Re-evaluating the role of the MFM specialist: lead, follow, or get out of the way

J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2005 Oct;18(4):253-8. doi: 10.1080/14767050500246292.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effect of sub-specialty prenatal care provided to high-risk obstetrical patients in a community perinatal center as a function of whether consultation and referral to a Maternal-Fetal Medicine (MFM) sub-specialist was at the discretion of the generalist, required by the insurance carrier, or by patient choice.

Methods: Demographics, management, and perinatal outcomes for high-risk patients managed exclusively by MFM were compared with those managed by generalists who were later referred to MFM after problems arose.

Results: Despite similar demographics, high-risk patients managed exclusively by a single MFM had less prematurity, lower cesarean section rates, fewer low 5-minute Apgar scores (1.3% vs. 5.5%, p < 0.001), and lower perinatal mortality rates (8.0/1000 vs. 47.6/1000, p < 0.001) than those referred at a later date.

Conclusions: In this setting, earlier MFM care resulted in better outcomes. These data suggest that the 'gatekeeper' model of generalist to MFM might be better the other way around.

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Apgar Score
  • Cesarean Section / statistics & numerical data
  • Female
  • Fetal Distress / epidemiology
  • Gestational Age
  • Health Maintenance Organizations
  • Humans
  • Infant Mortality
  • Infant, Newborn
  • Length of Stay / statistics & numerical data
  • Obstetrics*
  • Perinatology*
  • Physician's Role*
  • Pregnancy
  • Pregnancy Outcome*
  • Pregnancy, High-Risk*
  • Premature Birth / epidemiology
  • Prenatal Care
  • Referral and Consultation*
  • Time Factors
  • United States / epidemiology