Group versus conventional antenatal care for women

From Midwife-Dominated to Midwifery-Led Antenatal Care: A Meta-Ethnography

Provision of antenatal care includes risk identification, prevention and management of pregnancy-related diseases, but also health education, health promotion, support and guidance to smooth the transition to parenthood. To ensure good perinatal health, high-quality, free and easily accessed antenatal care is essential. The aim of this study was to identify, integrate and synthesize knowledge of midwives' experiences of providing antenatal care, attending to clients' individual needs whilst facing multiple challenges. We conducted a meta-ethnography, which is a seven-step grounded, comparative and interpretative methodology for qualitative evidence synthesis. A lines-of-argument synthesis based on two metaphors was developed, based on refutational themes emerging from an analogous translation of findings in the included 14 papers. The model reflects midwives' wished-for transition from a midwife-dominated caring model toward a midwifery-led model of antenatal care. Structural, societal and personal challenges seemingly influenced midwives' provision of antenatal care. However, it emerged that midwives had the willingness to change rigid systems that maintain routine care. The midwifery-led model of care should be firmly based in midwifery science and evidence-based antenatal care that emphasize reflective practices and listening to each woman and her family. The change from traditional models of antenatal care towards increased use of digitalization no longer seems to be a choice, but a necessity given the ongoing 2020 pandemic.

Intention to Participate in Group Prenatal Care: Moving Beyond Yes or No

Group prenatal care (GPNC) is an alternative model to traditional individual care and may improve public health outcomes. Prior studies suggest that interest in GPNC varies widely and few studies have examined characteristics predictive of interest in this model. The purpose of this study was to inform GPNC recruitment efforts by examining likelihood of participation delineated by characteristics and GPNC perceptions. Pregnant participants received information about GPNC then completed a survey measuring demographic, psychosocial, and reproductive characteristics, likelihood to participate in GPNC, and factors influencing selections. Respondents expressed varied levels of likelihood to participate in GPNC; 16.2% low likelihood, 44.9% moderate likelihood, and 38.9% high likelihood. Characteristics were similar between groups, and thus their use is not recommended when targeting recruitment efforts. Benefits outweighed barriers and threats for the high likelihood category, barriers and threats outweighed benefits for the low likelihood category, and benefits, barriers, and threats were balanced for the moderate likelihood category. Accurately assessing likelihood of participating in GPNC efficiently identifies individuals who are clearly either going to decline or participate, as well as promotes targeted recruitment efforts directed at those who are ambivalent. Understanding and addressing perceived benefits, barriers, and threats supports effective GPNC recruitment.

Group Medical Visits as Participatory Care in Community Health Centers

In this article, I examine group medical visits, a clinic-based intervention that aims to improve patient health by combining clinical care, health education and peer support. Research shows that health care inequalities are reproduced through the interplay of interpersonal, institutional, and structural factors. I examine changing social relations made possible by group visits, including peer support and an expanded role for patient knowledge. The qualitative data presented here are part of a mixed-methods study of how group medical visits and integrative medicine are combined and implemented for low-income people with chronic conditions. I find that patients take active roles in each other's care, supporting, challenging, and advocating in ways that shift patient-provider relationships. Such shifts demand reflection about what kinds of knowledge matter for health. Health care encounters can reproduce inequality for marginalized patients; this study suggests group visits can restructure patient-provider encounters to interrupt healthcare inequalities.

The Impact of Introducing Centering Pregnancy in a Community Health Setting: A Qualitative Study of Experiences and Perspectives of Health Center Clinical and Support Staff

Objectives Introducing new programming into an existing setting may be challenging. Understanding how staff and clinicians who are not directly involved in program delivery view the program can help support program implementation. This study aimed to understand how peripheral staff and clinicians perceived a newly implemented Centering Pregnancy group prenatal care program in a community-based health center and its impact on clinic operations. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 12 staff members at a community-based health center. The interview guide covered topics such as perceptions of Centering Pregnancy and how the program impacted their work. An interpretive description approach was used to analyze the interview data. A coding framework was developed iteratively and all interview data were analyzed independently by multiple researchers. Results Staff had overall positive perceptions of Centering Pregnancy, but the level of understanding about the program varied widely. Most respondents viewed the Centering Pregnancy program as separate from other programs offered by the clinic, which created both opportunities and challenges. Opportunities included increased cross-referrals between established services and Centering Pregnancy. Challenges included a lack of communication about responsibilities of staff in relation to Centering Pregnancy patients. Impact on staff and overall clinic operations was perceived to be minimal to moderate, and most tensions related to roles and expectations were resolved. Conclusions for Practice Clear communication regarding fit within clinic structures and processes and expectations of staff in relation to the program was critical to the integration of Centering Pregnancy program into an established health center.

Promoting improved social support and quality of life with the CenteringPregnancy® group model of prenatal care

This prospective cohort study compared women participating in CenteringPregnancy® group prenatal care (N = 120) with those in standard individual care (N = 221) to determine if participation in Centering was associated with improvements in perceived social support and quality of life, with concomitant decreases in screens of postpartum depression and improvements in breastfeeding rates. Participants completed surveys at the onset of prenatal care, in the late third trimester and in the postpartum period. Centering participants had higher scores of perceived social support from friends after participating in group care (p < 0.05) with associated improvements in quality of life in the psychological and relational domains (p < 0.05) compared to standard care participants who showed higher scores of perceived support from family (p < 0.05) but did not show concomitant improvements in quality of life. This did not translate to any significant difference in scores on postpartum depression screens but was associated with improvements in breastfeeding continuation rates among Centering participants in the postpartum period. This study indicates that Centering care is associated with improved perceptions of peer social support with associated improvements in quality of life and higher rates of continued breastfeeding.

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

BACKGROUND

Midwife facilitated, group models of antenatal care have emerged as an alternative to conventional care both within Australia and internationally. Group antenatal care can be offered in a number of different ways, however usually constitutes a series of sessions co-ordinated by a midwife combining physical assessment, antenatal education and peer support in a group setting. Midwife-led group antenatal care is viewed positively by expectant mothers, with no associated adverse outcomes identified in the published literature for women or their babies when compared with conventional care. Evidence of an improvement in outcomes is limited. The aim of this study was to compare mode of birth (any vaginal birth with caesarean birth) between pregnant women accessing midwife-led group antenatal care and conventional individual antenatal care, in Queensland, Australia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective matched cohort study, set within a collaborative antenatal clinic between the local university and regional public health service in Queensland, Australia. Midwife-led group antenatal care (n = 110) participants were compared with controls enrolled in conventional antenatal care (n = 330). Groups were matched by parity, maternal age and gestation to form comparable groups, selecting a homogeneous sample with respect to confounding variables likely to affect outcomes.

RESULTS

There was no evidence that group care resulted in a greater number of caesarean births. The largest increase in the odds of caesarean birth was associated with a previous caesarean birth (p < 0.001), no previous birth (compared with previous vaginal birth) (p < 0.003), and conventional antenatal care (p < 0.073). The secondary outcomes (breastfeeding and infant birth weight) which were examined between the matched cohorts were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence arising from this study that there was a significant difference in mode of birth (caesarean or vaginal) between group and conventional care. Group care was associated with a lower risk of caesarean birth after controlling for previous births, with the highest chance for a vaginal birth being a woman who has had a previous vaginal birth and was in group care. Conversely, the highest risk of caesarean birth was for women who have had a previous caesarean birth and conventional care.

Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models

BACKGROUND

Antenatal care models vary widely around the world, reflecting local contexts, drivers and resources. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have tested the impact of multi-component antenatal care interventions on service delivery and outcomes in many countries since the 1980s. Some have applied entirely new schemes, while others have modified existing care delivery approaches. Systematic reviews (SRs) indicate that some specific antenatal interventions are more effective than others; however the causal mechanisms leading to better outcomes are poorly understood, limiting implementation and future research. As a first step in identifying what might be making the difference we conducted a scoping review of interventions tested in RCTs in order to establish a taxonomy of antenatal care models.

METHODS

A protocol-driven systematic search was undertaken of databases for RCTs and SRs reporting antenatal care interventions. Results were unrestricted by time or locality, but limited to English language. Key characteristics of both experimental and control interventions in the included trials were mapped using SPIO (Study design; Population; Intervention; Outcomes) criteria and the intervention and principal outcome measures were described. Commonalities and differences between the components that were being tested in each study were identified by consensus, resulting in a comprehensive description of emergent models for antenatal care interventions.

RESULTS

Of 13,050 articles retrieved, we identified 153 eligible articles including 130 RCTs in 34 countries. The interventions tested in these trials varied from the number of visits to the location of care provision, and from the content of care to the professional/lay group providing that care. In most studies neither intervention nor control arm was well described. Our analysis of the identified trials of antenatal care interventions produced the following taxonomy: Universal provision model (for all women irrespective of health state or complications); Restricted 'lower-risk'-based provision model (midwifery-led or reduced/flexible visit approach for healthy women); Augmented provision model (antenatal care as in Universal provision above but augmented by clinical, educational or behavioural intervention); Targeted 'higher-risk'-based provision model (for woman with defined clinical or socio-demographic risk factors). The first category was most commonly tested in low-income countries (i.e. resource-poor settings), particularly in Asia. The other categories were tested around the world. The trials included a range of care providers, including midwives, nurses, doctors, and lay workers.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions can be defined and described in many ways. The intended antenatal care population group proved the simplest and most clinically relevant way of distinguishing trials which might otherwise be categorised together. Since our review excluded non-trial interventions, the taxonomy does not represent antenatal care provision worldwide. It offers a stable and reproducible approach to describing the purpose and content of models of antenatal care which have been tested in a trial. It highlights a lack of reported detail of trial interventions and usual care processes. It provides a baseline for future work to examine and test the salient characteristics of the most effective models, and could also help decision-makers and service planners in planning implementation.

Psychometric Testing of the French Language Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To assess the psychometrics of the French language Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire (QPCQ).

METHODS

Data from 302 women were used in a confirmatory factor analysis and in assessment of construct validity through hypothesis testing and internal consistency reliability using Cronbach's alpha.

RESULTS

The 6 factors (subscales) were verified and confirmed. Hypothesis testing further supported construct validity. The overall QPCQ had acceptable internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha = .97) as did 5 subscales (Cronbach's alpha = .70-.92); the Sufficient Time subscale had poorer reliability (Cronbach's alpha = .61).

CONCLUSIONS

The French language QPCQ is a valid and reliable self-report measure of prenatal care quality. It can be used in research and in quality improvement work to strengthen prenatal care services.

Factors Associated With Excessive Gestational Weight Gain: Review of Current Literature

Background:

Excessive gestational weight gain (EGWG) places women at increased risk for complications during pregnancy and also increases the likelihood that they will remain overweight after pregnancy. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has recommended weight gain guidelines based on pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI), but evidence-based strategies to achieve these goals are limited.

Objective:

This review discusses factors associated with EGWG with the goal of identifying targets for future intervention.

Methods:

A search was performed using the PubMed database to identify all English-language papers published between 1995 and 2014 related to excessive weight gain in pregnancy. Papers were grouped by theme: preconception BMI, sociodemographics, diet and exercise, psychosocial characteristics, and type of prenatal care.

Results:

Studies found that women who were overweight or obese at the time of conception were at higher risk of EGWG and that increased physical activity protected against EGWG. Studies on diet and sociodemographic characteristics were inconclusive. Psychological factors, specifically accurate perceptions of BMI, also appear to play a role in EGWG. Limited studies on methods of prenatal care delivery did not show improvement of weight parameters with group compared to one-on-one visits.

Conclusion:

Pre-pregnancy BMI is most strongly associated with EGWG, indicating that healthy weight habits throughout adult life may be especially important in periods of expected weight change, such as pregnancy. To decrease EGWG, providers should focus on improving pre-conception BMI through appropriate counseling on healthy eating and increased physical activity as well as encouraging pregnant women to continue moderate exercise during pregnancy when appropriate.

Quality of prenatal care questionnaire: psychometric testing in an Australia population

BACKGROUND

The quality of antenatal care is recognized as critical to the effectiveness of care in optimizing maternal and child health outcomes. However, research has been hindered by the lack of a theoretically-grounded and psychometrically sound instrument to assess the quality of antenatal care. In response to this need, the 46-item Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire (QPCQ) was developed and tested in a Canadian context. The objective of this study was to validate the QPCQ and to establish its internal consistency reliability in an Australian population.

METHODS

Study participants were recruited from two public maternity services in two Australian states: Monash Health, Victoria and Wollongong Hospital, New South Wales. Women were eligible to participate if they had given birth to a single live infant, were 18 years or older, had at least three antenatal visits during the pregnancy, and could speak, read and write English. Study questionnaires were completed in hospital. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted. Construct validity, including convergent validity, was further assessed against existing questionnaires: the Patient Expectations and Satisfaction with Prenatal Care (PESPC) and the Prenatal Interpersonal Processes of Care (PIPC). Internal consistency reliability of the QPCQ and each of its six subscales was assessed using Cronbach's alpha.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ninety-nine women participated in the study. CFA verified and confirmed the six factors (subscales) of the QPCQ. A hypothesis-testing approach and an assessment of convergent validity further supported construct validity of the instrument. The QPCQ had acceptable internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.97), as did each of the six factors (Cronbach's alpha = 0.74 to 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

The QPCQ is a valid and reliable self-report measure of antenatal care quality. This instrument fills a scientific gap and can be used in research to examine relationships between the quality of antenatal care and outcomes of interest, and to examine variations in antenatal care quality. It also will be useful in quality assurance and improvement initiatives.

Interventions to Improve Neonatal Health and Later Survival: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based interventions and strategies are needed to improve child survival in countries with a high burden of neonatal and child mortality. An overview of systematic reviews can focus implementation on the most effective ways to increase child survival.

METHODS

In this overview we included published Cochrane and other systematic reviews of experimental and observational studies on antenatal, childbirth, postnatal and child health interventions aiming to prevent perinatal/neonatal and child mortality using the WHO list of essential interventions. We assessed the methodological quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR criteria and assessed the quality of the outcomes using the GRADE approach. Based on the findings from GRADE criteria, interventions were summarized as effective, promising or ineffective.

FINDINGS

The overview identified 148 Cochrane and other systematic reviews on 61 reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health interventions. Of these, only 57 reviews reported mortality outcomes. Using the GRADE approach, antenatal corticosteroids for preventing neonatal respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants; early initiation of breastfeeding; hygienic cord care; kangaroo care for preterm infants; provision and promotion of use of insecticide treated bed nets (ITNs) for children; and vitamin A supplementation for infants from six months of age, were identified as clearly effective interventions for reducing neonatal, infant or child mortality. Antenatal care, tetanus immunization in pregnancy, prophylactic antimalarials during pregnancy, induction of labour for prolonged pregnancy, case management of neonatal sepsis, meningitis and pneumonia, prophylactic and therapeutic use of surfactant, continuous positive airway pressure for neonatal resuscitation, case management of childhood malaria and pneumonia, vitamin A as part of treatment for measles associated pneumonia for children above 6 months, and home visits across the continuum of care, were identified as promising interventions for reducing neonatal, infant, child or perinatal mortality.

INTERPRETATION

Comprehensive adoption of the above six effective and 11 promising interventions can improve neonatal and child survival around the world. Choice of intervention and degree of implementation currently depends on resources available and policies in individual countries and geographical settings.

FUNDING

This review was part of doctoral thesis which was funded by University of Adelaide, Australia.

Group versus conventional antenatal care for women

BACKGROUND

Antenatal 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.

OBJECTIVES

1. 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 METHODS

We 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 CRITERIA

All 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 ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data; all review authors checked data for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We 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' CONCLUSIONS

Available 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.

Centering Pregnancy: practical tips for your practice

IMPORTANCE

With increased access to care, current health delivery systems will need expansion to meet higher demands and needs.

PURPOSE

To define Centering Pregnancy and practical tips for implementation into both private and academic practices.

METHODS/EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Evidence was gathered through literature reviews.

RESULTS

It was found that Centering Pregnancy offers a patient-centered, evidence-based approach to helping with access issues, as well as improving outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This article describes the benefits of Centering Pregnancy to the practice, the provider, and the patient.

RELEVANCE

Practical implementation tips will be offered, with suggestions for negating common implementation barriers.

Essential pre-pregnancy and pregnancy interventions for improved maternal, newborn and child health

The statistics related to pregnancy and its outcomes are staggering: annually, an estimated 250000-280000 women die during childbirth. Unfortunately, a large number of women receive little or no care during or before pregnancy. At a period of critical vulnerability, interventions can be effectively delivered to improve the health of women and their newborns and also to make their pregnancy safe. This paper reviews the interventions that are most effective during preconception and pregnancy period and synergistically improve maternal and neonatal outcomes. Among pre-pregnancy interventions, family planning and advocating pregnancies at appropriate intervals; prevention and management of sexually transmitted infections including HIV; and peri-conceptual folic-acid supplementation have shown significant impact on reducing maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. During pregnancy, interventions including antenatal care visit model; iron and folic acid supplementation; tetanus Immunisation; prevention and management of malaria; prevention and management of HIV and PMTCT; calcium for hypertension; anti-Platelet agents (low dose aspirin) for prevention of Pre-eclampsia; anti-hypertensives for treating severe hypertension; management of pregnancy-induced hypertension/eclampsia; external cephalic version for breech presentation at term (>36 weeks); management of preterm, premature rupture of membranes; management of unintended pregnancy; and home visits for women and children across the continuum of care have shown maximum impact on reducing the burden of maternal and newborn morbidity and mortality. All of the interventions summarized in this paper have the potential to improve maternal mortality rates and also contribute to better health care practices during preconception and periconception period.

Essential interventions: implementation strategies and proposed packages of care

In an effort to accelerate progress towards achieving Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4 and 5, provision of essential reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) interventions is being considered. Not only should a state-of-the-art approach be taken for services delivered to the mother, neonate and to the child, but services must also be deployed across the household to hospital continuum of care approach and in the form of packages. The paper proposed several packages for improved maternal, newborn and child health that can be delivered across RMNCH continuum of care. These packages include: supportive care package for women to promote awareness related to healthy pre-pregnancy and pregnancy interventions; nutritional support package for mother to improve supplementation of essential nutrients and micronutrients; antenatal care package to detect, treat and manage infectious and noninfectious diseases and promote immunization; high risk care package to manage preeclampsia and eclampsia in pregnancy; childbirth package to promote support during labor and importance of skilled birth attendance during labor; essential newborn care package to support healthy newborn care practices; and child health care package to prevent and manage infections. This paper further discussed the implementation strategies for employing these interventions at scale.

Assessment of the pregnancy education programme with 'EDUMA2' questionnaire in Madrid (Spain)

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The prenatal education promotes the empowerment of parents during pregnancy and postnatal period. This study aimed to assess the quality of educational sessions held in the third trimester of pregnancy as part of the parenting education programme for Spanish National Health System in Madrid.

METHODS

The design is a cross-sectional study in 41 primary care centres in the autonomous community of Madrid, which is one of the 17 autonomous communities that constitute the Spanish State, each wick medical responsibilities. The participants are a representative probability sample of 928 attendees to the programme. The assessment instrument is 'EDUMA2' questionnaire (Cronbach's alpha = 0.829) of 56 variables. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed using SPSS. The project was approved by the Research and Ethics Committees of the University Hospital of La Paz.

RESULTS

The uptake efficiency immigration risk is 14.7%, and lack of social support is 8.7%. The functionality in organization, teaching and methodology is high in 90.5%. The learning effectiveness of health habits, care and techniques is significant and greater than 60% in the 14 parameters studied. Satisfaction is very high at 67.5%. The immediate impact in terms of control or safety increase is significant and greater than 71% and significantly greater than 40% and for increasing the bonding with the baby.

CONCLUSIONS

No jobs found with which to compare. The assessment of the programme with adequate psychometric characteristics questionnaire allows designing strategies and research to improve the quality of prenatal education.

Facilitators and barriers to quality of care in maternal, newborn and child health: a global situational analysis through metareview

OBJECTIVE

Conduct a global situational analysis to identify the current facilitators and barriers to improving quality of care (QoC) for pregnant women, newborns and children.

STUDY DESIGN

Metareview of published and unpublished systematic reviews and meta-analyses conducted between January 2000 and March 2013 in any language. Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) is used to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.

SETTINGS

Health systems of all countries. Study outcome: QoC measured using surrogate indicators--effective, efficient, accessible, acceptable/patient centred, equitable and safe.

ANALYSIS

Conducted in two phases (1) qualitative synthesis of extracted data to identify and group the facilitators and barriers to improving QoC, for each of the three population groups, into the six domains of WHO's framework and explore new domains and (2) an analysis grid to map the common facilitators and barriers.

RESULTS

We included 98 systematic reviews with 110 interventions to improve QoC from countries globally. The facilitators and barriers identified fitted the six domains of WHO's framework--information, patient-population engagement, leadership, regulations and standards, organisational capacity and models of care. Two new domains, 'communication' and 'satisfaction', were generated. Facilitators included active and regular interpersonal communication between users and providers; respect, confidentiality, comfort and support during care provision; engaging users in decision-making; continuity of care and effective audit and feedback mechanisms. Key barriers identified were language barriers in information and communication; power difference between users and providers; health systems not accounting for user satisfaction; variable standards of implementation of standard guidelines; shortage of resources in health facilities and lack of studies assessing the role of leadership in improving QoC. These were common across the three population groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The barriers to good-quality healthcare are common for pregnant women, newborns and children; thus, interventions targeted to address them will have uniform beneficial effects. Adopting the identified facilitators would help countries strengthen their health systems and ensure high-quality care for all.

Swedish Midwives’ Perspectives of Antenatal Care Focusing on Group-Based Antenatal Care

BACKGROUND:Antenatal care in Sweden is routinely delivered on an individual level with optional parental education classes. Group-based antenatal care (GBAC) is a model of antenatal care that has been implemented in Sweden since the year 2000.

AIM:Previous research has focused mainly on parents’ experiences and perceptions of GBAC. Midwives have an important role in developing Swedish antenatal care, but studies focusing on midwives’ perspectives are rare. Hence, the aim of this study was to investigate and describe antenatal midwives’ perceptions and experiences of their current work, with a special focus on their opinions about GBAC.

METHOD:An interview study was conducted and analyzed by descriptive statistics and quantitative content analysis.

PARTICIPANTS:56 midwives from 52 antenatal clinics in Sweden.

RESULTS:The major findings of this study were that midwives were satisfied with their work in antenatal care but have reservations concerning time constraints and parental classes. More than half of the midwives reported an interest in trying the group model but expressed personal and organizational obstacles based on identifiable difficulties in implementing the model. Midwives had strong opinions about the suitability of the model for women.

CONCLUSION:This is the first study in Sweden to investigate midwives’ perspectives on GBAC. Midwives showed an interest in the group model but have concerns about implementing the process. The midwives considered GBAC as inappropriate for immigrants and well-educated parents.