Moseson Protocol 1: Increasing Continuous Labor Support in Hospitals

Moseson Protocol 1: Increasing Continuous Labor Support in Hospitals

by Heidi Moseson -
Number of replies: 3

A. I am proposing to translate evidence on the benefits of continuous labor support (physical, emotional and informational) on labor and delivery outcomes, for both mother and infant, into practice. 

A1. A Cochrane Systematic Review was updated and released in July of 2013  summarizing results of 22 randomized controlled trials with data from 15,288 women. These review found strong results of the many benefits of continuous labor support, including reduced likelihood of cesarean section, lower likelihood of using analgesia, lower likelihood of patient dissatisfaction, shorter labors, and lower likelihood of instrumental vaginal birth. Subgroup analyses suggest that continuous support is most effective when the provider is not part of the woman's social network.

A2. The single, key behavior change target for my translational activity would be to get hospitals in San Francisco to routinely offer doula services to their clients - ideally, to introduce them in the prenatal period, but if not, to offer when woman arrives in labor (modeled after SFGH program).

A3. To the best of my knowledge, SFGH is the only hospital in SF that offers doula services to all patients. Several other hospitals will allow a woman to have a doula present, but do not facilitate these services and are at times resistant to them. 

B. Per above, the performance gap is that only one hospital in the Bay Area routinely offers doula services to all patients - regardless of ability to pay. There are many other hospitals in the area that could be providing these services.

C. The outcome gap is that right now, roughly 30% of women deliver via cesarean section. The WHO and numerous other organizations feel that the maximum proportion of births ending in c-section should be 15%, and generally closer to 5-10%. Doula continuous labor support has been shown to dramatically reduce the rate of cesarean sections - by up to half - and this could result in much improved outcomes for both the mother and child, as well as an enormous reduction in hospital costs/expenses.

D. Yes, there is strong evidence that changing performance would improve outcomes. Again, the Cochrane review cites 22 RCTs looking at this question, consistently showing the benefit of continuous labor support.

In reply to Heidi Moseson

Re: Moseson Protocol 1: Increasing Continuous Labor Support in Hospitals

by Ralph Gonzales -

Nice job! It's good to see that your evidence (continuous labor support) incorporates many different aspects of the birthing process.  Most of these are incredibly important to patients and stakeholders.  

Questions/Suggestions:

1. Would be good if you could also include some mention of the impact of CLS on health outcomes of the baby and/or mother.  I agree that c-section is very important to a lot of people, including moms and doctors and payers!  And we know that c-sections carry some risks to mom's and baby's, as well as costs… so you might be able to "back into" some estimates of an outcome gap based on the frequency of the adverse effects of c-sections on baby and mom.

2. Are "doula" services the same as CLS?

3. Can you comment on how big the "effect size" is of CLS on c-section rates?  

In reply to Heidi Moseson

Re: Moseson Protocol 1: Increasing Continuous Labor Support in Hospitals

by Lisa Thompson -

A few questions:

1. Is there a cost benefit analysis of CLS provided by doulas/hospital-provided staff, because this would seem to be quite costly, although definitely beneficial to women who do not have adequate CLS.

2. Would this only be provided to women who do not have adequate CLS, or in addition to those who have strong support already (e.g. family, friends)?

In reply to Heidi Moseson

Re: Moseson Protocol 1: Increasing Continuous Labor Support in Hospitals

by JESSICA COHAN -

Hi Heidi,

This is really easy to follow, clear, and important.  Thanks for sharing!  I think it is really interesting and wonderful that the only hospital providing this service right now is SFGH.  I wonder what the barriers are to doulas at other hospitals - percieved cost?  Patient or physician culture?  Lack of knowledge?    

It would be interesting to know how SFGH has implemented this and how many patients choose to participate so that this model (or parts of it) could be spread to other hospitals.  Particularly, if there was any cost analysis, outcomes, or patient satisfaction data.  

Again, this is really interesting and has the potential to impact a huge population.  Thank you for tackling this issue, and good luck!