Literature DB >> 27061231

The Influence of Group Versus Individual Prenatal Care on Phase of Labor at Hospital Admission.

Ellen L Tilden, Cathy L Emeis, Aaron B Caughey, Sarah R Weinstein, Sarah B Futernick, Christopher S Lee.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Group prenatal care, an alternate model of prenatal care delivery, has been associated with various improved perinatal outcomes in comparison to standard, individual prenatal care. One important maternity care process measure that has not been explored among women who receive group prenatal care versus standard prenatal care is the phase of labor (latent vs active) at hospital admission.
METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was conducted comparing 150 women who selected group prenatal care with certified nurse-midwives (CNMs) versus 225 women who chose standard prenatal care with CNMs. Analyses performed included descriptive statistics to compare groups and multivariate regression to evaluate the contribution of key covariates potentially influencing outcomes. Propensity scores were calculated and included in regression models.
RESULTS: Women within this sample who received group prenatal care were more likely to be in active labor (≥ 4 cm of cervical dilatation) at hospital admission (odds ratio [OR], 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-2.99; P = .049) and were admitted to the hospital with significantly greater cervical dilatation (mean [standard deviation, SD] 5.7 [2.5] cm vs. 5.1 [2.3] cm, P = .005) compared with women who received standard prenatal care, controlling for potential confounding variables and propensity for group versus individual care selection. DISCUSSION: Group prenatal care may be an effective and safe intervention for decreasing latent labor hospital admission among low-risk women. Neither group prenatal care nor active labor hospital admission was associated with increased morbidity.
© 2016 by the American College of Nurse-Midwives.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antepartum care; CenteringPregnancy/group care; cesarean birth; first stage of labor; intrapartum care

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27061231     DOI: 10.1111/jmwh.12437

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Midwifery Womens Health        ISSN: 1526-9523            Impact factor:   2.388


  4 in total

1.  Applying a physiologic partograph to Consortium on Safe Labor data to identify opportunities for safely decreasing cesarean births among nulliparous women.

Authors:  Jeremy L Neal; Nancy K Lowe; Aaron B Caughey; Kelly A Bennett; Ellen L Tilden; Nicole S Carlson; Julia C Phillippi; Mary S Dietrich
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 3.689

2.  Describing latent phase duration and associated characteristics among 1281 low-risk women in spontaneous labor.

Authors:  Ellen L Tilden; Julia C Phillippi; Mia Ahlberg; Tekoa L King; Mekhala Dissanayake; Christopher S Lee; Jonathan M Snowden; Aaron B Caughey
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2019-03-28       Impact factor: 3.689

3.  The association between longer durations of the latent phase of labor and subsequent perinatal processes and outcomes among midwifery patients.

Authors:  Ellen L Tilden; Julia C Phillippi; Nicole Carlson; Mekhala Dissanayake; Christopher S Lee; Aaron B Caughey; Jonathan M Snowden
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 3.689

4.  Likelihood of cesarean birth among parous women after applying leading active labor diagnostic guidelines.

Authors:  Jeremy L Neal; Nancy K Lowe; Julia C Phillippi; Nicole S Carlson; Amy M Knupp; Mary S Dietrich
Journal:  Midwifery       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 2.372

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.