The study considered the following measures as indicators of adverse
outcomes for ‘low risk’ women, comparing outcomes for all non-OU
settings with OU outcomes. The following list provides a summary of
findings for each outcome examined (only statistically significant
differences are reported):

• Third and fourth-degree tears – no differences

• The need for a blood transfusion - lower in births planned in FMUs

• Emergency caesarean section – lower in all births planned in
non-OU settings (see below)

• Combined forceps and ventouse delivery rates – lower in all
births planned in non-OU settings (though when separated
there was no difference the forceps rates in planned AMU
and planned OU births)

• Admission to higher level care – lower in FMUs

• Maternal deaths – there were no maternal deaths in any setting.

Emergency caesarean section rates were significantly higher in
obstetric units than in the three other settings. The rates for
each group of ‘low risk’ women were:

Emergency caesarean section rates were significantly higher
in obstetric units than in the three other settings.

The rates for each group of ‘low risk’ women were:
•    11% for planned births in an obstetric unit
             (nullips 16%; multips 5.3%)
•    4% for planned births at a midwifery unit attached to hospital
             (nullips 7.7% vs. 16% for OU births;
                    multips 1% vs. 5.3% for OU births )
•    4% for planned births at a freestanding midwifery unit
             (nullips 6.7% vs. 16% for OU births;
                    multips 0.7% vs. 5.3% for OU births)
•    3% for planned births at home
             (nullips 8.5% vs. 16% for OU births;
                   multips 0.6% vs. 5.3% for OU births)