Literature DB >> 15064028

Clinical, psychosocial, and economic effects of antenatal day care for three medical complications of pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial of 395 women.

Deborah A Turnbull1, Chris Wilkinson, Karen Gerard, Marian Shanahan, Philip Ryan, Elizabeth C Griffith, Gillian Kruzins, Georgina E Stamp.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Day care is increasingly being used for complications of pregnancy, but there is little published evidence on its efficacy. We assessed the clinical, psychosocial, and economic effects of day care for three pregnancy complications in a randomised trial of day care versus standard care on an antenatal ward.
METHODS: 395 women were randomly assigned day (263) or ward (132) care in a ratio of two to one, stratified for major diagnostic categories (non-proteinuric hypertension, proteinuric hypertension, and preterm premature rupture of membranes). The research hypothesis was that for these disorders, as an alternative to admission, antenatal day care will reduce specified interventions and investigations, result in no differences in clinical outcome, lead to greater satisfaction and psychological wellbeing, and be more cost-effective. Data were collected through case-note review, self-report questionnaires (response rates 81.0% or higher) and via the hospital's financial system. Analysis was by intention to treat.
FINDINGS: All participants were included in the analyses. There were no differences between the groups in antenatal tests or investigations or intrapartum interventions. The total duration of antenatal care episodes was shorter in the day-care group than in the ward group (median 17 [IQR 5-9] vs 57 [35-123] h; p=0.001). Overall stay was also significantly shorter in the day-care group (mean 7.22 [SE 0.31] vs 8.53 [0.44]; p=0.014). The median number of care episodes was three (range one to 14) in the day-care group and two (one to nine) in the ward group (p=0.01). There were no statistically or clinically significant differences in maternal or perinatal outcomes. The day-care group reported greater satisfaction, with no evidence of unintended psychosocial sequelae. There was no significant difference in either average cost per patient or average cost per day of care.
INTERPRETATION: Since clinical outcomes and costs are similar, adoption by maternity services of a policy providing specified women with the choice between admission and day-unit care seems appropriate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15064028     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15893-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  8 in total

1.  An analysis of antenatal hospitalization in Canada, 1991-2003.

Authors:  Shiliang Liu; Maureen Heaman; Reg Sauve; Robert Liston; Francesca Reyes; Sharon Bartholomew; David Young; Michael S Kramer
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2006-11-07

Review 2.  Management of pre-eclampsia.

Authors:  Lelia Duley; Shireen Meher; Edgardo Abalos
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-02-25

3.  Postcards from the EDge project: randomised controlled trial of an intervention using postcards to reduce repetition of hospital treated deliberate self poisoning.

Authors:  Gregory L Carter; Kerrie Clover; Ian M Whyte; Andrew H Dawson; Catherine D'Este
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-09-23

4.  Expectant versus immediate delivery in women with PPROM between 34 and 35+6 weeks: A Retrospective cohort.

Authors:  Shruthi Sreedhar; Swati Rathore; Santosh Benjamin; M Gowri; Jiji E Mathews
Journal:  J Family Med Prim Care       Date:  2020-07-30

Review 5.  Antenatal day care units versus hospital admission for women with complicated pregnancy.

Authors:  Therese Dowswell; Philippa Middleton; Andrew Weeks
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-10-07

6.  Blood pressure assessments of pregnant women in a Day Assessment Unit - A prospective observational study.

Authors:  Vidhu Krishnan; Angela Makris; AnneMarie Hennessy; Brian Hollis; Gaksoo Lee
Journal:  Obstet Med       Date:  2019-12-04

7.  Changing prevalence and the risk factors for antenatal obstetric hospitalizations in Denmark 2003-2012.

Authors:  Jane Bendix; Hanne Kristine Hegaard; Jens Langhoff-Roos; Thomas Bergholt
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2016-06-11       Impact factor: 4.790

8.  Effectiveness and safety of 1 vs 4 h blood pressure profile with clinical and laboratory assessment for the exclusion of gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia: a retrospective study in a university affiliated maternity hospital.

Authors:  Elizabeth Anne McCarthy; Thomas A Carins; Yolanda Hannigan; Nadia Bardien; Alexis Shub; Susan P Walker
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 2.692

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.