Table 1 Description and quality assessments of included studies
From: Transfer to hospital in planned home births: a systematic review
Study | Inclusion criteria | Participants (% P01) | Caregivers | Study design | Data source | Duration of observation time after birth | Analyses stratified for parity | Study population representative | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Amelink-Verburg et al.[24] | All women under midwifery care and with an intended home birth in the Netherlands during 01.01.2001-31.12.2003 | N = 168,618 | Primary level midwifes | Prospective | The Dutch Midwifery Perinatal Database (LVR1) | 2 h after the birth of the placenta | No | Data from LVR1 covers 95% of midwifery practices. | Medium |
(Parity not described) | |||||||||
Anderson et al.[22] | All Nurse-midwifery practices in the USA during 1987-1991 | N = 11,084 | Independent midwives | Retrospective | Data collection forms from the midwives | ..”early postpartum period” | No | 66% of midwifery practices participated. | Medium |
(Parity not described) | |||||||||
BECG2[1] | All NHS trusts providing intrapartum care at home in England (UK) during April 2008-April 2010 | N = 16,840 | National Health Service midwives | Prospective | Data collection forms from midwives and hospitals | 48 h postpartum | Yes | 97% of trusts providing home birth services participated. (Home births attended by independent midwives in the region were not included) | Good |
(27.2%) | |||||||||
Blix et al.[25] | All planned home births in Norway during 01.01.1990-31.12.2007 | N = 1631 | Independent midwives | Retrospective | Midwives’ patient files | 5 days postpartum | Yes | Unclear, probably >70% of all planned home births during the study period | Medium |
(22.6% ) | |||||||||
Davies et al.[23] | All women in the North Regional Health Authority area (UK) who planned for a home birth and expected to deliver in 1993 | N = 177 | National Health Service midwives | Prospective | Data collection forms from midwives, women and GP’s | Not described | Partly | Unclear, probably were all planned home births attended by NHS midwives included. | Medium |
(9.1%) | |||||||||
Hansen and et al.[27] | All home births assisted by midwives employed by the local health authorities in the Municipality of Copenhagen (Denmark) during 1980-1982 | N = 102 | Midwives employed at Hvidovre Hospital | Retrospective | Hospital patient files | Not described | No | All planned home births assisted by midwives employed by the local health authorities were included. (Home births attended by independent midwives in the region were not included) | Medium |
(about 50%) | |||||||||
Howe [17] | All home births attended by a registered midwife in the south-west of Western Australia during 01.01.1983-31.12.1986 | N = 165 | Independent midwives | Retrospective | Midwifery registers | Not described | Partly | All midwives participated | Medium |
(31.5%) | |||||||||
Hutton et al.[18] | All home births attended by Ontario midwives during 01.04.2003-31.03.2006 (Canada) | N = 6,692 | Certified midwives who are required to submit all data to a regional database | Retrospective | The Ontario Ministry of Health Database | Not described | Partly | All planned home births were included | Medium |
(34.3%) | |||||||||
Johnson and Daviss [4] | All home births involving certified professional midwives across the USA and Canada during 01.01.2000-31.12.2000 | N = 5,418 | Independent midwives | Prospective | Data collection forms from the midwives | Not described | No | 73% of the midwives asked, participated. <1% of the women declined participation | Medium |
(31.2%) | |||||||||
Janssen et al.[19] | All planned home births attended by regulated midwives in British Columbia (Canada) during 01.01.1998-31.12.1999 | N = 797 | Regulated midwives | Prospective | Data collection forms | Not described | No | >99% of the data collection forms were received | Medium |
(about 47%) | |||||||||
Lindgren et al.[26] | All planned home births in Sweden during 01.01.1992-31.07.2005 | N = 1,025 | Independent midwives | Retrospective | Data collection forms to the mothers | …”shortly after planned home birth” | Yes | 99% of the women asked, agreed to participate. Unclear if all home births were identified. | Medium |
(23.8%) | |||||||||
McMurtrie et al.[15] | The first 100 booked home births at the St. George Homebirth Program during Nov 2005-March 2009 in New South Wales (Australia) | n = 70 attempted home births | Midwives employed at St George Hospital | Prospective | Databases at the birth centre | Not described | No | All planned homebirths were included. (Home births attended by independent midwives in the region were not included) | Medium |
(Parity not described) | |||||||||
Murphy et al.[21] | All nurse-midwifery practices providing home birth services in the USA during Dec 1994-Dec 1995 | N = 1,221 | Independent midwives | Prospective | Data collection forms from the midwives, data from hospital files | Not described | Partly | 64% of midwifery practices participated. 20% of women transferred to hospital were lost-to-follow-up | Medium |
(22.0%) | |||||||||
Parratt et al.[16] | All planned home births in Victoria (Australia) during 1995-1998 | N = 419 | Independent midwives | Retrospective | Midwives’ patient files | Not described | No | 50-60 births were not included | Medium |
(about 31%) | |||||||||
Tyson [20] | All planned midwife-attended home births in Toronto (Canada) during Jan 1983-Jul 1988 | N = 1,001 | Independent midwives | Retrospective | Midwives’ patient files | 4 days postpartum | Yes | All midwives participated | Medium |
(Parity not described) |