Dataset Information

Rationale, development and feasibility of group antenatal care for immigrant women in Sweden: a study protocol for the Hooyo Project.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Somali-born women comprise a large group of immigrant women of childbearing age in Sweden, with increased risks for perinatal morbidity and mortality and poor experiences of care, despite the goal of providing equitable healthcare for the entire population. Rethinking how care is provided may help to improve outcomes.

Overall aim

To develop and test the acceptability, feasibility and immediate impacts of group antenatal care for Somali-born immigrant women, in an effort to improve experiences of antenatal care, knowledge about childbearing and the Swedish healthcare system, emotional well-being and ultimately, pregnancy outcomes. This protocol describes the rationale, planning and development of the study.

Methods and analysis

An intervention development and feasibility study. Phase I includes needs assessment and development of contextual understanding using focus group discussions. In phase II, the intervention and evaluation tools, based on core values for quality care and person-centred care, are developed. Phase III includes the historically controlled evaluation in which relevant outcome measures are compared for women receiving individual care (2016-2018) and women receiving group antenatal care (2018-2019): care satisfaction (Migrant Friendly Maternity Care Questionnaire), emotional well-being (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale), social support, childbirth fear, knowledge of Swedish maternity care, delivery outcomes. Phase IV includes the process evaluation, investigate process, feasibility and mechanisms of impact using field notes, observations, interviews and questionnaires. All phases are conducted in collaboration with a stakeholder reference group.

Ethics and dissemination

The study is approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board, Stockholm, Sweden. Participants receive information about the study and their right to decline/withdraw without consequences. Consent is given prior to enrolment. Findings will be disseminated at antenatal care units, national/international conferences, through publications in peer-reviewed journals, seminars involving stakeholders, practitioners, community and via the project website. Participating women will receive a summary of results in their language.

SUBMITTER: Byrskog U

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6677950 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLanguage supported group antenatal care (gANC) for Somali-born women was implemented in a Swedish public ANC clinic. The women were offered seven 60-min sessions, facilitated by midwives and starting with a presentation of a selected topic, with an additional 15-min individual appointment before or after. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility for participants and midwives of implementing The Hooyo ("mother" in Somali) gANC intervention, including implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors.MethodsA process evaluation was performed, using The Medical Research Council (MRC) guidelines for evaluating complex interventions as a framework. A range of qualitative and quantitative data sources were used including observations (n = 9), complementary, in-depth and key-informant interviews (women n = 6, midwives n = 4, interpreters and research assistants n = 3) and questionnaire data (women n = 44; midwives n = 8).ResultsLanguage-supported gANC offered more comprehensive ANC that seemed to correspond to existing needs of the participants and could address knowledge gaps related to pregnancy, birth and the Swedish health care system. The majority of women thought listening to other pregnant women was valuable (91%), felt comfortable in the group (98%) and supported by the other women (79%), and they said that gANC suited them (79%). The intervention seemed to enhance knowledge and cultural understanding among midwives, thus contributing to more women-centred care. The intervention was not successful at involving partners in ANC.ConclusionsThe Hooyo gANC intervention was acceptable to the Somali women and to midwives, but did not lead to greater participation by fathers-to-be. The main mechanisms of impact were more comprehensive ANC and enhanced mutual cultural understanding. The position of women was strengthened in the groups, and the way in which the midwives expanded their understanding of the participants and their narratives was promising. To be feasible at a large scale, gANC might require further adaptations and the "othering" of women in risk groups should be avoided.Trial registrationThe study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03879200).

Project description:ObjectivesComparing language-supported group antenatal care (gANC) and standard antenatal care (sANC) for Somali-born women in Sweden, measuring overall ratings of care and emotional well-being, and testing the feasibility of the outcome measures.DesignA quasi-experimental trial with one intervention and one historical control group, nested in an intervention development and feasibility study.SettingMidwifery-led antenatal care clinic in a mid-sized Swedish town.ParticipantsPregnant Somali-born women (<25 gestational weeks); 64 women in gANC and 81 in sANC.InterventionLanguage-supported gANC (2017-2019). Participants were offered seven 60-minute group sessions with other Somali-born women led by one to two midwives, in addition to 15-30 min individual appointments with their designated midwife.OutcomesPrimary outcomes were women's overall ratings of antenatal care and emotional well-being (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS)) in gestational week ≥35 and 2 months post partum. Secondary outcomes were specific care experiences, information received, social support, knowledge of pregnancy danger signs and obstetric outcomes.ResultsRecruitment and retention of participants were challenging. Of eligible women, 39.3% (n=106) declined to participate. No relevant differences regarding overall ratings of antenatal care between the groups were detected (late pregnancy OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.16 and 6-8 weeks post partum OR 2.71, 95% CI 0.88 to 9.41). The reduction in mean EPDS score was greater in the intervention group when adjusting for differences at baseline (mean difference -1.89; 95% CI -3.73 to -0.07). Women in gANC were happier with received pregnancy and birth information, for example, caesarean section where 94.9% (n=37) believed the information was sufficient compared with 17.5% (n=7) in standard care (p<0.001) in late pregnancy.ConclusionsThis evaluation suggests potential for language-supported gANC to improve knowledge acquisition among pregnant Somali-born women with residence in Sweden ˂10 years. An adequately powered randomised trial is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03879200).

Project description:BackgroundAntenatal care is one of the key preventive health services used around the world. In most Western countries, antenatal care traditionally involves a schedule of one-to-one visits with a care provider. A different way of providing antenatal care involves use of a group model.Objectives1. To compare the effects of group antenatal care versus conventional antenatal care on psychosocial, physiological, labour and birth outcomes for women and their babies.2. To compare the effects of group antenatal care versus conventional antenatal care on care provider satisfaction.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2014), contacted experts in the field and reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies.Selection criteriaAll identified published, unpublished and ongoing randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing group antenatal care with conventional antenatal care were included. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible, and one has been included. Cross-over trials were not eligible.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data; all review authors checked data for accuracy.Main resultsWe included four studies (2350 women). The overall risk of bias for the included studies was assessed as acceptable in two studies and good in two studies. No statistically significant differences were observed between women who received group antenatal care and those given standard individual antenatal care for the primary outcome of preterm birth (risk ratio (RR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 1.00; three trials; N = 1888). The proportion of low-birthweight (less than 2500 g) babies was similar between groups (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.23; three trials; N = 1935). No group differences were noted for the primary outcomes small-for-gestational age (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.24; two trials; N = 1473) and perinatal mortality (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.25; three trials; N = 1943).Satisfaction was rated as high among women who were allocated to group antenatal care, but this outcome was measured in only one trial. In this trial, mean satisfaction with care in the group given antenatal care was almost five times greater than that reported by those allocated to standard care (mean difference 4.90, 95% CI 3.10 to 6.70; one study; N = 993). No differences in neonatal intensive care admission, initiation of breastfeeding or spontaneous vaginal birth were observed between groups. Several outcomes related to stress and depression were reported in one trial. No differences between groups were observed for any of these outcomes.No data were available on the effects of group antenatal care on care provider satisfaction.We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess evidence for seven prespecified outcomes; results ranged from low quality (perinatal mortality) to moderate quality (preterm birth, low birthweight, neonatal intensive care unit admission, breastfeeding initiation) to high quality (satisfaction with antenatal care, spontaneous vaginal birth).Authors' conclusionsAvailable evidence suggests that group antenatal care is positively viewed by women and is associated with no adverse outcomes for them or for their babies. No differences in the rate of preterm birth were reported when women received group antenatal care. This review is limited because of the small numbers of studies and women, and because one study contributed 42% of the women. Most of the analyses are based on a single study. Additional research is required to determine whether group antenatal care is associated with significant benefit in terms of preterm birth or birthweight.

Project description:Background: Group antenatal care has demonstrated promise as a service delivery model that may result in improved outcomes compared to standard antenatal care in socio-demographic populations at disparately high risk for poor perinatal outcomes. Intrigued by results from the United States showing lower preterm birth rates among high-risk women who participate in group antenatal care, partners working together as the Preterm Birth Initiative - Rwanda designed a trial to assess the impact of group antenatal care on gestational age at birth. Methods: This study is a pair-matched cluster randomized controlled trial with four arms. Pairs randomized to group or standard care were further matched with other pairs into quadruples, within which one pair was assigned to implement basic obstetric ultrasound at the health center and early pregnancy testing at the community. At facilities randomized to group care, this will follow the opt-out model of service delivery and individual visits will always be available for those who need or prefer them. The primary outcome of interest is mean gestational age at birth among women who presented for antenatal care before 24 completed weeks of pregnancy and attended more than one antenatal care visit. Secondary outcomes of interest include attendance at antenatal and postnatal care, preterm birth rates, satisfaction of mothers and providers, and feasibility. A convenience sample of women will be recruited to participate in a longitudinal survey in which they will report such indicators as self-reported health-related behaviors and depressive symptoms. Providers will be surveyed about satisfaction and stress. Discussion: This is the largest cluster randomized controlled trial of group antenatal and postnatal care ever conducted, and the first in a low- or middle-income country to examine the effect of this model on gestational age at birth. Trial registration: This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03154177 May 16, 2017.

Project description:Background:Antenatal care is an important public health priority. Women from socially disadvantaged, and culturally and linguistically diverse groups often have difficulties with accessing antenatal care and report more negative experiences with care. Although group antenatal care has been shown in some settings to be effective for improving women's experiences of care and for improving other maternal as well as newborn health outcomes, these outcomes have not been rigorously assessed in the UK. A pilot trial will be conducted to determine the feasibility of, and optimum methods for, testing the effectiveness of group antenatal care in an NHS setting serving populations with high levels of social deprivation and cultural, linguistic and ethnic diversity. Outcomes will inform the protocol for a future full trial. Methods:This protocol outlines an individual-level randomised controlled external pilot trial with integrated process and economic evaluations. The two trial arms will be group care and standard antenatal care. The trial will involve the recruitment of 72 pregnant women across three maternity services within one large NHS Acute Trust. Baseline, outcomes and economic data will be collected via questionnaires completed by the participants at three time points, with the final scheduled for 4 months postnatal. Routine maternity service data will also be collected for outcomes assessment and economic evaluation purposes. Stakeholder interviews will provide insights into the acceptability of research and intervention processes, including the use of interpreters to support women who do not speak English. Pre-agreed criteria have been selected to guide the decision about whether or not to progress to a full trial. Discussion:This pilot trial will determine if it is appropriate to proceed to a full trial of group antenatal care in this setting. If progression is supported, the pilot will provide authoritative high-quality evidence to inform the design and conduct of a trial in this important area that holds significant potential to influence maternity care, outcomes and experience. Trial registration:ISRCTN ISRCTN66925258. Registered 03 April 2017. Retrospectively registered.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Access to high-quality antenatal care services has been shown to be beneficial for maternal and child health. In 2016, the WHO published evidence-based recommendations for antenatal care that aim to improve utilization, quality of care, and the patient experience. Prior research in Nepal has shown that a lack of social support, birth planning, and resources are barriers to accessing services in rural communities. The success of CenteringPregnancy and participatory action women's groups suggests that group care models may both improve access to care and the quality of care delivered through women's empowerment and the creation of social networks. We present a group antenatal care model in rural Nepal, designed and implemented by the healthcare delivery organization Nyaya Health Nepal, as well as an assessment of implementation outcomes. METHODS:The study was conducted at Bayalata Hospital in Achham, Nepal, via a public private partnership between the Nepali non-profit, Nyaya Health Nepal, and the Ministry of Health and Population, with financial and technical assistance from the American non-profit, Possible. We implemented group antenatal care as a prospective non-randomized cluster-controlled, type I hybrid effectiveness-implementation study in six village clusters. The implementation approach allows for iterative improvement in design, making changes to improve the quality of the intervention. Assessments of implementation process and model fidelity were undertaken using a mobile checklist completed by nurse supervisors, and observation forms completed by program leadership. We evaluated data quarterly using descriptive statistics to identify trends. Qualitative interviews and team communications were analyzed through immersion crystallization to identify major themes that evolved during the implementation process. RESULTS:A total of 141 group antenatal sessions were run during the study period. This paper reports on implementation results, whereas we analyze and present patient-level effectiveness outcomes in a complementary paper in this journal. There was high process fidelity to the model, with 85.7% (95% CI 77.1-91.5%) of visits completing all process elements, and high content fidelity, with all village clusters meeting the minimum target frequency for 80% of topics. The annual per capita cost for group antenatal care was 0.50 USD. Qualitative analysis revealed the compromise of stable gestation-matched composition of the group members in order to make the intervention feasible. Major adaptations were made in training, documentation, feedback and logistics. CONCLUSION:Group antenatal care provided in collaboration with local government clinics has the potential to provide accessible and high quality antenatal care to women in rural Nepal. The intervention is a feasible and affordable alternative to individual antenatal care. Our experience has shown that adaptation from prior models was important for the program to be successful in the local context within the national healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02330887, registered 01/05/2015, retroactively registered.

Project description:BackgroundAs utilization of individual antenatal care (I-ANC) has increased throughout sub-Saharan Africa, questions have arisen about whether individual versus group-based care might yield better outcomes. We implemented a trial of group-based antenatal care (G-ANC) to determine its impact on birth preparedness and complication readiness (BPCR) among pregnant women in Ghana.MethodsWe conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial comparing G-ANC to routine antenatal care in 14 health facilities in the Eastern Region of Ghana. We recruited women in their first trimester to participate in eight two-hour interactive group sessions throughout their pregnancies. Meetings were facilitated by midwives trained in G-ANC methods, and clinical assessments were conducted in addition to group discussions and activities. Data were collected at five timepoints, and results are presented comparing baseline (T0) to 34 weeks' gestation to 3 weeks post-delivery (T1) for danger sign recognition, an 11-point additive scale of BPCR, as well as individual items comprising the scale.Results1285 participants completed T0 and T1 assessments (N = 668 I-ANC, N = 617, G-ANC). At T1, G-ANC participants were able to identify significantly more pregnancy danger signs than I-ANC participants (mean increase from 1.8 to 3.4 in G-ANC vs. 1.7 to 2.2 in I-ANC, p < 0.0001). Overall BPCR scores were significantly greater in the G-ANC group than the I-ANC group. The elements of BPCR that showed the greatest increases included arranging for emergency transport (I-ANC increased from 1.5 to 11.5% vs. G-ANC increasing from 2 to 41% (p < 0.0001)) and saving money for transportation (19-32% in the I-ANC group vs. 19-73% in the G-ANC group (p < 0.0001)). Identifying someone to accompany the woman to the facility rose from 1 to 3% in the I-ANC group vs. 2-20% in the G-ANC group (p < 0.001).ConclusionsG-ANC significantly increased BPCR among women in rural Eastern Region of Ghana when compared to routine antenatal care. Given the success of this intervention, future efforts that prioritize the implementation of G-ANC are warranted.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04033003 (25/07/2019).Protocol availableProtocol Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9508671/ .

Project description:INTRODUCTION:A quarter of all births in the UK are to mothers born outside the UK. There is also evidence that immigrant women have higher maternal and infant death rates and of inequalities in the provision and uptake of maternity services/birth centres. The topic is of great significance to the National Health Service because of directives that address inequalities and the changing patterns of migration to the UK. Our main question for the systematic review is 'what interventions exist that are specifically focused on improving maternity care for immigrant women in the UK?' The primary objective of this synthesis is to generate new interpretations of research evidence. Second, the synthesis will provide substantive base to guide developments and implementation of maternity services/birth centres which are acceptable and effective for immigrant women in the UK. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We are using a narrative synthesis (NS) approach to identify, assess scientific quality and rigour, and synthesise empirical data focused on access and interventions that enhance quality of maternity care/birth centres for the UK immigrant women. The inclusion criteria include: publication date 1990 to present, English language, empirical research and findings are focused on women who live in the UK, participants of the study are immigrant women, is related to maternity care/birth centres access or interventions or experiences of maternity.In order to ensure the robustness of the NS, the methodological quality of key evidence will be appraised using the Center for Evidence-Based Management tools and review confidence with CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research). Two reviewers will independently screen studies and extract relevant evidence. We will synthesise evidence studying relationships between included studies using a range of tools. DISSEMINATION:Dissemination plan includes: an e-workshop for policymakers, collaborative practitioner workshops, YouTube video and APP, scientific papers and conference presentations.