Last reviewed · How we verify
NCT05483101: PhysioCare
Personalized Support Care in Alternative Midwifery Birth Units Versus Traditional Units in France : Effects on Perinatal Health and Outcomes
trial testing Alternative birth units in Compare 2 Models of Midwifery Care in Maternity Care in 597 participants. Completed in 12 July 2023.
12 May 2023
Quick facts
| Lead sponsor | Rennes University Hospital |
|---|---|
| Status | Completed |
| Study type | OBSERVATIONAL |
| Enrollment | 597 |
| Start date | 2 September 2022 |
| Primary completion | 12 May 2023 |
| Estimated completion | 12 July 2023 |
| Sites | 3 locations across France |
Drugs / interventions tested
- Alternative birth units
Conditions studied
- Compare 2 Models of Midwifery Care in Maternity Care — all drugs for Compare 2 Models of Midwifery Care in Maternity Care →
Sponsor
Rennes University Hospital
Who can join
Adults 18 to 40, female only, with Compare 2 Models of Midwifery Care in Maternity Care. Patients with the condition only — healthy volunteers not accepted.
Sponsor's own description
Most pregnancies and deliveries in France occur without complication. According to the 2016 Perinatal Survey, 2/3 of births are carried out by spontaneous vaginal delivery with midwife support in most cases. Although the impact of lack of care is now well recognized, literature reveals that overmedicalization of pregnancy and birth follow-up is not associated with better health outcomes for women and children. Rather, it may have a deleterious impact, in addition to unnecessary health care costs. Recent national and international guidelines in the management of normal childbirth support the facilitation of physiologic labor and the minimization of non-medically justified interventions, particularly for women at low obstetric risk. Providing specific places to support low-rick pregnant women is an opportunity to preserve physiology. In France, 4 innovative care units called Filières Physiologiques (FP), have been developed on an experimental model within hospital structures in recent years. The FPs, unlike freestanding midwifery units, allow a non-medicalized birth within a maternity hospital, with immediate care of the pregnant women and/or their child in case of vital emergency. A personalized follow-up with a midwife from the beginning of the pregnancy, birth and parenthood preparation classes and delivery is proposed to couples wishing to. Existing studies in France and abroad show that support outside the conventional care network does not increase perinatal morbidity and improves the experience of childbirth, with a positive influence on the establishment of the mother-child bond and the psychological state of the parents in postpartum. In addition, several studies conducted abroad suggest that follow-up by a midwife could reduce the costs of perinatal care for the health system. However, these studies were conducted abroad, with different structures of follow-up in FP. A care approach, as proposed in the FPs, with physiological accompaniment of childbirth by a midwife who is available and listens to the couple (the "one-to-one" principle with individual support for the woman) would improve the experience of couples, reduce the stress, fear and pain of labor, and diminish the feeling of insecurity. Other studies suggest that psychosomatic support during pregnancy could reduce the risk of postpartum depression, which is a public health issue. This study suggest that FP care for women at low obstetrical risk, as compared with conventionnal birth care unit, would promote spontaneous vaginal birth without instrumental extraction. Another hypothesis is that this management would improve salutogenesis indicators, the birth experience of couples, the establishment of the mother-child bond, and the psychological state of parents in the postpartum period. FP care could also be more efficient than conventionnal birth care unit from the community's perspective.
Publications & conference data
No peer-reviewed publications indexed yet for this trial. Completed trials usually publish results within 12-18 months.
Verify or expand the search:
- PubMed search for NCT05483101
- Europe PMC full search
- ASCO Meeting Library
- ESMO Meeting Library
- bioRxiv preprints
- medRxiv preprints
- Google Scholar
Related trials
Other Rennes University Hospital trials
Trials by the same sponsor.
- NCT07527949 — PASTRAMI : Patient-specific Statistics for Microstructure-augmented Connectomics · NA · not yet recruiting
- NCT07449832 — Sperm Epigenome in Hodgkin Lymphoma · NA · not yet recruiting
- NCT06950398 — Normothermic Oxygenated Perfusion (NMP) Viability Testing Before Transplantation of Discarded Livers · Phase 2 · not yet recruiting
- NCT07188753 — Randomized Controlled Trial Testing the Efficacy of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation by Accelerated & High-dose Theta-b · NA · not yet recruiting
- NCT06898099 — Evaluation of the Efficacy of E2R Hypnotherapy in the Management of Chronic Insomnia in Primary Care (HypERR) · NA · recruiting
Verify against primary sources
- ClinicalTrials.gov — authoritative US registry record
- WHO ICTRP — international registry index
- EU Clinical Trials Register
- Sponsor press releases (Google)
- Trial protocol + status: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05483101 (US National Library of Medicine, public domain)
- Drug + disease cross-links: matched in real time against Drug Landscape's normalised drug + company + condition tables
- Sponsor: as reported to ClinicalTrials.gov by Rennes University Hospital
- Last refreshed: 2 October 2024
Drug Landscape aggregates and links these public records for informational use only. Always verify against the primary source before clinical or regulatory decisions. Canonical URL: https://druglandscape.com/trial/NCT05483101.
Primary sources · FDA · ClinicalTrials.gov · EMA · SEC EDGAR · ChEMBL · Wikidata · full sourcing