Sorry Guys, Homebirth is Still Safe.

This past Friday, the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology released an article online about a study–more accurately, a meta-analysis–by Dr. Joseph R. Wax of the obstetrics and gynecology department at Maine Medical Center and his colleagues.  The analysis reached the loud conclusion that homebirth, while having significantly better intervention and morbidity rates than planned hospital birth, had a threefold neonatal mortality rate.  This is in sharp contrast to previous studies that have been done on the subject, which reached the conclusion that homebirth is as safe as a hospital birth for low-risk women.  Bad news for homebirth supporters, right?

…Not exactly.

Firstly, the advantage of a meta-analysis is that it provides impressive numbers.  Which is why this study is going to be flaunted and relished by anti-homebirth OBGYNs for years to come–the sheer scale of it is impressive.  But the disadvantage is that it is synthesizing data from many different studies, it is not controlled and the population is not uniform.  That means the conclusions are less reliable than a controlled study.

Also, a closer look at the study reveals some major differences between this analysis and the pro-homebirth studies.  For one thing, those studies’ conclusion was not that all homebirths–attended or unattended by a professional–are safe.  It was that low-risk births, attended by a professional and well-equipped midwife, are as safe as hospital births with significantly lower morbidity rates.

And actually, this analysis reaches the exact same conclusion (emphases and brackets mine):

“The analysis excluding studies that included home births attended by other than certified or certified nurse midwives had findings similar to the original study [meaning, significantly lower intervention and morbidity rates], except that the ORs [odds ratios] for neonatal deaths among all (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.62–3.98) and nonanomalous (OR, 3.00; 95% CI, 0.61–14.88) newborns were not statistically significant.”

Hmm.  They failed to mention that in the official conclusion.

Morever, as in this report on CBC, other epidemiologists are questioning the political motivation of the analysis as well as the methodology.  According to UBC epidemiologist Patricia Janssen, quoted in the article in the link, the analysis includes studies that are highly questionable–some with as few as five recorded births, some dating back to the 1970s, and some in which the qualifications of the caregiver is unknown.

Another glance at the statistical analysis will raise a few eyebrows among those who know a thing or two about the US national birth rates.  That’s right–the rate of C-section in the planned hospital births.  9.3%, huh?  Extremely impressive, considering the national rate is higher than 25%.  How optimistic.  What other statistics listed in the analysis are so far removed from reality?

Basically, Dr. Wax… nice try, but no cigar.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Sorry Guys, Homebirth is Still Safe.

  1. Homebirth Babe says:

    AWESOME response, Daniella! Spreading it around…

  2. Allie says:

    Great response! =D

  3. LucinaDoula says:

    Thanks for highlighting this. The other reason home birth in Canada is safe is because midwives are integrated into the system and have hospital admitting privileges. There is limited motivation to keep women at home if their risk status changes during labour, which can happen with direct entry midwifery in the US.

  4. Jenn says:

    Thanks for this- I’ve been trying to find an intelligent look at the study, since it seemed so different from what I would expect.

  5. Pingback: Tweets that mention » Sorry Guys, Homebirth is Still Safe. -- Topsy.com

  6. WellBegun says:

    Not to mention that the population numbers alone (much larger number of homebirths than hospital births, which is also far removed from reality) shows that the data were extremely cherry-picked. Might as well title it “Comparison of Homebirths Where Things Go Wrong to Hospital Births Where Things Go Right.”

  7. Pingback: Is Homebirth a Safe Option? « Birth True Blog

  8. Shelly says:

    I love the proposed title from wellbegun. How many times have I seen “studies” where that title would fit!
    Excellent answer. Thank you

  9. Pingback: A flawed study published in “a second-tier journal” « Woman to Woman Childbirth Education

  10. Pingback: Making Things Up: A woman with a husband, four kids, and the occasional witty anecdote

  11. Pingback: August Favorites « Birth a Miracle Services

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>