Linking Obstetric and Midwifery Practice With Optimal Outcomes
Article first published online: 10 NOV 2006
Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, & Neonatal Nursing
Volume 35, Issue 6, pages 779–785, November/December 2006
How to Cite
Cragin, L. and Kennedy, H. P. (2006), Linking Obstetric and Midwifery Practice With Optimal Outcomes. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, & Neonatal Nursing, 35: 779–785. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2006.00106.x
- Issue published online: 10 NOV 2006
- Article first published online: 10 NOV 2006
- Obstetric outcomes;
Objective: To compare midwifery and medical care practices and measure optimal perinatal outcomes using a new clinimetric instrument.
Design: Prospective descriptive cohort design.
Setting: A large, inner city obstetric service with medical and midwifery services.
Participants: Three hundred seventy-five of 400 consecutively enrolled patients were participated (25 excluded due to extreme risk status or missing data); 92% were of minority race/ethnicity and 54% had less than a high school education. Of the 375 patients, 179 received physician care and 196 received nurse-midwife care.
Main Outcome Measures: The Optimality Index-US was measured. Health record data were extracted and scored using the Optimality Index-US to summarize the optimality of processes and outcomes of care as well as the woman’s preexisting health status.
Results: Midwifery patients had more optimal care processes (less use of technology and intervention) with no difference in neonatal outcomes, even when preexisting risk was taken into account.
Conclusion: Even among moderate-risk patients, the midwifery model of care with its limited use of interventions can produce outcomes equivalent to or better than those of the biomedical model. JOGNN, 35, 779-785; 2006. DOI: 10.1111/J.1552-6909.2006.00106.x