Literature DB >> 21493173

Does the way maternity care is provided affect maternal and neonatal outcomes for young women? A review of the research literature.

Jyai Allen1, Jenny Gamble, Helen Stapleton, Sue Kildea.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Young pregnant women who continue a pregnancy are primarily from a socioeconomically deprived background. The risk factors associated with low socio-economic status may independently affect perinatal and neonatal morbidity to a greater extent than the young age of the woman. Young pregnant women are frequently sceptical about health care providers who they can perceive to be judgemental. This may lead to late booking for pregnancy care, attending few appointments, or not attending the health service for any antenatal care. QUESTION: Does the way maternity care is provided affect maternal and neonatal outcomes for young women?
METHOD: A systematic search of the major health databases.
RESULTS: Nine research articles met the eligibility criteria: one randomised controlled trial, three prospective cohort studies, two comparative studies with concurrent controls, two comparative studies with historical controls, and one case series. DISCUSSION: Providing young women with a non-standard model of maternity care has some beneficial and no known detrimental effects on childbirth outcomes. While there is a dearth of evidence on the effectiveness of a Midwifery Group Practice model of care for young women, there is strong evidence to suggest that a Group Antenatal Care model increases antenatal visit attendance and breastfeeding initiation, and decreases the risk of preterm birth. There is research to indicate that a Young Women's Clinic model may also increase antenatal visit attendance and decrease the incidence of preterm birth.
CONCLUSION: More well-designed and resourced midwifery models of care for young women should be implemented and rigorously researched.
Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21493173     DOI: 10.1016/j.wombi.2011.03.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Women Birth        ISSN: 1871-5192            Impact factor:   3.172


  12 in total

1.  Housing instability and birth weight among young urban mothers.

Authors:  Bianca V Carrion; Valerie A Earnshaw; Trace Kershaw; Jessica B Lewis; Emily C Stasko; Jonathan N Tobin; Jeannette R Ickovics
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.671

2.  Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of Group Prenatal Care: Perinatal Outcomes Among Adolescents in New York City Health Centers.

Authors:  Jeannette R Ickovics; Valerie Earnshaw; Jessica B Lewis; Trace S Kershaw; Urania Magriples; Emily Stasko; Sharon Schindler Rising; Andrea Cassells; Shayna Cunningham; Peter Bernstein; Jonathan N Tobin
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  The effects of CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care on gestational age, birth weight, and fetal demise.

Authors:  Emily E Tanner-Smith; Katarzyna T Steinka-Fry; Mark W Lipsey
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2014-05

4.  The maternal and neonatal outcomes for an urban Indigenous population compared with their non-Indigenous counterparts and a trend analysis over four triennia.

Authors:  Sue Kildea; Helen Stapleton; Rebecca Murphy; Machellee Kosiak; Kristen Gibbons
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 3.007

Review 5.  Midwifery-led antenatal care models: mapping a systematic review to an evidence-based quality framework to identify key components and characteristics of care.

Authors:  Andrew Symon; Jan Pringle; Helen Cheyne; 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:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 3.007

Review 6.  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

7.  The relationship between midwife-led group-based versus conventional antenatal care and mode of birth: a matched cohort study.

Authors:  Lauren Kearney; Mary Kynn; Alison Craswell; Rachel Reed
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2017-01-19       Impact factor: 3.007

8.  Is a randomised controlled trial of a maternity care intervention for pregnant adolescents possible? An Australian feasibility study.

Authors:  Jyai Allen; Helen Stapleton; Sally Tracy; Sue Kildea
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  Coverage and timing of antenatal care among poor women in 6 Mesoamerican countries.

Authors:  Emily Dansereau; Claire R McNellan; Marielle C Gagnier; Sima S Desai; Annie Haakenstad; Casey K Johanns; Erin B Palmisano; Diego Ríos-Zertuche; Alexandra Schaefer; Paola Zúñiga-Brenes; Bernardo Hernandez; Emma Iriarte; Ali H Mokdad
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-08-19       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  An evaluation of Interprofessional group antenatal care: a prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Zoë G Hodgson; Lee Saxell; Julian K Christians
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2017-09-07       Impact factor: 3.007

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.