Background Midwife-managed programmes of care are being widely impleme
nted although there has been little investigation of their efficacy. W
e have compared midwife-managed care with shared care (ie, care divide
d among midwives, hospital doctors, and general practitioners) in term
s of clinical efficacy and women's satisfaction. Methods We carried ou
t a randomised controlled trial of 1299 pregnant women who had no adve
rse characteristics at booking (consent rate 81.9%). 648 women were as
signed midwife-managed care and 651 shared care. The research hypothes
is was that compared with shared care, midwife-managed care would prod
uce fewer interventions, similar (or more favourable) outcomes, simila
r complications, and greater satisfaction with care. Data were collect
ed by retrospective review of case records and self-report questionnai
res. Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings Interventions were s
imilar in the two groups or lower with midwife-managed care. For examp
le, women in the midwife-managed group were less likely than women in
shared care to have induction of labour (146 [23.9%] vs 199 [33.3%]; 9
5% Cl for difference 4.4-14.5). Women in the midwife-managed group wer
e more likely to have an intact perineum and less likely to have had a
n episiotomy (p=0.02), with no significant difference in perineal tear
s. Complication rates were similar. Overall, 32.8% of women were perma
nently transferred from midwife-managed care (28.7% for clinical reaso
ns, 3.7% for non-clinical reasons). Women in both groups reported sati
sfaction with their care but the midwife-managed group were significan
tly more satisfied with their antenatal (difference in mean scores 0.4
8 [95% Cl 0.41-0.55]), intrapartum (0.28 [0.18-0.37]), hospital-based
postnatal care (0.57 [0.45-0.70]), and home-based postnatal care (0.33
[0.25-0.42]). Interpretation We conclude that midwife-managed care fo
r healthy women, integrated within existing services, is clinically ef
fective and enhances women's satisfaction with maternity care.