Good practices, interventions, and results: a comparative study between a birthing center and hospitals of the Brazilian Unified National Health System in the Southeastern Region, Brazil

This study aims to compare obstetric care in a birthing center and in hospitals of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS) considering good practices, interventions, and maternal and perinatal results in the Southeast Region of Brazil. A cross-sectional study was conducted with comparable...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Tatagiba Medina, Edymara, José Oliveira Mouta, Ricardo, Nascimento do Carmo, Cleber, Miranda Theme Filha, Mariza, do Carmo Leal, Maria, Granado Nogueira da Gama, Silvana
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2023
País:Brasil
Institución:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
Repositorio:Cadernos de Saúde Pública
Idioma:portugués
OAI Identifier:oai:ojs.teste-cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br:article/8237
Acceso en línea:https://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/ojs/index.php/csp/article/view/8237
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Centros de Assistência à Gravidez e ao Parto
Enfermagem Obstétrica
Parto Normal
Parto Humanizado
Guia de Prática Clínica
Centros de Asistencia al Embarazo Gravidez y al Parto
Enfermería Obstétrica
Guía de Práctica Clínica
Birthing Centers
Obstetric Nursing
Natural Birth
Humanizing Delivery
Practice Guidelines
Descripción
Sumario:This study aims to compare obstetric care in a birthing center and in hospitals of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS) considering good practices, interventions, and maternal and perinatal results in the Southeast Region of Brazil. A cross-sectional study was conducted with comparable retrospective data from two studies on labor and birth. A total of 1,515 puerperal women of usual risk of birthing centers and public hospitals in the Southeast region were included. Propensity score weighting was used to balance the groups according to the following covariates: age, skin-color, parity, membrane integrity, and cervix dilation at hospitalization. Logistic regressions were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) between the place of birth and outcomes. In birthing centers, compared to hospitals, the puerperal woman had a higher chance of having a companion (OR = 86.31; 95%CI: 29.65-251.29), eating or drinking (OR = 862.38; 95%CI: 120.20-6,187.33), walking around (OR = 7.56; 95%CI: 4.65-12.31), using non-pharmacological methods for pain relief (OR = 27.82; 95%CI: 17.05-45.40), being in an upright position (OR = 252.78; 95%CI: 150.60-423.33), and a lower chance of using oxytocin (OR = 0.22; 95%CI: 0.16-0.31), amniotomy (OR = 0.01; 95%CI: 0.01-0.04), episiotomy (OR = 0.01; 95%CI: 0.00-0.02), and Kristeller maneuvers (OR = 0.01; 95%CI: 0.00-0.02). Also, in birthing centers the newborn had a higher chance of exclusive breastfeeding (OR = 1.84; 95%CI: 1.16-2.90) and a lower chance of airway (OR = 0.24; 95%CI: 0.18-0.33) and gastric aspiration (OR = 0.15; 95%: 0.10-0.22). Thus, birthing centers offers a greater supply of good practices and fewer interventions in childbirth and birth care, with more safety and care without influence on the outcomes.