Literature DB >> 11028575

A randomised controlled trial of flexibility in routine antenatal care.

D Jewell1, D Sharp, J Sanders, T J Peters.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in satisfaction associated with a flexible approach to antenatal care schedules offered to women at low obstetric risk.
DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial.
SETTING: Eleven primary care centres providing midwifery care in Avon. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred and nine women at low risk of obstetric complications presenting for antenatal care.
METHODS: A standard antenatal care schedule ('traditional care') was compared with a schedule based on a minimum number of visits and additional visits with timing agreed between women and midwives ('flexible care'). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Women's attitudes to pregnancy and motherhood using a subscale of the Maternal Adjustment and Maternal Attitudes scale, satisfaction with antenatal care, and perception of the speed of recognition of antenatal complications.
RESULTS: There was no difference between the two groups in terms of attitudes to pregnancy and motherhood (mean difference on Maternal Adjustment and Maternal Attitudes scale -0.64, 95% CI -1.39 to 0.11, P = 0.068) and no difference in the proportions of women reporting antenatal problems as soon as possible (traditional group 74.5%, flexible group 76.4%, difference -2%, 95% CI -12.1 to 8.2, P = 0.70). Women receiving traditional care reported higher levels of satisfaction for the care provided by community midwives (P < 0.01). Women receiving flexible care were more likely to report having a choice over the number and timing of their antenatal visits (P < 0.001), but were also more likely to report that they would like to have been seen more often (P < 0.01). There was no difference between the groups in rates of obstetric complications.
CONCLUSIONS: An imposed reduction in antenatal visits has been reported to increase dissatisfaction in other studies. In this study, encouraging women to adopt a flexible approach to antenatal care resulted in a similar finding. Successful implementation of such approaches may depend on more careful selection of women who welcome such an approach, more encouragement to pregnant women to express their own needs and greater feelings of commitment on the part of the care providers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11028575     DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb11614.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJOG        ISSN: 1470-0328            Impact factor:   6.531


  6 in total

Review 1.  Alternative versus standard packages of antenatal care for low-risk pregnancy.

Authors:  Therese Dowswell; Guillermo Carroli; Lelia Duley; Simon Gates; A Metin Gülmezoglu; Dina Khan-Neelofur; Gilda Gp Piaggio
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-10-06

Review 2.  Alternative versus standard packages of antenatal care for low-risk pregnancy.

Authors:  Therese Dowswell; Guillermo Carroli; Lelia Duley; Simon Gates; A Metin Gülmezoglu; Dina Khan-Neelofur; Gilda Piaggio
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-07-16

3.  Patient Satisfaction with Virtual Obstetric Care.

Authors:  Bethann Mangel Pflugeisen; Jin Mou
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2017-07

Review 4.  Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models.

Authors:  Andrew Symon; Jan Pringle; Soo Downe; Vanora Hundley; Elaine Lee; Fiona Lynn; Alison McFadden; Jenny McNeill; Mary J Renfrew; Mary Ross-Davie; Edwin van Teijlingen; Heather Whitford; Fiona Alderdice
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2017-01-06       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Are women and providers satisfied with antenatal care? Views on a standard and a simplified, evidence-based model of care in four developing countries.

Authors:  Ana Langer; José Villar; Mariana Romero; Gustavo Nigenda; Gilda Piaggio; Chusri Kuchaisit; Georgina Rojas; Muneera Al-Osimi; José Miguel Belizán; Ubaldo Farnot; Yagob Al-Mazrou; Guillermo Carroli; Hassan Ba'aqeel; Pisake Lumbiganon; Alain Pinol; Per Bergsjö; Leiv Bakketeig; Jo Garcia; Heinz Berendes
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2002-07-19       Impact factor: 2.809

6.  Implementation of a new prenatal care model to reduce office visits and increase connectivity and continuity of care: protocol for a mixed-methods study.

Authors:  Jennifer L Ridgeway; Annie LeBlanc; Megan Branda; Roger W Harms; Megan A Morris; Kate Nesbitt; Bobbie S Gostout; Lenae M Barkey; Susan M Sobolewski; Ellen Brodrick; Jonathan Inselman; Anne Baron; Angela Sivly; Misty Baker; Dawn Finnie; Rajeev Chaudhry; Abimbola O Famuyide
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-12-02       Impact factor: 3.007

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.