Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift

, Volume 116, Issue 11–12, pp 379–384

Influence of the birth attendant on maternal and neonatal outcomes during normal vaginal delivery: A comparison between midwife and physician management

  • Barbara Bodner-Adler
  • Klaus Bodner
  • Oliver Kimberger
  • Plamen Lozanov
  • Peter Husslein
  • Klaus Mayerhofer
Original Article



The purpose of this study was to compare the obstetric outcome of low-risk maternity patients attended by certified midwives with that of low-risk maternity patients attended by obstetricians.

Patients and methods

Obstetric outcome of 1352 midwife patients was compared with that of 1352 age- and parity-matched physician patients with normal spontaneous vaginal delivery at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the University Hospital Vienna during the period from January 1997 to July 2002. Our analysis was restricted to a sample of low-risk pregnant women. Women with medical or obstetric risk factors were excluded.


A significant decrease in the use of oxytocin (p=0.0001) was observed in women who selected a midwife as their primary birth attendant compared with women in the physician group. In both groups most women gave birth in a supine position; however, significantly more alternative birth positions were used by midwife patients (p=0.0001). Concerning perineal trauma, a significantly lower rate of episiotomies (p=0.0001) and perineal tears of all degrees (p=0.006) were found in midwife patients. When analyzing severe postpartum hemorrhage and postpartum infections, there were no significant differences between the two groups (p>0.05). Concerning neonatal outcome, there were no significant differences in APGAR score < 7 at 5 minutes (p>0.05).

Our data clearly show the ability of certified midwives to successfully provide prenatal care and delivery to lowrisk maternity patients, with neonatal outcomes comparable to those of physician patients. The use of certified midwives supervised by obstetricians may provide the optimum model for perinatal care, particularly for those women who are low-risk maternity patients, leaving physicians free to attend to the high-risk elements of care.

Key words

Midwifery-led care low-risk maternity patients perineal lacerations 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Renfrew MJ (1994) Midwive vs. medical/shared care. In: Enkin MW, Keirse MJNC, Renfrew MJ, et al (eds) Pregnancy and childbirth module. Chochrane database of sysrematic reviews. Review no 03295, Chochrane updates on disks, disk tissue 1. Update Software, Oxford 1994Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Konstantiniuk P, Kern I, Giuliani A, Kainer F (2002) The midwife factor in obstetric procedures and neonatal outcome. J Perinat Med 30: 242–249PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lachelin GCL (1996) Midwifery led care meeting: Newsletter of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. UCL Medical School, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Galotti KM, Pierce B, Reimer RL, Luckner AE (2000) Midwife or doctor: a study of pregnant women making delivery decisions. J Midwifery Womens Health 45: 318–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chamliss LR, Daly C, Medearis AL, Ames M, Kayne M, Paul R (1992) The role of selection bias in comparing cesarean birth rates between physiaian and midwifery management. Obstet Gynecol 80: 161–165Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hueston WJ, Rudy M (1993) A comparison of labor and delivery management between nurse midwives and family physicians J Fam Pract 37: 449–454PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Platt LD, Angelina DN, Quilligan EJ (1985) Nurse-Midwifery in a large teaching hospital. Obstet Gynecol 66: 816–820PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schimmel L, Hogan P, Boehler B, Difelice M, Cooney A (1992) The Yolo Country Midwifery service: a descriptive study of 496 singleton birth outcomes. 1990. J Nurse Midwifery 37: 398–403PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blanchette H (1995) Comparision of obstetric outcome of a primary-care access clinic staffed by certified nursemidwives and a private group of obstetricians in the same community. Am J Obstet Gynecol 172: 1864–1871PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Blindness, Perinatal Research Branch (1996) The collaborative study on cerebral palsy, mental retardation and other neurological and sensory disorders of infancy and childhood: part III: manuals. Bethesda, Maryland, March 1966Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Donnison J (1988) Midwives and medical men: a history of the struggle for the control of childbirth. Historical Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Slome C, Wheterbee H, Daly M, Christensen K, Meglen M, Thiede H (1976) Effectiveness of certified nurse-midwives. A prospective evaluation study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 124: 177–182PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bodner-Adler B, Bodner K, Kimberger O, Lozanov P, Husslein P, Mayerhofer K (2003) Women’s position during labour: influence on maternal and neonatal outcome. Wien Klin Wochenschr 115: 720–723PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nikodem VC (1992) Upright vs recumbent position during the second stage of labour. In: Enkin MW, Keirse MJNC, Renfrew MJ, et al (eds) Pregnancy and childbirth module. Chochrane database of systematic reviews. Review No. 03335; 1 July 1992. Chochrane Updates on Disk. Oxford: Update Software, Disk Issue 2, 1994Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gardosi J, Sylester S, B-Lynch C (1989) Alternative positions in the second stage of labour: a randomised controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 96: 1290–1296PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Scholz HS, Benedici C, Gürkan Arikan M, Haas J, Petru E (2001) Spontaneous vaginal delivery in birth-chair versus in the conventional dorsal position: a matched controlled comparison. Wien Klin Wochenschr 113: 695–697PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bodner K, Bodner-Adler B, Wierrani F, Mayerhofer K, Fousek C, Niedermayr A, Grünberger W (2002) Effects of water birth on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Wien Klin Wochenschr 114: 391–395PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rosenberg EE, Klien M (1987) Is maternity care different in family pracice? A pilot matched pair study. J Fam Pract 25: 237–242PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Klein M, Lloyd I, Redman C, Bull M, Turnbull AC (1983) A comparison of low-risk maternity women booked booked for delivery in two systems of care: shared-care (consultant) and integrated general practice unit I. Obstetrical procedures and neonatal outcomes. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 90: 118–122PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mayerhofer K, Bodner-Adler B, Bodner K, et al. (2002) Traditional acre of the perineum during birth: a prospective, randomized, multicenter study of 10076 women. J Reprod Med 47: 477–482PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bodner K, Bodner-Adler B, Kaider A, Wagenbichler P, Leodolter S, Husslein P, Mayerhofer K (2001) Perineal lacerations during normal vaginal delivery. Wien Klin Wochenschr 113: 743–746PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Bodner-Adler
    • 1
  • Klaus Bodner
    • 1
  • Oliver Kimberger
    • 2
  • Plamen Lozanov
    • 1
  • Peter Husslein
    • 1
  • Klaus Mayerhofer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics & GynecologyUniversity of Vienna Medical SchoolViennaAustria
  2. 2.Department of AnesthesiologyUniversity of Vienna Medical SchoolViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations