Literature DB >> 19821282

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

Therese Dowswell1, Philippa Middleton, Andrew Weeks.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Antenatal day care units have been widely used as an alternative to inpatient care for women with pregnancy complications including mild and moderate hypertension, and preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to compare day care units with routine care or hospital admission for women with pregnancy complications in terms of maternal and perinatal outcomes, length of hospital stay, acceptability, and costs to women and health services providers. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (February 2009). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing day care with inpatient or routine care for women with complicated pregnancy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently carried out data extraction and assessed studies for risk of bias. MAIN
RESULTS: Three trials with a total of 504 women were included. For most outcomes it was not possible to pool results from trials in meta-analyses as outcomes were measured in different ways.Compared with women in the ward/routine care group, women attending day care units were less likely to be admitted to hospital overnight (risk ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.34 to 0.62). The average length of antenatal admission was shorter for women attending for day care, although outpatient attendances were increased for this group. There was evidence from one study that women attending for day care were significantly less likely to undergo induction of labour, but mode of birth was similar for women in both groups. For other outcomes there were no significant differences between groups.The evidence regarding the costs of different types of care was mixed; while the length of antenatal hospital stays were reduced, this did not necessarily translate into reduced health service costs.While most women tended to be satisfied with whatever care they received, women preferred day care compared with hospital admission. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Small studies suggest that there are no major differences in clinical outcomes for mothers or babies between antenatal day units or hospital admission, but women may prefer day care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19821282      PMCID: PMC4171387          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001803.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  19 in total

Review 1.  Antenatal day care units versus hospital admission for women with complicated pregnancy.

Authors:  C Kröner; D Turnbull; C Wilkinson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2001

2.  Pregnancy-associated hospitalizations in the United States, 1999-2000.

Authors:  Stephen J Bacak; William M Callaghan; Patricia M Dietz; Chadd Crouse
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  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

4.  Severe maternal morbidity during pregnancy, delivery and puerperium in the Netherlands: a nationwide population-based study of 371,000 pregnancies.

Authors:  J J Zwart; J M Richters; F Ory; J I P de Vries; K W M Bloemenkamp; J van Roosmalen
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 6.531

5.  Antenatal hospitalisations in New South Wales, 1995-96.

Authors:  P L Adelson; A G Child; W B Giles; D J Henderson-Smart
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  1999-03-01       Impact factor: 7.738

6.  Day care obstetrics.

Authors:  J J Walker
Journal:  Br J Hosp Med       Date:  1993 Sep 1-14

7.  In a day's work.

Authors:  L Lewis
Journal:  Nurs Times       Date:  1993 Feb 3-9

8.  Hospitalizations for severe complications of pregnancy, 1987-1992.

Authors:  C L Scott; G F Chavez; H K Atrash; D J Taylor; R S Shah; D Rowley
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Randomised controlled trial of day care for hypertension in pregnancy.

Authors:  D J Tuffnell; R J Lilford; P C Buchan; V M Prendiville; A J Tuffnell; M P Holgate; M D Jones
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1992-01-25       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction with pregnancy day care for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.

Authors:  Lisa Dunlop; Mark Umstad; Gabrielle McGrath; Karen Reidy; Shaun Brennecke
Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.100

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Epidural therapy for the treatment of severe pre-eclampsia in non labouring women.

Authors:  Amita Ray; Sujoy Ray
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-11-28

Review 2.  Pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension.

Authors:  Lelia Duley
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2011-02-14

Review 3.  Interventions for the prevention of spontaneous preterm birth: a scoping review of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Fiona Campbell; Shumona Salam; Anthea Sutton; Shamanthi Maya Jayasooriya; Caroline Mitchell; Emmanuel Amabebe; Julie Balen; Bronwen M Gillespie; Kerry Parris; Priya Soma-Pillay; Lawrence Chauke; Brenda Narice; Dilichukwu O Anumba
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-05-13       Impact factor: 3.006

Review 4.  Delivery arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Agustín Ciapponi; Simon Lewin; Cristian A Herrera; Newton Opiyo; Tomas Pantoja; Elizabeth Paulsen; Gabriel Rada; Charles S Wiysonge; Gabriel Bastías; Lilian Dudley; Signe Flottorp; Marie-Pierre Gagnon; Sebastian Garcia Marti; Claire Glenton; Charles I Okwundu; Blanca Peñaloza; Fatima Suleman; Andrew D Oxman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-09-13

5.  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

6.  7th Brazilian Guideline of Arterial Hypertension: Chapter 9 - Arterial Hypertension in pregnancy

Authors:  M V B Malachias; C E P Figueiredo; N Sass; I C Antonello; M R Torloni; M R F L Bortolotto
Journal:  Arq Bras Cardiol       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.000

Review 7.  Antenatal and intrapartum interventions for reducing caesarean section, promoting vaginal birth, and reducing fear of childbirth: An overview of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Valerie Smith; Louise Gallagher; Margaret Carroll; Kathleen Hannon; Cecily Begley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 3.240

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.