia. The primary outcomes included: maternal outcomes (mortality, transfer to hospital, place and mode of birth, perineal status, type of third stage of labour, postpartum haemorrhage), and neonatal outcomes (mortality, Apgar score at five minutes, birthweight, breastfeeding initiation, significant morbidity, transfer to hospital).Results: Referrals for 827 women were reviewed; 633 remained eligible at 36 weeks gestation, and 473 (57%) birthed at home. Compared to women who did not, women who had a homebirth were significantly more likely to be multiparous, have a normal vaginal birth and an intact perineum, less likely to require suturing and less likely to have blood loss of more than 500 mL. Compared to infants not born at home, infants born at home were significantly less likely to require resuscitation, more likely to be of normal birthweight and exclusively receive breastmilk on discharge. There were no maternal deaths and one neonatal death of a baby born at home before the arrival of a midwife. Conclusions:The outcomes for women accepted into the publicly funded homebirth program suggest appropriate triaging and case selection. A publicly funded homebirth program, with appropriate governance and clinical guidelines, appears to be a safe option for women experiencing low-risk pregnancies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%