» Articles » PMID: 2920336

Differences in Intrapartum Obstetric Care Provided to Women at Low Risk by Family Physicians and Obstetricians

Overview
Journal CMAJ
Date 1989 Mar 15
PMID 2920336
Citations 26
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

To determine differences in practice style and to examine maternal and neonatal outcomes, we reviewed the hospital charts of 1115 women admitted by family physicians and 1250 women admitted by obstetricians who gave birth at one of three teaching hospitals in Toronto between April 1985 and March 1986. All the women in the two groups were categorized retrospectively as being at low risk at the onset of labour on the basis of their prenatal records and their admission histories and physical examination results. There were higher proportions of younger women and women of lower socioeconomic status in the family physician group than in the obstetrician group (p less than 0.001). The rates of interventions, including artificial rupture of the membranes, induction, augmentation, low forceps plus vacuum extraction, episiotomy and epidural anesthesia, were all higher in the obstetrician group. The mean birth weight and the cesarean section rate were the same in the two groups. Differences in labour and delivery outcomes between the two groups, including a higher rate of spontaneous vaginal delivery for the family physicians, reflected a more "expectant" practice style by family doctors. However, there were no significant differences in the rates of maternal or neonatal complications. A practice style characterized by a higher rate of interventions was not associated with improved maternal or newborn outcome in this low-risk setting.

Citing Articles

Resident and supervisor perceptions of gaining obstetrical competency in Family Medicine: a qualitative descriptive study.

Arora N, Koppula S, Brown J Can Med Educ J. 2024; 15(5):75-82.

PMID: 39588028 PMC: 11586020. DOI: 10.36834/cmej.78131.


Exploring family physicians' reasons to continue or discontinue providing intrapartum care: Qualitative descriptive study.

Dove M, Dogba M, Rodriguez C Can Fam Physician. 2017; 63(8):e387-e393.

PMID: 28807974 PMC: 5555346.


A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Low-Risk Deliveries: A Comparison of Midwives, Family Physicians and Obstetricians.

Walters D, Gupta A, Nam A, Lake J, Martino F, Coyte P Healthc Policy. 2015; 11(1):61-75.

PMID: 26571469 PMC: 4748366.


Family physician and obstetrician episiotomy rates in low-risk obstetrics in southern Alberta.

Hargrove A, Penner K, Williamson T, Ross S Can Fam Physician. 2011; 57(4):450-6.

PMID: 21626899 PMC: 3076481.


Babes in the woods: teaching the use of the vacuum extractor.

Wilson C, Casson R Can Fam Physician. 2011; 36:1720-4.

PMID: 21233994 PMC: 2280524.


References
1.
Brody H, Thompson J . The maximin strategy in modern obstetrics. J Fam Pract. 1981; 12(6):977-86. View

2.
Klein M, Lloyd I, Redman C, Bull M, Turnbull A . A comparison of low-risk pregnant women booked for delivery in two systems of care: shared-care (consultant) and integrated general practice unit. II. Labour and delivery management and neonatal outcome. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1983; 90(2):123-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1983.tb08895.x. View

3.
Phillips W, Sevens G . Obstetrics in family practice: competence, continuity, and caring. J Fam Pract. 1985; 20(6):595-6. View

4.
Rosenblatt R, Reinken J, Shoemack P . Is obstetrics safe in small hospitals? Evidence from New Zealand's regionalised perinatal system. Lancet. 1985; 2(8452):429-32. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(85)92747-3. View

5.
Ely J, UELAND K, Gordon M . An audit of obstetric care in a university family medicine department and an obstetrics-gynecology department. J Fam Pract. 1976; 3(4):397-401. View