Perceptions of Barriers and Facilitators During Implementation of a Complex Model of Group Prenatal Care in Six Urban Sites

What is known about the role of external facilitators during the implementation of complex interventions in healthcare settings? A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise current knowledge about the role of external facilitators as an individual role during the implementation of complex interventions in healthcare settings.

DESIGN

A scoping review was conducted. We reviewed original studies (between 2000 and 2023) about implementing an evidence-based complex intervention in a healthcare setting using external facilitators to support the implementation process. An information specialist used the following databases for the search strategy: MEDLINE, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Academic Search Complete, EMBASE (Scopus), Business Source Complete and SocINDEX.

RESULTS

36 reports were included for analysis, including 34 different complex interventions. We performed a mixed thematic analysis to synthesise the data. We identified two primary external facilitator roles: lead facilitator and process expert facilitator. Process expert external facilitators have specific responsibilities according to their role and expertise in supporting three main processes: clinical, change management and knowledge/research management.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research should study processes supported by external facilitators and their relationship with facilitation strategies and implementation outcomes. Future systematic or realist reviews may also focus on outcomes and the effectiveness of external facilitation.

Providers' Perspectives of a Culturally Adapted CenteringPregnancy Intervention for Marshallese Women in Arkansas

OBJECTIVE

To explore health care providers' perspectives on the successes, challenges, and suggestions for future directions regarding the implementation of CenteringPregnancy for Marshallese women in Arkansas.

DESIGN

A descriptive qualitative design was used as an exploratory method.

SETTING/LOCAL PROBLEM

This study took place in northwest Arkansas. Arkansas is home to the largest Marshallese Pacific Islander population in the United States. Marshallese Pacific Islanders residing in the United States have disproportionally high rates of poor maternal and infant health outcomes, even compared to other Pacific Islanders.

PARTICIPANTS

Seven CenteringPregnancy providers from the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Northwest.

INTERVENTION/MEASUREMENTS

Individual interviews were conducted from February to March of 2023. Data were managed using MAXQDA12 software. Content analysis was used to analyze the data. Initial coding was completed to identify each data segment with short summations of emergent themes. The focused thematic codes that emerged were used to identify and develop the most salient thematic categories of the data, which became the thematic codes.

RESULTS

Three overarching themes emerged: Implementation Successes, Challenges to Implementation, and Future Suggestions to Improve Implementation and Sustainability. Each theme had representative subthemes.

CONCLUSION

Findings provide insight for future implementation of CenteringPregnancy for Marshallese and other Pacific Islander individuals.

Group prenatal care successes, challenges, and frameworks for scaling up: a case study in adopting health care innovations

BACKGROUND

Group prenatal care enhances quality of care, improves outcomes, and lowers costs. However, this healthcare innovation is not widely available. Using a case-study approach, our objectives were to (1) examine organizational characteristics that support implementation of Expect With Me group prenatal care and (2) identify key factors influencing adoption and sustainability.

METHODS

We studied five clinical sites implementing group prenatal care, collecting qualitative data including focus group discussions with clinicians (n = 4 focus groups, 41 clinicians), key informant interviews (n = 9), and administrative data. We utilized a comparative qualitative case-study approach to characterize clinical sites and explain organizational traits that fostered implementation success. We characterized adopting and non-adopting (unable to sustain group prenatal care) sites in terms of fit for five criteria specified in the Framework for Transformational Change: (1) impetus to transform, (2) leadership commitment to quality, (3) improvement initiatives that engage staff, (4) alignment to achieve organization-wide goals, and (5) integration.

RESULTS

Two sites were classified as adopters and three as non-adopters based on duration, frequency, and consistency of group prenatal care implementation. Adopters had better fit with the five criteria for transformational change. Adopting organizations were more successful implementing group prenatal care due to alignment between organizational goals and resources, dedicated healthcare providers coordinating group care, space for group prenatal care sessions, and strong commitment from organization leadership.

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting sites were more likely to integrate group prenatal care when stakeholders achieved alignment across staff on organizational change goals, leadership buy-in, and committed institutional support and dedicated resources to sustain it.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Expect With Me intervention's design and hypotheses were preregistered: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02169024 . Date: June 19, 2014.

The Effect of CenteringPregnancy Group Antenatal Care on Maternal, Birth, and Neonatal Outcomes Among Low-Risk Women in the Netherlands: A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial

INTRODUCTION

This study was carried out to assess the effects of participating in CenteringPregnancy (CP) on maternal, birth, and neonatal outcomes among low-risk pregnant women in the Netherlands.

METHODS

A total of 2124 pregnant women in primary care were included in the study. Data were derived from the Dutch national database, Perined, complemented with data from questionnaires completed by pregnant women. A stepwise-wedge design was employed; multilevel intention-to-treat analyses and propensity score matching were the main analytic approaches. Propensity score matching resulted in sample sizes of 305 nulliparous women in both the individual care (IC) and the matched control group (control-IC) and 267 in the CP and control-CP groups. For multiparous women, 354 matches were found for IC and control-IC groups and 152 for CP and control-CP groups. Main outcome measures were maternal, birth, and neonatal outcomes.

RESULTS

Compared with the control-CP group receiving standard antenatal care, nulliparous women participating in CP had a lower risk of maternal hypertensive disorders (odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30-0.93) and for the composite adverse maternal outcome (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33-0.82). Breastfeeding initiation rates were higher amongst nulliparous (OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 134-3.69) and multiparous women (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.00-2.62) participating in CP compared with women in the control-CP group.

CONCLUSION

Nulliparous women in CP were at lower risk of developing hypertensive disorders during pregnancy and, consequently, at lower risk of having adverse maternal outcomes. The results confirmed our hypothesis that both nulliparous and multiparous women who participated in CP would have higher breastfeeding rates compared with women receiving standard antenatal care.

National assessment of obstetrics and gynecology and family medicine residents' experiences with CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care

OBJECTIVE

To examine family medicine (FM) and obstetrician-gynecologist (OB/GYN) residents' experiences with CenteringPregnancy (CP) group prenatal care (GPNC) as a correlate to perceived likelihood of implementing CP in future practice, as well as knowledge, level of support, and perceived barriers to implementation.

METHODS

We conducted a repeated cross-sectional study annually from 2017 to 2019 with FM and OB/GYN residents from residency programs in the United States licensed to operate CP. We applied adjusted logistic regression models to identify predictors of intentions to engage with CP in future practice.

RESULTS

Of 212 FM and 176 OB/GYN residents included in analysis, 67.01% of respondents intended to participate as a facilitator in CP in future practice and 51.80% of respondents were willing to talk to decision makers about establishing CP. Both FM and OB/GYN residents who spent more than 15 h engaged with CP and who expressed support towards CP were more likely to participate as a facilitator. FM residents who received residency-based training on CP and who were more familiar with CP reported higher intention to participate as a facilitator, while OB/GYN residents who had higher levels of engagement with CP were more likely to report an intention to participate as a facilitator.

CONCLUSION

Engagement with and support towards CP during residency are key factors in residents' intention to practice CP in the future. To encourage future adoption of CP among residents, consider maximizing resident engagement with the model in hours of exposure and level of engagement, including hosting residency-based trainings on CP for FM residents.

Long-term cost savings with Centering-based group antenatal care

INTRODUCTION

Group antenatal care (gANC) is a group-based care-model combining routine antenatal care, with health assessment, education, and community building. GANC has shown positive results on perinatal outcomes. However, midwives in Dutch primary care have reported higher costs when providing gANC. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of replacing individual prenatal care (IC) by gANC on (expected future) health care costs and health outcomes.

METHODS

We performed an exploratory cost-benefit analysis comparing costs and consequences of gANC with those of IC, using a hypothetical cohort of 12,894 women in gANC. Primary input data were derived from a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial carried out in the Netherlands, assessing both health and psychosocial effects of gANC comparing them with IC. Other data was retrieved from available literature and an online questionnaire among midwifery practices. The main outcome measure was differential cost of gANC and lifetime direct healthcare costs related to the effects of gANC compared to IC (price level 2019).

RESULTS

Results showed that gANC comes at a differential cost of €45 extra per person when compared to IC. However, projected healthcare cost-savings related to increased breastfeeding rates, reduced prevalence of pregnancy induced hypertension and less postpartum smoking, lead to an average net cost-savings of €67 per gANC participant.

DISCUSSION

Although gANC shows better health- and psychosocial outcomes when compared to IC, it is more costly to provide. However, findings indicate that the differential costs of gANC are off-set by long-term healthcare cost-savings.

Anticipated benefits and challenges of implementing group care in Suriname's maternity and child care sector: a contextual analysis

BACKGROUND

Suriname is a uppermiddle-income country with a relatively high prevalence of preventable pregnancy complications. Access to and usage of high-quality maternity care services are lacking. The implementation of group care (GC) may yield maternal and child health improvements. However, before introducing a complex intervention it is pivotal to develop an understanding of the local context to inform the implementation process.

METHODS

A context analysis was conducted to identify local needs toward maternity and postnatal care services, and to assess contextual factor relevant to implementability of GC. During a Rapid Qualitative Inquiry, 63 online and face-to-face semi-structured interviews were held with parents, community members, on-and off-site healthcare professionals, policy makers, and one focus group with parents was conducted. Audio recordings were transcribed in verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis and Framework Method. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research served as a base for the coding tree, which was complemented with inductively derived codes.

RESULTS

Ten themes related to implementability, one theme related to sustainability, and seven themes related to reaching and participation of the target population in GC were identified. Factors related to health care professionals (e.g., workload, compatibility, ownership, role clarity), to GC, to recipients and to planning impact the implementability of GC, while sustainability is in particular hampered by sparse financial and human resources. Reach affects both implementability and sustainability. Yet, outer setting and attitudinal barriers of health professionals will likely affect reach.

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-layered contextual factors impact not only implementability and sustainability of GC, but also reach of parents. We advise future researchers and implementors of GC to investigate not only determinants for implementability and sustainability, but also those factors that may hamper, or facilitate up-take. Practical, attitudinal and cultural barriers to GC participation need to be examined. Themes identified in this study will inspire the development of adaptations and implementation strategies at a later stage.

CenteringPregnancy: A Review of Implementation and Outcomes

Importance

CenteringPregnancy (CP) is a model for group prenatal care associated with improved perinatal outcomes for preterm birth and low birthweight, increased rates of breastfeeding, and higher rates of patient and clinician satisfaction.

Objective

The study aims to review the literature related to perinatal outcomes associated with CP, benefits and barriers to implementation, and utility of the model.

Evidence

An electronic-based search was performed in PubMed using the search terms "CenteringPregnancy" OR "Centering Pregnancy," revealing 221 articles.

Results

The CP model improves patient centeredness, efficiency, and equality in prenatal care. Challenges include administrative buy-in, limited resources, and financial support. Multisite retrospective studies of CP demonstrate improved maternal, neonatal, postpartum, and well-being outcomes, especially for participants from minority backgrounds; however, prospective studies had mixed results. CenteringPregnancy is feasibly implemented with high tenet fidelity in several low- and middle-income settings with improved perinatal outcomes compared with traditional care.

Conclusions

CenteringPregnancy is feasible to implement, largely accepted by communities, and shows positive qualitative and quantitative health outcomes. This body of literature supports CP as a potential tool for decreasing racial inequalities in prenatal access, quality of care, and maternal mortality. Further investigation is necessary to inform obstetric clinicians about the potential outcome differences that exist between group and traditional prenatal care.

It takes two to tango: the recruiter's role in accepting or refusing to participate in group antenatal care among pregnant women-an exploration through in-depth interviews

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to explore how women are recruited for group antenatal care (GANC) in primary care organisations (PCOs), what elements influence the behaviour of the recruiter, and what strategies recruiters use to encourage women to participate.

METHOD

Using a qualitative research design, we conducted 10 in-depth interviews with GANC facilitators working in PCOs. Selected constructs of the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Theoretical Domains Framework helped to develop interview questions and raise awareness of important elements during interviews and thematic analyses. GANC facilitators working in multidisciplinary PCOs located in Brussels and Flanders (Belgium) were invited to participate in an interview. We purposively selected participants because of their role as GANC facilitators and recruiters. We recruited GANC facilitators up until data saturation and no new elements emerged.

RESULT

We identified that the recruitment process consists of four phases or actions: identification of needs and potential obstacles for participation; selection of potential participants; recruitment for GANC and reaction to response. Depending on the phase, determinants at the level of the woman, recruiter, organisation or environment have an influence on the recruitment behaviour.

CONCLUSION

Our study concludes that it takes two to tango for successful recruitment for GANC. Potential participants' needs and wishes are of importance, but the care providers' behaviour should not be underestimated. Therefore, successful recruitment may be improved when introducing a multidisciplinary recruitment plan consisting of specific strategies, as we suggest.

Utilization of digital prenatal services and management of depression and anxiety during pregnancy: A retrospective observational study

Introduction

We examined how utilization of Maven, a digital healthcare platform that provides virtual prenatal services, is associated with improvements in perceived management of anxiety and depression during pregnancy, and how medical knowledge and support may influence this association.

Materials and Methods

In this retrospective study we used adjusted logistic regression to examine the relationship between digital platform use in pregnancy and perceived mental health management, and how perceived management of mental health is affected by user-reported improvements in medical knowledge and feeling supported by the platform. Effects were evaluated separately among users with and without a mental health condition. Demographics, medical history, and mental health management were self-reported.

Results

Of 5,659 users, 705 (12.5%) reported that Maven helped them manage anxiety and/or depression in the prenatal period. In adjusted models, users who read more articles, sent more messages to care advocates, or had more appointments with providers were more likely to report improved management of mental health in a dose-response manner (e.g., articles read: Q2 aOR 1.31 (95% CI 1.01–1.70), Q3 aOR 1.68 (95% CI 1.30–2.17), Q4 1.99 (95% CI 1.54–2.59)). Improvements in medical knowledge and high perceived support were both associated with better perceived mental health management. Results were similar in users with and without a mental health condition.

Discussion

These results suggest that access to a diverse set of digital resources provides multiple pathways to managing depression and anxiety during pregnancy for those with and without a diagnosed mental health condition.

Inequities in Availability of Evidence-Based Birth Supports to Improve Perinatal Health for Socially Vulnerable Rural Residents

Rural residents in the United States (US) have disproportionately high rates of maternal and infant mortality. Rural residents who are Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) face multiple social risk factors and have some of the worst maternal and infant health outcomes in the U.S. The purpose of this study was to determine the rural availability of evidence-based supports and services that promote maternal and infant health. We developed and conducted a national survey of a sample of rural hospitals. We determined for each responding hospital the county-level scores on the 2018 CDC Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). The sample’s (n = 93) median SVI score [IQR] was 0.55 [0.25–0.88]; for majority-BIPOC counties (n = 29) the median SVI score was 0.93 [0.88–0.98] compared with 0.38 [0.19–0.64] for majority-White counties (n = 64). Among counties where responding hospitals were located, 86.2% located in majority-BIPOC counties ranked in the most socially vulnerable quartile of counties nationally (SVI ≥ 0.75), compared with 14.1% of majority-White counties. In analyses adjusted for geography and hospital size, certified lactation support (aOR 0.36, 95% CI 0.13–0.97), midwifery care (aOR 0.35, 95% CI 0.12–0.99), doula support (aOR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11–0.84), postpartum support groups (aOR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09–0.68), and childbirth education classes (aOR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01–0.69) were significantly less available in the most vulnerable counties compared with less vulnerable counties. Residents in the most socially vulnerable rural counties, many of whom are BIPOC and thus at higher risk for poor birth outcomes, are significantly less likely to have access to evidence-based supports for maternal and infant health.

CenteringPregnancy in the Netherlands: Who engages, who doesn't, and why

BACKGROUND

CenteringPregnancy (CP), a model of group antenatal care, was implemented in 2012 in the Netherlands to improve perinatal health; CP is associated with improved pregnancy outcomes. However, motivating women to participate in CP can be difficult. As such, we explored the characteristics associated with CP uptake and attendance and then investigated whether participation differs between health care facilities. In addition, we examined the reasons why women may decline participation and the reasons for higher or lower attendance rates.

METHODS

Data from a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial were used. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine associations among women's health behavior, sociodemographic and psychosocial characteristics, health care facilities, and participation and attendance in CP.

RESULTS

A total of 2562 women were included in the study, and the average participation rate was 31.6% per health care facility (range of 10%-53%). Nulliparous women, women <26 years old or >30 years old, and women reporting average or high levels of stress were more likely to participate in CP. Participation was less likely for women who had stopped smoking before prenatal intake, or who scored below average on lifestyle/pregnancy knowledge. For those participating in CP, 87% attended seven or more out of the 10 sessions, and no significant differences were found in women's characteristics when compared for higher or lower attendance rates. After the initial uptake, group attendance rates remained high.

CONCLUSION

A more comprehensive understanding of the variation in participation rate between health care facilities is required, in order to develop effective strategies to improve the recruitment of women, especially those with less knowledge and understanding of health issues and smoking habits.

Assessing Perception of Prenatal Care Quality Among Black Women in the United States

INTRODUCTION

There has been little attention to measuring quality of prenatal care from a Black person's perspective. We examined validity and reliability of the Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire (QPCQ) and perceptions of the quality of prenatal care among pregnant Black women.

METHODS

A total of 190 women had complete data on the postpartum questionnaire containing the QPCQ within 8 weeks after birth. Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α. Construct validity was assessed through hypothesis testing using select questions from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) and Pearson's r correlation.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) maternal age was 26.5 (5.5) years, and 85.3% of births were term (>37 weeks' 0 days' gestation). The total mean (SD) QPCQ score was 191.3 (27.9) points (range 46-230), and the mean (SD) item score for the subscales ranged from 3.88 (0.80) points to 4.27 (0.64). The Cronbach's α for the overall QPCQ score was .97 and ranged from .72 to .96 for the 6 subscale scores, which indicated acceptable internal consistency reliability. All but one subscale had a Cronbach's α higher than .80. The Approachability subscale had a Cronbach's α of .72. Construct validity demonstrated a moderate and significant positive correlation between the PRAMS items and the QPCQ (r = .273, P < .001).

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the validity and reliability of the QPCQ and perceptions of quality of prenatal care among Black women from the United States. The results indicate that participants rate the quality of their prenatal care highly and that the QPCQ is a reliable and valid measure of the quality of prenatal care. Use of a convenient and reliable instrument to measure the quality of prenatal care rather than prenatal care satisfaction or utilization may help to elucidate the factors of prenatal care that are protective specifically among Black women.

Group prenatal care and improved birth outcomes: Results from a type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study

To compare birth outcomes for patients receiving Expect With Me (EWM) group prenatal care or individual care only, we conducted a type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial (Detroit and Nashville, 2014-2016). Participants entered care <24 weeks gestation, had singleton pregnancy, and no prior preterm birth (N = 2402). Mean participant age was 27.1 (SD = 5.77); 49.5% were Black; 15.3% were Latina; 59.7% publicly insured. Average treatment effect of EWM compared to individual care only was estimated using augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW). This doubly-robust analytic method produces estimates of causal association between treatment and outcome in the absence of randomization. AIPW was effective at creating equivalent groups for potential confounders. Compared to those receiving individual care only, EWM patients did significantly better on three of four primary outcomes: lower risk of infants born preterm (<37 weeks gestation; 6.4% vs. 15.1%, risk ratio (RR) 0.42, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.29, 0.54), low birthweight (<2500 g; 4.3% vs. 11.6%, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.24, 0.49), and admission to NICU (9.4% vs. 14.6%, RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49, 0.78). There was no difference in small for gestational age (<10% percentile of weight for gestational age). EWM patients attended a mean of 5.9 group visits (SD = 2.7); 70% attended ≥5 group visits. Post-hoc analyses indicated EWM patients utilizing the integrated information technology platform had lower risk for low birthweight infants (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24, 0.86) than non-users. Future research is needed to understand mechanisms by which group prenatal care improves outcomes, best practices for implementation, and health systems savings. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.govNCT02169024.

A systematic review of providers' experiences of facilitating group antenatal care

Background

Group antenatal care is a rapidly expanding alternative antenatal care delivery model. Research has shown it to be a safe and effective care model for women, but less is known about the perspectives of the providers leading this care. This systematic review examined published literature that considered health care professionals’ experiences of facilitating group antenatal care.

Methods

Systematic searches were conducted in seven databases (Cinahl, Medline, Psychinfo, Embase, Ovid Emcare, Global Health and MIDRS) in April 2020. Qualitative or mixed methods studies with a significant qualitative component were eligible for inclusion if they included a focus on the experiences of health care providers who had facilitated group antenatal care. Prisma screening guidelines were followed and study quality was critically appraised by three independent reviewers. The findings were synthesised thematically.

Results

Nineteen papers from nine countries were included. Three main themes emerged within provider experiences of group antenatal care. The first theme, ‘Giving women the care providers feel they want and need’, addresses richer use of time, more personal care, more support, and continuity of care. The second theme, ‘Building skills and relationships’, highlights autonomy, role development and hierarchy dissolution. The final theme, ‘Value proposition of group antenatal care’, discusses provider investment and workload.

Conclusions

Health care providers’ experience of delivering group antenatal care was positive overall. Opportunities to deliver high-quality care that benefits women and allows providers to develop their professional role were appreciated. Questions about the providers’ perspectives on workload, task shifting, and the structural changes needed to support the sustainability of group antenatal care warrant further exploration.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12978-021-01200-0.

Receiving antenatal care in a group setting has been found to be safe and satisfying for women and is supported by international public health guidelines. However, questions remain about the experience of health care professionals tasked with providing this model, such as whether they like working in this model and whether they support its expansion. To answer these questions, the team searched for studies about the experiences of health care providers with group antenatal care, and only included those studies where providers themselves spoke about their own experiences of providing this kind of care. Our review demonstrated that midwives, doctors, nurses and community health workers mostly enjoyed facilitating group antenatal care. They particularly appreciated the ability to give women the kind of care they felt women want and need. Health care providers also experienced some changes in their professional roles, in relation to both the women they serve and their colleagues and organizations. In order to determine if group antenatal care models are a satisfying and sustainable option for health care professionals in the long term, more research is needed.

Association of Delivery Outcomes With the Number of Childbirth Education Sessions

The objective of this study was to determine whether childbirth education conducted over 3 or more sessions is more effective than courses conducted over 1 or 2 sessions. This was a secondary analysis of 2853 participants in a longitudinal study of women recruited during their first pregnancy. Data on childbirth education attendance were collected during the 1-month postpartum interview. The Kruskal-Wallis test for ranks was used for univariate analysis by the number of class sessions, and logistic regression was used to compare no education with any childbirth education, single-session, 2-session, and 3-or-more-session courses. Primary outcomes included induction of labor, cesarean delivery, use of pain medication, and shared decision-making. Attending 3 or more education sessions was associated with a decreased risk of planned cesarean delivery and increased shared decision-making. Attending any childbirth education was associated with lower odds of using pain medication in labor, reduced odds of planned cesarean delivery, and increased shared decision-making. Childbirth education was not associated with induction of labor. Childbirth education can be provided over 3 or more sessions. This finding can be used to develop evidence-based childbirth education programs.

Implementation of a novel rehabilitation model of care across Alberta, Canada: a focused ethnography

Background

In 2017, a provincial health-system released a Rehabilitation Model of Care (RMoC) to promote patient-centred care, provincial standardisation and data-driven innovation. Eighteen early-adopter community-rehabilitation teams implemented the RMoC using a 1.5-year-long Innovation Learning Collaborative (in-person learning sessions; balanced scorecards). More research is required on developing, implementing and evaluating models of care. We aimed to explore experiences of early-adopter providers and provincial consultants involved in the community-rehabilitation RMoC implementation in Alberta, Canada.

Methods

Using focused ethnography, we used focus groups (or interviews for feasibility/confidentiality) and aggregate, site-level data analysis of RMoC standardised metrics. Purposive sampling ensured representation across geography, service types and patient populations. Team-specific focus groups were onsite and led by a researcher-moderator and cofacilitator. A semistructured question guide promoted discussions on interesting/challenging occurrences; perceptions of RMoC impact and perceptions of successful implementation. Focus groups and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed alongside field notes. Data collection and analysis were concurrent to saturation. Transcripts coding involves collapsing similar ideas into themes, with intertheme relationships identified. Rigour tactics included negative case analysis, thick description and audit trail.

Results

We completed 11 focus groups and seven interviews (03/2018 to 01/2019) (n=45). Participants were 89.6% women, mostly Canadian trained and represented diverse rehabilitation professions. The implementation experience involved navigating emotions, operating among dynamics and integrating the RMoC details. Confident, satisfied early-adopter teams demonstrated traits including strong coping strategies; management support and being opportunistic and candid about failure. Teams faced common challenges (eg, emotions of change; delayed data access and lack of efficient, memorable communication across team and site). Implementation success targeted patient, team and system levels.

Conclusions

We recommend training priorities for future teams including evaluation training for novice teams; timelines for stepwise implementation; on-site, in-person time with a facilitator and full-team present and prolonged facilitated introductions between similar teams for long-term mentorship.

Group Prenatal Care as a Strategy to Address Diabesity

Group prenatal care is a health care delivery model that utilizes shared medical appointments to place greater focus on patient education, mutual support, and increased time with the clinician to promote a healthy pregnancy. Several studies suggest that medically low-risk women participating in group prenatal care have improved pregnancy outcomes, but the same tenants can likely be used to help women with diabetes and obesity achieve healthy outcomes during pregnancy and throughout their life course. This chapter will review the background, care model, and evidence regarding group medical visits for pregnant women with diabetes and obesity.

Group Prenatal Care in Mexico: perspectives and experiences of health personnel

OBJECTIVE

Identify barriers and facilitators to implementing the Group Prenatal Care model in Mexico (GPC) from the health care personnel's perspective.

METHODS

We carried out a qualitative descriptive study in four clinics of the Ministry of Health in two states of Mexico (Morelos and Hidalgo) from June 2016 to August 2018. We conducted 11 semi-structured interviews with health care service providers, and we examined their perceptions and experiences during the implementation of the GPC model. We identified the barriers and facilitators for its adoption in two dimensions: a) structural (space, resources, health personnel, patient volume, community) and b) attitudinal (motivation, leadership, acceptability, address problems, work atmosphere and communication).

RESULTS

The most relevant barriers reported at the structural level were the availability of physical space in health units and the work overload of health personnel. We identified the difficulty in adopting a less hierarchical relationship during the pregnant women's care at the attitudinal level. The main facilitator at the attitudinal level was the acceptability that providers had of the model. One specific finding for Mexico's implementation context was the resistance to change the doctor-patient relationship; it is difficult to abandon the prevailing hierarchical model and change to a more horizontal relationship with pregnant women.

CONCLUSION

Analyzing the GPC model's implementation in Mexico, from the health care personnel's perspective, has revealed barriers and facilitators similar to the experiences in other contexts. Future efforts to adopt the model should focus on timely attention to identified barriers, especially those identified in the attitudinal dimension that can be modified by regular health care personnel training.

Beyond Implementation: Sustaining Group Prenatal Care and Group Well-Child Care

INTRODUCTION

Group prenatal care and group well-child care (collectively called group care) provide health care in groups. Group care is being introduced in many settings, and the model's benefits are increasingly recognized. Yet, little attention has been paid to understanding model sustainability. This study examined barriers to sustainability and offers suggestions for sustaining group care programs.

METHODS

This qualitative research was guided by interpretive description. Semistructured interviews with 17 professionals were conducted in 4 sites in one community to explore barriers to sustaining group care and key ingredients for sustainability. Sites were 2 clinics that had provided group prenatal care, a clinic currently providing group prenatal care, and a clinic currently providing group well-child care. Two clinics have continued providing group care and 2 have discontinued it. Participants included midwives, physicians, nurses, and nurse practitioners. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and entered in ATLAS.ti. A priori and inductive coding schemes were developed; code content was compared across individuals, participant types, and settings.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: administrative buy-in, robust recruitment, clinician and staff buy-in, owning it, and sustainability mindset. Group care needs to be sold to many different constituencies: administrators, staff and clinicians, and patients. Furthermore, sustainability requires having a conscious awareness of the importance of sustainability from the outset, taking ownership by adapting group care to needs of settings, creating venues for expressing divergent viewpoints and problem-solving, and recognizing that these processes are ongoing with change occurring incrementally. It also includes addressing the need for long-term financing.

DISCUSSION

Those implementing group care must be prepared to go beyond managing the logistics of introducing a complex new program; they must also be prepared to develop sustainability mindsets, sell the model to everyone on all levels within their institutions, and advocate for enhanced reimbursement for group care and value-driven payment systems.

Core strategies, social processes, and contextual influences of early phases of implementation and statewide scale-up of group prenatal care in South Carolina

This mixed-methods process evaluation examined a state-wide, interagency collaborative in South Carolina that expanded CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care from two to five additional healthcare practices from 2012 to 2015. The evaluation focused on delineating core processes, strategies, and external contextual elements of group prenatal care implementation and scale-up. Success of this scale-up was enhanced by the effective use and creation of windows of opportunity, which allowed stakeholders to pursue actions consistent with their own values, at both state and organizational levels. Most importantly, strong political advocacy and state-level financial commitment for group prenatal care made it possible for clinics throughout South Carolina to begin providing CenteringPregnancy to their patients. Improved understanding of the processes involved in scaling-up pilot interventions may enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of future expansion efforts.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing priority inpatient initiatives in the safety net setting

Background

Safety net hospitals, which serve vulnerable and underserved populations and often operate on smaller budgets than non-safety net hospitals, may experience unique implementation challenges. We sought to describe common barriers and facilitators that affect the implementation of improvement initiatives in a safety net hospital, and identify potentially transferable lessons to enhance implementation efforts in similar settings.

Methods

We interviewed leaders within five inpatient departments and asked them to identify the priority inpatient improvement initiative from the last year. We then conducted individual, semi-structured interviews with 25 stakeholders across the five settings. Interviewees included individuals serving in implementation oversight, champion, and frontline implementer roles. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research informed the discussion guide and a priori codes for directed content analysis.

Results

Despite pursuing diverse initiatives in different clinical departments, safety net hospital improvement stakeholders described common barriers and facilitators related to inner and outer setting dynamics, characteristics of individuals involved, and implementation processes. Implementation barriers included (1) limited staffing resources, (2) organizational recognition without financial investment, and (3) the use of implementation strategies that did not adequately address patients’ biopsychosocial complexities. Facilitators included (1) implementation approaches that combined passive and active communication styles, (2) knowledge of patient needs and competitive pressure to perform well against non-SNHs, (3) stakeholders’ personal commitment to reduce health inequities, and (4) the use of multidisciplinary task forces to drive implementation activities.

Conclusion

Inner and outer setting dynamics, individual’s characteristics, and process factors served as implementation barriers and facilitators within the safety net. Future work should seek to leverage findings from this study toward efforts to enact positive change within safety net hospitals.

A Model of Group Prenatal Care for Patients with Prenatally Diagnosed Fetal Anomalies

The model of group prenatal care was initially developed to include peer support and to improve education and health-promoting behaviors during pregnancy. This model has since been adapted for populations with unique educational needs. Mama Care is an adaptation of the CenteringPregnancy Model of prenatal care. Mama Care is situated within a national and international referral center for families with prenatally diagnosed fetal anomalies. In December 2013, the Center for Fetal Diagnosis and Treatment at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia began offering a model of group prenatal care to women whose pregnancies are affected by a prenatal diagnosis of a fetal anomaly. The model incorporates significant adaptations of CenteringPregnancy in order to accommodate these women, who typically transition their care from community-based settings to the Center for Fetal Diagnosis and Treatment in the late second or early third trimester. Unique challenges associated with caring for families within a referral center include a condensed visit schedule, complex social needs such as housing and psychosocial support, as well as an increased need for antenatal surveillance and frequent preterm birth. Outcomes of the program are favorable and suggest group prenatal care models can be developed to support the needs of patients with prenatally diagnosed fetal anomalies.

Mixed methods study of a new model of care for chronic disease: co-design and sustainable implementation of group consultations into clinical practice

Objectives

Group consultations are used for chronic conditions, such as inflammatory arthritis, but evidence of efficacy for treatment to target or achieving tight control is lacking. Our aim was to establish whether group consultation is a sustainable, co-designed routine care option and to explore factors supporting spread.

Methods

The study used mixed methods, observational process/outcome data, plus qualitative exploration of enabling themes. It was set in two community hospitals, in 2008–19, with a third hospital from 2016, and was triangulated with primary care qualitative data. There was a total of 3363 arthritis patient attendances at 183 clinics during 2008–19. The early arthritis cohort comprised 46 patients, followed monthly until the treatment target was achieved, during 2016–19. Focus groups included 15 arthritis and 11 osteoporosis group attendees. Intervention was a 2 h group consultation, attended monthly for early/active disease and annually for stable disease. Measurements included attendance, DAS, satisfaction and enabling themes.

Results

There was a mean number of 18.4 patients per clinic (n = 16, 2010–15; n = 18, 2016; n = 20, 2017; n = 23, 2018–19). Forty per cent (1161/2874) of patients with DAS data reached low disease activity (DAS < 3.2) or remission (DAS < 2.6). Forty-six early arthritis patients followed monthly until they achieved remission responded even better: 50% remission; and 89% low disease activity/remission by 6 months. Qualitative analysis derived five main enabling themes (efficiency, empathy, education, engagement and empowerment) and five promotors to translate these themes into practice (prioritization, personalization, participation, personality and pedagogy). Limitations included the prospectively collected observational data and pragmatic design susceptible to bias.

Conclusion

Co-designed group consultations can be sustainable, clinically effective and efficient for monthly review of early active disease and annual review of stable disease. Promoting factors may support effective training for chronic disease group consultations.

Key Considerations for Implementing Group Prenatal Care: Lessons from 60 Practices

INTRODUCTION

Group prenatal care combines clinical care with peer support and education. Research has indicated neutral or positive results for group care when compared with traditional individual prenatal visits. A national initiative, Strong Start II, was implemented to determine if specific prenatal care interventions such as group prenatal care can reduce the rate of preterm birth, improve health outcomes, and lower costs. This study explored barriers to implementation and sustainability and strategies for overcoming barriers and sustaining the model.

METHODS

Results from prenatal care provider-level qualitative case studies for the independent evaluation of Strong Start were examined. Case studies for sites implementing group prenatal care were based on a total of 313 interviews with 441 Strong Start key informants (eg, prenatal care providers, project staff, and health administrators involved in group care) and 53 focus groups with 428 Strong Start participants from 2013 to 2016. Supplemental interviews with 25 additional stakeholders were also conducted. Case study data were queried using content analysis followed by a grounded theory-based analysis of these findings.

RESULTS

Barriers to implementation existed at patient, provider, administrator, system, and funding levels and included inflexible appointment times, lack of childcare, lack of appropriate meeting space, new scheduling and training needs, meeting requirements of graduate medical education programs, prenatal care provider and administrator reluctance to adopt new practices, and Medicaid payment policies. Sites newly implementing group prenatal care had varying degrees of success sustaining their programs. Both new and established sites identified provider champions and opt-out enrollment approaches as critical for maintaining buy-in.

DISCUSSION

Successful implementation of group prenatal care depends on systematic strategies at the practice, payer, provider, patient, and policy levels to implement, reimburse for, and sustain the model. Strategies for overcoming barriers can assist practices in offering this transformative approach, including practices with graduate medical education programs or those serving women with clinical, demographic, or psychosocial risk factors for preterm birth.

Redesigning systems to improve teamwork and quality for hospitalized patients (RESET): study protocol evaluating the effect of mentored implementation to redesign clinical microsystems

Background

A number of challenges impede our ability to consistently provide high quality care to patients hospitalized with medical conditions. Teams are large, team membership continually evolves, and physicians are often spread across multiple units and floors. Moreover, patients and family members are generally poorly informed and lack opportunities to partner in decision making. Prior studies have tested interventions to redesign aspects of the care delivery system for hospitalized medical patients, but the majority have evaluated the effect of a single intervention. We believe these interventions represent complementary and mutually reinforcing components of a redesigned clinical microsystem. Our specific objective for this study is to implement a set of evidence-based complementary interventions across a range of clinical microsystems, identify factors and strategies associated with successful implementation, and evaluate the impact on quality.

Methods

The RESET project uses the Advanced and Integrated MicroSystems (AIMS) interventions. The AIMS interventions consist of 1) Unit-based Physician Teams, 2) Unit Nurse-Physician Co-leadership, 3) Enhanced Interprofessional Rounds, 4) Unit-level Performance Reports, and 5) Patient Engagement Activities. Four hospital sites were chosen to receive guidance and resources as they implement the AIMS interventions. Each study site has assembled a local leadership team, consisting of a physician and nurse, and receives mentorship from a physician and nurse with experience in leading similar interventions. Primary outcomes include teamwork climate, assessed using the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire, and adverse events using the Medicare Patient Safety Monitoring System (MPSMS). RESET uses a parallel group study design and two group pretest-posttest analyses for primary outcomes. We use a multi-method approach to collect and triangulate qualitative data collected during 3 visits to study sites. We will use cross-case comparisons to consider how site-specific contextual factors interact with the variation in the intensity and fidelity of implementation to affect teamwork and patient outcomes.

Discussion

The RESET study provides mentorship and resources to assist hospitals as they implement complementary and mutually reinforcing components to redesign the clinical microsystems caring for medical patients. Our findings will be of interest and directly applicable to all hospitals providing care to patients with medical conditions.

Trial registration

NCT03745677. Retrospectively registered on November 19, 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4116-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

PROCESS AND SYSTEMS: A systems approach to embedding group consultations in the NHS

Group consultations are an important care option that is -starting to gain traction in the USA and Australia. This review summarises the likely benefits accruing from a systems -approach to implementing group consultations widely in the NHS and other socialised healthcare systems. Existing evidence is mapped to five distinct systems approaches: (1) development; (2) different age groups; (3) patient-centred pathway of care; (4) NHS system changes; and (5) education. Implications are discussed for patients and staff, who both benefit from group consultations once embedded; ranging from improved access and efficiency to more enjoyable multidisciplinary team working, improved resource management, and maintained/better outcomes. Moreover, even patients who don't attend group consultations can benefit from system effects of long-term implementation. Changing behaviour and health systems is challenging, but change requires systematic experimentation and documentation of evidence. We conclude that group consultations have unique potential for delivering system-wide benefits across the NHS.

Redesigning primary care in the safety net: A qualitative analysis of team-based care implementation

BACKGROUND

Team-based care is an innovative approach to primary care in which groups of health care professionals work collaboratively to manage care for groups of patients. Safety-net organizations face specific barriers to implementing health care innovations. More research is needed that documents the dynamics that inform implementation and sustainment of innovative practices in the safety net.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative fieldwork, including purposeful observation and semi-structured and informal interviews, to explore the implementation of care teams in safety-net clinics in California. Field notes and transcripts were analyzed using an inductive approach to identify overarching themes across sites.

RESULTS

Salient themes across clinics suggest that 1) well-designed physical layouts that promote sustained patterns of structured and spontaneous communication and collaboration are critical to creating high-functioning teams; 2) implementation of team-based care relies on a relaxing of the traditional clinic hierarchy into an agile organizational structure that empowers all clinic staff-most notably medical assistants-by facilitating an ethos of collaborative decision-making, interdependence, and shared responsibility; and 3) resource constraints related to recruitment and retention of qualified staff are key barriers to implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Team-based care has the potential to improve patient outcomes, strengthen relationships and well-being among clinic staff, and expand staff roles to facilitate collective accomplishment of work goals. To successfully launch and sustain care teams in safety-net clinics, greater commitments to creating well-designed spaces and a re-envisioning of the training and compensation for medical assistants that reflects the valuable role these individuals can play appear to be necessary.

Implementing Group Prenatal Care in Southwest Georgia Through Public-Private Partnerships

Introduction CenteringPregnancy® is well-regarded as an innovative group model of prenatal care. In 2009, Georgia's Southwest Public Health District partnered with local obstetricians and medical centers to expand prenatal care access and improve perinatal outcomes for low-income women by implementing Georgia's first public health administered CenteringPregnancy program. This paper describes the successful implementation of CenteringPregnancy in a public health setting with no prior prenatal services; assesses the program's first 5-year perinatal outcomes; and discusses several key lessons learned. Methods Prenatal and hospital medical records of patients were reviewed for the time period from October 2009 through October 2014. Descriptive analyses were conducted to examine demographic and clinical characteristics of women initiating prenatal care and to assess perinatal outcomes among patients with singleton live births who attended at least three CenteringPregnancy sessions or delivered prior to attending the third session. Results Six hundred and six low-income women initiated prenatal care; 55.4 and 36.4% self-identified as non-Hispanic black and Hispanic, respectively. The median age was 23 years (IQR 20, 28). Nearly 69% initiated prenatal care in the first trimester. Perinatal outcomes were examined among 338 singleton live births. The 2010-2014 preterm birth rate (% of births < 37 weeks gestation at delivery) and low birth weight rate (% of births < 2500 g) were 9.1 and 8.9%, respectively. Nearly 77% of women initiated breastfeeding. Discussion CenteringPregnancy administered via public-private partnership may improve access to prenatal care and perinatal outcomes for medically underserved women in low-resource settings.

Innovative Implementation Studies Conducted in US Safety Net Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review

Little is known about dissemination and implementation in safety net settings. The authors conducted a literature review of innovation/implementation studies in US safety net health care settings between 2008 and 2017. Each article was coded for (1) intervention characteristics, (2) implementation stage, (3) internal versus external ownership, and (4) prespecified implementation outcomes (eg, acceptability and fidelity). Twenty studies were identified; the majority were implemented within community clinics or integrated safety net systems (15 articles), most involved care process improvements (13 articles), and most were internally developed (13 articles). The internally developed innovations reported fewer barriers to acceptability among staff/providers, higher leadership involvement and organizational alignment, greater amounts of customization to the local setting, and better sustainment. Future work should harness the high levels of alignment and acceptability in implementation research within safety net settings, with an eye toward maintaining fidelity to facilitate dissemination across sites.

The Mexican Experience Adapting CenteringPregnancy: Lessons Learned in a Publicly Funded Health Care System Serving Vulnerable Women

Group antenatal care is an innovative model of health care in which all components of antenatal care-clinical, educational, and supportive-happen in a group context with health care professionals as facilitators. CenteringPregnancy is the most studied model of group antenatal care, now widely implemented in the United States. This model has been shown to be effective in improving health and behavioral outcomes in the United States, but there is less known about the experience adapting group antenatal care in settings outside the US health care system. This article describes the adaptation of the CenteringPregnancy model to a Mexican context. We describe the Mexican health care context and our adaptation process and highlight key factors to consider when adapting the content and modality of the CenteringPregnancy model for diverse populations and health systems. Our findings are relevant to others seeking to implement group antenatal care in settings outside the US health care system.

Group Prenatal Visits: Maternal and Neonatal Health Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Most studies evaluating the effect of group prenatal care on maternal and neonatal health outcomes assess the CenteringPregnancy model, which follows a set structure and educational curriculum. Group prenatal visits (GPVs) bring together pregnant patients for visits that include education and a health evaluation. GPVs represent a more flexible method of delivering group prenatal care, compared with CenteringPregnancy. Our study sought to determine whether GPV participation affects maternal and neonatal health outcomes.

METHODS

The Myers Park Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic is located in Charlotte, North Carolina, and serves a racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically diverse population. GPVs were offered at the clinic between July 2014 and July 2015. Retrospective data were collected for women who obtained prenatal care, either GPV or individual care, during that period. Demographic, birth, and postpartum data were extracted from the electronic health record. GPV participants were categorized by the percent of prenatal visits that were GPVs (limited GPV: <30% of visits as GPV; moderate GPV: ≥30% of visits as GPV). Logistic regression models were created to assess the effect of GPV participation on low birth weight, preterm birth, cesarean birth, and postpartum visit attendance.

RESULTS

There were 355 study participants (GPV n = 78, individual care n = 277). Among GPV participants, 52.6% were classified as limited GPV, and 47.4% were classified as moderate GPV. The adjusted analysis showed limited-GPV patients had lower odds of postpartum visit attendance, compared with individual-care patients (odds ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.24-0.94). Neither the unadjusted nor adjusted models demonstrated a statistically significant association between GPV participation and low birth weight, preterm birth, or cesarean birth.

DISCUSSION

GPVs for prenatal care can be implemented without negative effects on maternal or neonatal health. However, fidelity to a more comprehensive model of group prenatal care may be necessary to achieve health outcome improvements.

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.

Group prenatal care

Patients participating in group prenatal care gather together with women of similar gestational ages and 2 providers who cofacilitate an educational session after a brief medical assessment. The model was first described in the 1990s by a midwife for low-risk patients and is now practiced by midwives and physicians for both low-risk patients and some high-risk patients, such as those with diabetes. The majority of literature on group prenatal care uses CenteringPregnancy, the most popular model. The first randomized controlled trial of CenteringPregnancy showed that it reduced the risk of preterm birth in low-risk women. However, recent meta-analyses have shown similar rates of preterm birth, low birthweight, and neonatal intensive care unit admission between women participating in group prenatal care and individual prenatal care. There may be subgroups, such as African Americans, who benefit from this type of prenatal care with significantly lower rates of preterm birth. Group prenatal care seems to result in increased patient satisfaction and knowledge and use of postpartum family planning as well as improved weight gain parameters. The literature is inconclusive regarding breast-feeding, stress, depression, and positive health behaviors, although it is theorized that group prenatal care positively affects these outcomes. It is unclear whether group prenatal care results in cost savings, although it may in large-volume practices if each group consists of approximately 8-10 women. Group prenatal care requires a significant paradigm shift. It can be difficult to implement and sustain. More randomized trials are needed to ascertain the true benefits of the model, best practices for implementation, and subgroups who may benefit most from this innovative way to provide prenatal care. In short, group prenatal care is an innovative and promising model with comparable pregnancy outcomes to individual prenatal care in the general population and improved outcomes in some demographic groups.

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

BACKGROUND

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.

METHODS/DESIGN

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.

DISCUSSION

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.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02169024 . Retrospectively registered on June 18, 2014.

Achieving higher-value obstetrical care

Obstetrical care in the United States is unnecessarily costly. Birth is 1 of the most common reasons for healthcare use in the United States and 1 of the top expenditures for payers every year. However, compared with other Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries, the United States spends substantially more money per birth without better outcomes. Our team at the Clinical Excellence Research Center, a center that is focused on improving value in healthcare, spent a year studying ways in which obstetrical care in the United States can deliver better outcomes at a lower cost. After a thoughtful discovery process, we identified ways that obstetrical care could be delivered with higher value. In this article, we recommend 3 redesign steps that foster the delivery of higher-value maternity care: (1) to provide long-acting reversible contraception immediately after birth, (2) to tailor prenatal care according to women's unique medical and psychosocial needs by offering more efficient models such as fewer in-person visits or group care, and (3) to create hospital-affiliated integrated outpatient birth centers as the planned place of birth for low-risk women. For each step, we discuss the redesign concept, current barriers and implementation solutions, and our estimation of potential cost-savings to the United States at scale. We estimate that, if this model were adopted nationally, annual US healthcare spending on obstetrical care would decline by as much as 28%.

Invested in Success: A Qualitative Study of the Experience of CenteringPregnancy Group Prenatal Care for Perinatal Educators

The objective of this study was to understand the central meaning of the experience of providing CenteringPregnancy for perinatal educators who were facilitators for the group sessions. Four perinatal educators participated in one-on-one interviews and/or a validation focus group. Six themes emerged: (a) "stepping back and taking on a different role," (b) "supporting transformation," (c) "getting to knowing," (d) "working together to bridge the gap," (e) "creating the environment," and (f) "fostering community." These themes contributed to the core phenomenon of being "invested in success." Through bridging gaps and inconsistencies in information received from educators and physicians, this model of CenteringPregnancy provides an opportunity for women to act on relevant information more fully than more traditional didactic approaches to perinatal education.