Philadelphia, PA, July 1, 2010 — About 1 in 200 women in the US delivers her baby at home, with approximately 75% of these low-risk, single-baby births planned in advance as home deliveries. In a study published online today by the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology (AJOG), researchers from Maine Medical Center, Portland, Maine, analyzed the results of multiple studies from around the world. They report that less medical intervention, characteristic of planned home births, is associated with a tripling of the neonatal mortality rate compared to planned hospital deliveries. Planned home births were characterized by a greater proportion of deaths attributed to respiratory distress and failed resuscitation.
“Our findings raise the question of a link between the increased neonatal mortality among planned home births and the decreased obstetric intervention in this group,” according to lead investigator Joseph R. Wax, MD, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maine Medical Center. “Women choosing home birth, particularly low-risk individuals who had given birth previously, are in large part successful in achieving their goal of delivering with less morbidity and medical intervention than experienced during hospital-based childbirth. Of significant concern, these apparent benefits are associated with a doubling of the neonatal mortality rate overall and a near tripling among infants born without congenital defects (nonanomalous). These findings echo concerns raised in a recent large US cohort study in which home births experienced significantly more 5-minute Apgar scores < 7 as compared to low-risk term hospital births, suggesting an increased need for resuscitation among home births. Therefore, the personnel, training, and equipment available for neonatal resuscitation represent other possible contributors to the excessive neonatal mortality rate among planned home births.”
Investigators conducted a rigorous metaanalysis through which the peer-reviewed medical literature was searched for studies that contained information about home and hospital deliveries, including morbidity and mortality data for both mother and child. They extracted data for a total of 342,056 planned home and 207,551 planned hospital deliveries. The results are striking as women planning home births were of similar and often lower obstetric risk than those planning hospital births.
In contrast to neonatal mortality rates, investigators observed that perinatal mortality rates for planned home and hospital births were similar overall, as well as just among nonanomalous offspring.
Mothers in planned home births experienced significantly fewer medical interventions including epidural analgesia, electronic fetal heart rate monitoring, episiotomy, and operative vaginal and cesarean deliveries. Likewise, women intending home deliveries had fewer infections, perineal and vaginal lacerations, hemorrhages, and retained placentas. Data also showed that planned home births are characterized by less frequent premature and low birthweight infants.
AJOG Editors-in- Chief Thomas J. Garite, MD, and Moon H. Kim, MD, commented that “The report by Wax et al supports the safety of planned home birth for the mother, but raises serious concerns about increased risks of home birth for the newborn infant. This topic deserves more attention from public health officials at state and national levels.”
The article is “Maternal and newborn outcomes in planned home birth vs planned hospital births: a metaanalysis” by Joseph R. Wax, MD; F. Lee Lucas, PhD; Maryanne Lamont, MLS; Michael G. Pinette, MD; Angelina Cartin; and Jacquelyn Blackstone, DO. It will appear in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Volume 203, Issue 3 (September 2010) published by Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.05.028
After reading your blog and understanding your concern for children’s health research I wanted to inform you about my charity, Jacob’s Cure. The mission of Jacob’s Cure is to support the advancement of research in gene-therapy and neural stem cell transplantation that has exhibited great hope in curing Canavan. Jacob’s Cure is participating in the Chase Community Giving, which is backed by JP Morgan Chase. Chase Community Giving supports local charities and their efforts. The program is giving away $5 million to the 200 charities that receive the most votes from the Chase Community Giving contest. This is an amazing opportunity for Jacob’s Cure to receive funding to continue their search for a cure for Canavan disease. Voting is easy, and takes only a few seconds, just click on this link, http://apps.facebook.com/chasecommunitygiving/, and vote for Jacob’s Cure as the charity you support. In just a few seconds you could make a difference in a child’s future. Please show your support for this wonderful cause and vote. But do not stop there, encourage your friends and family to participate as well. This is your chance to create positive change in the world.
I’d be interested to see which countries were included since this is a study that taps into information for countries around the world. Homebirth in the Netherlands or UK is much different than that in Congo for example, so let’s be realistic about conditions and availability of equipment and proper conditions. Also, I’m curious to know if the journal which published the article is financially connected with the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists as they have completely severed themselves from actual science regarding homebirth vs. hospital birth. Science is truth but money speaks greater volumes when it comes to this issue.
This quote says it all,
“Women choosing home birth, particularly low-risk individuals who had given birth previously, are in large part successful in achieving their goal of delivering with less morbidity and medical intervention than experienced during hospital-based childbirth.”
Clearly if the fetus and mother are healthy then it is SAFER to give birth at home. If the baby is not healthy then no midwife worth her salt would allow a homebirth and the responsible thing to do would be to go to a hospital. But to say that home births are more dangerous is very misleading. Isn’t it also strange that the number of studied hospital births is lower than home births? Considering that most births are done in a hospital it would stand to reason that they could research a much larger pool. Bad science all around. One last point, of course an OB/GYN would not want a mother to have a birth anywhere except for a hospital as they wouldn’t be able to charge for the extra crap that they do.