Dataset Information

Expect With Me: development and evaluation design for an innovative model of group prenatal care to improve perinatal outcomes.

ABSTRACT: Despite biomedical advances and intervention efforts, rates of preterm birth and other adverse outcomes in the United States have remained relatively intransigent. Evidence suggests that group prenatal care can reduce these risks, with implications for maternal and child health as well as substantial cost savings. However, widespread dissemination presents challenges, in part because training and health systems have not been designed to deliver care in a group setting. This manuscript describes the design and evaluation of Expect With Me, an innovative model of group prenatal care with a strong integrated information technology (IT) platform designed to be scalable nationally.Expect With Me follows clinical guidelines from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Expect With Me incorporates the best evidence-based features of existing models of group care with a novel integrated IT platform designed to improve patient engagement and support, enhance health behaviors and decision making, connect providers and patients, and improve health service delivery. A multisite prospective longitudinal cohort study is being conducted to examine the impact of Expect With Me on perinatal and postpartum outcomes, and to identify and address barriers to national scalability. Process and outcome evaluation will include quantitative and qualitative data collection at patient, provider, and organizational levels. Mixed-method data collection includes patient surveys, medical record reviews, patient focus groups; provider surveys, session evaluations, provider focus groups and in-depth interviews; an online tracking system; and clinical site visits. A two-to-one matched cohort of women receiving individual care from each site will provide a comparison group (n?=?1,000 Expect With Me patients; n?=?2,000 individual care patients) for outcome and cost analyses.By bundling prevention and care services into a high-touch, high-tech group prenatal care model, Expect With Me has the potential to result in fundamental changes to the health care system to meet the "triple aim:" better healthcare quality, improved outcomes, and lower costs. Findings from this study will be used to optimize the dissemination and effectiveness of this model.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02169024 . Retrospectively registered on June 18, 2014.

SUBMITTER: Cunningham SD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5437650 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Expect With Me: development and evaluation design for an innovative model of group prenatal care to improve perinatal outcomes.

Cunningham Shayna D SD Lewis Jessica B JB Thomas Jordan L JL Grilo Stephanie A SA Ickovics Jeannette R JR

BMC pregnancy and childbirth 20170518 1

<h4>Background</h4>Despite biomedical advances and intervention efforts, rates of preterm birth and other adverse outcomes in the United States have remained relatively intransigent. Evidence suggests that group prenatal care can reduce these risks, with implications for maternal and child health as well as substantial cost savings. However, widespread dissemination presents challenges, in part because training and health systems have not been designed to deliver care in a group setting. This ma ...[more]

PMID: 28521785

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether group prenatal care improves pregnancy outcomes, psychosocial function, and patient satisfaction and to examine potential cost differences.MethodsA multisite randomized controlled trial was conducted at two university-affiliated hospital prenatal clinics. Pregnant women aged 14-25 years (n=1,047) were randomly assigned to either standard or group care. Women with medical conditions requiring individualized care were excluded from randomization. Group participants received care in a group setting with women having the same expected delivery month. Timing and content of visits followed obstetric guidelines from week 18 through delivery. Each 2-hour prenatal care session included physical assessment, education and skills building, and support through facilitated group discussion. Structured interviews were conducted at study entry, during the third trimester, and postpartum.ResultsMean age of participants was 20.4 years; 80% were African American. Using intent-to-treat analyses, women assigned to group care were significantly less likely to have preterm births compared with those in standard care: 9.8% compared with 13.8%, with no differences in age, parity, education, or income between study conditions. This is equivalent to a risk reduction of 33% (odds ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.44-0.99, P=.045), or 40 per 1,000 births. Effects were strengthened for African-American women: 10.0% compared with 15.8% (odds ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.38-0.92, P=.02). Women in group sessions were less likely to have suboptimal prenatal care (P<.01), had significantly better prenatal knowledge (P<.001), felt more ready for labor and delivery (P<.001), and had greater satisfaction with care (P<.001). Breastfeeding initiation was higher in group care: 66.5% compared with 54.6%, P<.001. There were no differences in birth weight nor in costs associated with prenatal care or delivery.ConclusionGroup prenatal care resulted in equal or improved perinatal outcomes at no added cost.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00271960Level of evidenceI.

Project description:Background and purposeFetal imaging is crucial in the evaluation of open neural tube defects. The identification of intraventricular hemorrhage prenatally has unclear clinical implications. We aimed to explore fetal imaging findings in open neural tube defects and evaluate associations between intraventricular hemorrhage with prenatal and postnatal hindbrain herniation, postnatal intraventricular hemorrhage, and ventricular shunt placement.Materials and methodsAfter institutional review board approval, open neural tube defect cases evaluated by prenatal sonography between January 1, 2013 and April 24, 2018 were enrolled (n = 504). The presence of intraventricular hemorrhage and gray matter heterotopia by both prenatal sonography and MR imaging studies was used for classification. Cases of intraventricular hemorrhage had intraventricular hemorrhage without gray matter heterotopia (n = 33) and controls had neither intraventricular hemorrhage nor gray matter heterotopia (n = 229). A total of 135 subjects with findings of gray matter heterotopia were excluded. Outcomes were compared with regression analyses.ResultsPrenatal and postnatal hindbrain herniation and postnatal intraventricular hemorrhage were more frequent in cases of prenatal intraventricular hemorrhage compared with controls (97% versus 79%, 50% versus 25%, and 63% versus 12%, respectively). Increased third ventricular diameter, specifically >1 mm, predicted hindbrain herniation (OR = 3.7 [95% CI, 1.5-11]) independent of lateral ventricular size and prenatal intraventricular hemorrhage. Fetal closure (n = 86) was independently protective against postnatal hindbrain herniation (OR = 0.04 [95% CI, 0.01-0.15]) and postnatal intraventricular hemorrhage (OR = 0.2 [95% CI, 0.02-0.98]). Prenatal intraventricular hemorrhage was not associated with ventricular shunt placement.ConclusionsIntraventricular hemorrhage is relatively common in the prenatal evaluation of open neural tube defects. Hindbrain herniation is more common in cases of intraventricular hemorrhage, but in association with increased third ventricular size. Fetal closure reverses hindbrain herniation and decreases the rate of intraventricular hemorrhage postnatally, regardless of the presence of prenatal intraventricular hemorrhage.

Project description:IntroductionImproving maternal and newborn health in low-income settings requires both health service and community action. Previous community initiatives have been predominantly rural, but India is urbanizing. While working to improve health service quality, we tested an intervention in which urban slum-dweller women's groups worked to improve local perinatal health.Methods and findingsA cluster randomized controlled trial in 24 intervention and 24 control settlements covered a population of 283,000. In each intervention cluster, a facilitator supported women's groups through an action learning cycle in which they discussed perinatal experiences, improved their knowledge, and took local action. We monitored births, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths, and interviewed mothers at 6 weeks postpartum. The primary outcomes described perinatal care, maternal morbidity, and extended perinatal mortality. The analysis included 18,197 births over 3 years from 2006 to 2009. We found no differences between trial arms in uptake of antenatal care, reported work, rest, and diet in later pregnancy, institutional delivery, early and exclusive breastfeeding, or care-seeking. The stillbirth rate was non-significantly lower in the intervention arm (odds ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.60-1.22), and the neonatal mortality rate higher (1.48, 1.06-2.08). The extended perinatal mortality rate did not differ between arms (1.19, 0.90-1.57). We have no evidence that these differences could be explained by the intervention.ConclusionsFacilitating urban community groups was feasible, and there was evidence of behaviour change, but we did not see population-level effects on health care or mortality. In cities with multiple sources of health care, but inequitable access to services, community mobilization should be integrated with attempts to deliver services for the poorest and most vulnerable, and with initiatives to improve quality of care in both public and private sectors.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN96256793

Project description:ImportanceThe impact of group-based prenatal care (GPNC) model in the US on the risk of gestational diabetes (GD) and related adverse obstetric outcomes is unknown.ObjectiveTo determine the effects of the GPNC model on risk of GD, its progression, and related adverse obstetric outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis is a single-site, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial conducted between February 2016 and March 2020 at a large health care system in Greenville, South Carolina. Participants were individuals aged 14 to 45 years with pregnancies earlier than 21 weeks' gestational age; follow-up continued to 8 weeks post partum. This study used an intention-to-treat analysis, and data were analyzed from March 2021 to July 2022.InterventionsEligible participants were randomized to receive either CenteringPregnancy, a widely used GPNC model, with 10 group-based sessions or traditional individual prenatal care (IPNC).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the incidence of GD diagnosed between 24 and 30 weeks of gestation. The secondary outcomes included progression to A2 GD (ie, GD treated with medications) and GD-related adverse obstetric outcomes (ie, preeclampsia, cesarean delivery, and large for gestational age). Log binomial models were performed to estimate risk differences (RDs), 95% CIs, and P values between GPNC and IPNC groups, adjusting for all baseline covariates.ResultsOf all 2348 participants (mean [SD] age, 25.1 [5.4] years; 952 Black participants [40.5%]; 502 Hispanic participants [21.4%]; 863 White participants [36.8%]), 1176 participants were randomized to the GPNC group and 1174 were randomized to the IPNC group. Among all participants, 2144 (91.3%) completed a GD screening (1072 participants [91.3%] in GPNC vs 1071 [91.2%] in IPNC). Overall, 157 participants (6.7%) developed GD, and there was no difference in GD incidence between the GPNC (83 participants [7.1%]) and IPNC (74 participants [6.3%]) groups, with an adjusted RD of 0.7% (95% CI, -1.2% to 2.7%). Among participants with GD, GPNC did not reduce the risk of progression to A2 GD (adjusted RD, -6.1%; 95% CI, -21.3% to 9.1%), preeclampsia (adjusted RD, -7.9%; 95% CI, -17.8% to 1.9%), cesarean delivery (adjusted RD, -8.2%; 95% CI, -12.2% to 13.9%), and large for gestational age (adjusted RD, -1.2%; 95% CI, -6.1% to 3.8%) compared with IPNC.Conclusions and relevanceIn this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial among medically low-risk pregnant individuals, the risk of GD was similar between participants who received GPNC intervention and traditional IPNC, indicating that GPNC may be a feasible treatment option for some patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02640638.

Dataset Information

Expect With Me: development and evaluation design for an innovative model of group prenatal care to improve perinatal outcomes.

Publications

Expect With Me: development and evaluation design for an innovative model of group prenatal care to improve perinatal outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets