Felix Sayinzoga1, Tiffany Lundeen2, Sabine F Musange3, Elizabeth Butrick2, David Nzeyimana3, Nathalie Murindahabi3, Hana Azman-Firdaus2, Nancy L Sloan2, Alejandra Benitez4, Beth Phillips2, Rakesh Ghosh2, Dilys Walker2,5. 1. Maternal, Child, and Community Health Division, Rwanda Biomedical Center, Kigali, Rwanda. 2. Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America. 3. School of Public Health, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda. 4. Department of Biostatistics, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America. 5. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research on group antenatal care in low- and middle-income contexts suggests high acceptability and preliminary implementation success. METHODS: We studied the effect of group antenatal care on gestational age at birth among women in Rwanda, hypothesizing that participation would increase mean gestational length. For this unblinded cluster randomized trial, 36 health centers were pair-matched and randomized; half continued individual antenatal care (control), half implemented group antenatal care (intervention). Women who initiated antenatal care between May 2017 and December 2018 were invited to participate, and included in analyses if they presented before 24 weeks gestation, attended at least two visits, and their birth outcome was obtained. We used a generalized estimating equations model for analysis. FINDINGS: In total, 4091 women in 18 control clusters and 4752 women in 18 intervention clusters were included in the analysis. On average, women attended three total antenatal care visits. Gestational length was equivalent in the intervention and control groups (39.3 weeks (SD 1.6) and 39.3 weeks (SD 1.5)). There were no significant differences between groups in secondary outcomes except that more women in control sites attended postnatal care visits (40.1% versus 29.7%, p = 0.003) and more women in intervention sites attended at least three total antenatal care visits (80.7% versus 71.7%, p = 0.003). No harms were observed. INTERPRETATION: Group antenatal care did not result in a difference in gestational length between groups. This may be due to the low intervention dose. We suggest studies of both the effectiveness and costs of higher doses of group antenatal care among women at higher risk of preterm birth. We observed threats to group care due to facility staff shortages; we recommend studies in which antenatal care providers are exclusively allocated to group antenatal care during visits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03154177.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Research on group antenatal care in low- and middle-income contexts suggests high acceptability and preliminary implementation success. METHODS: We studied the effect of group antenatal care on gestational age at birth among women in Rwanda, hypothesizing that participation would increase mean gestational length. For this unblinded cluster randomized trial, 36 health centers were pair-matched and randomized; half continued individual antenatal care (control), half implemented group antenatal care (intervention). Women who initiated antenatal care between May 2017 and December 2018 were invited to participate, and included in analyses if they presented before 24 weeks gestation, attended at least two visits, and their birth outcome was obtained. We used a generalized estimating equations model for analysis. FINDINGS: In total, 4091 women in 18 control clusters and 4752 women in 18 intervention clusters were included in the analysis. On average, women attended three total antenatal care visits. Gestational length was equivalent in the intervention and control groups (39.3 weeks (SD 1.6) and 39.3 weeks (SD 1.5)). There were no significant differences between groups in secondary outcomes except that more women in control sites attended postnatal care visits (40.1% versus 29.7%, p = 0.003) and more women in intervention sites attended at least three total antenatal care visits (80.7% versus 71.7%, p = 0.003). No harms were observed. INTERPRETATION: Group antenatal care did not result in a difference in gestational length between groups. This may be due to the low intervention dose. We suggest studies of both the effectiveness and costs of higher doses of group antenatal care among women at higher risk of preterm birth. We observed threats to group care due to facility staff shortages; we recommend studies in which antenatal care providers are exclusively allocated to group antenatal care during visits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03154177.
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Crystal L Patil; Carrie S Klima; Alana D Steffen; Sebalda C Leshabari; Heather Pauls; Kathleen F Norr Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 3.561
Authors: Jody R Lori; Henrietta Ofosu-Darkwah; Carol J Boyd; Tanima Banerjee; Richard M K Adanu Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Crystal L Patil; Carrie S Klima; Sebalda C Leshabari; Alana D Steffen; Heather Pauls; Molly McGown; Kathleen F Norr Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2017-11-08 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Lindsay Grenier; Stephanie Suhowatsky; Mark M Kabue; Lisa M Noguchi; Diwakar Mohan; Shalmali Radha Karnad; Brenda Onguti; Eunice Omanga; Anthony Gichangi; Jonesmus Wambua; Charles Waka; Jaiyeola Oyetunji; Jeffrey M Smith Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-10-02 Impact factor: 3.240