Introduction of CenteringPregnancy in a public health clinic

Group Multimodal Prenatal Care and Postpartum Outcomes

Importance

An increasing body of evidence suggests equivalent if not improved postpartum outcomes of in-person group prenatal care compared with individual prenatal care. However, research is needed to evaluate outcomes of group multimodal prenatal care (GMPC), with groups delivered virtually in combination with individual in-person office appointments to collect vital signs and conduct other tests compared with individual multimodal prenatal care (IMPC) delivered through a combination of remotely delivered and in-person visits.

Objective

To compare postpartum outcomes between GMPC and IMPC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A frequency-matched longitudinal cohort study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, an integrated health care delivery system. Participants included 424 individuals who were pregnant (212 GMPC and 212 frequency-matched IMPC controls (matched on gestational age, race and ethnicity, insurance status, and maternal age) receiving prenatal care between August 17, 2020, and April 1, 2021. Participants completed a baseline survey before 14 weeks' gestation and a follow-up survey between 4 and 8 weeks post partum. Data analysis was performed from January 3, 2022, to March 4, 2024.

Exposure

GMPC vs IMPC.

Main Outcome Measures

Validated instruments were used to ascertain postpartum psychosocial outcomes (stress, depression, anxiety) and perceived quality of prenatal care. Self-reported outcomes included behavioral outcomes (breastfeeding initiation, use of long-acting reversible contraception), satisfaction with prenatal care, and preparation for self and baby care after delivery. Primary analyses included all study participants in the final cohort. Three secondary dose-stratified analyses included individuals who attended at least 1 visit, 5 visits, and 70% of visits. Log-binomial regression and linear regression analyses were conducted.

Results

The final analytic cohort of 390 participants (95.6% follow-up rate of 408 singleton live births) was racially and ethnically diverse: 98 (25.1%) Asian/Pacific Islander, 88 (22.6%) Hispanic, 17 (4.4%) non-Hispanic Black, 161 (41.3%) non-Hispanic White, and 26 (6.7%) multiracial participants; median age was 32 (IQR, 30-35) years. In the primary analysis, after adjustment, GMPC was associated with a 21% decreased risk of perceived stress (adjusted risk ratio [ARR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67-0.94) compared with IMPC. Findings were consistent in the dose-stratified analyses. There were no significant differences between GMPC and IMPC for other psychosocial outcomes. While in the primary analyses there was no significant group differences in perceived quality of prenatal care (mean difference [MD], 0.01; 95% CI, -0.12 to 0.15) and feeling prepared to take care of baby at home (ARR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.96-1.23), the dose-stratified analyses documented higher perceived quality of prenatal care (MD, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.01-0.31) and preparation for taking care of baby at home (ARR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.13-1.43) for GMPC among those attending 70% of visits. No significant differences were noted in patient overall satisfaction with prenatal care and feeling prepared for taking care of themselves after delivery.

Conclusions

In this cohort study, equivalent and, in some cases, better outcomes were observed for GMPC compared with IMPC. Health care systems implementing multimodal models of care may consider incorporating virtual group prenatal care as a prenatal care option for patients.

Evaluating the Impact of CenteringPregnancy Program Versus Individual Prenatal Care on Gestational Weight Gain

Introduction: The CenteringPregnancy (CP) program-proven to reduce preterm births-was modified to achieve more optimal gestational weight gain (GWG) by an intentional incorporation of nutrition education. We compared the effect of the modified CP program versus individual prenatal care (IPNC) on GWG. Methods: This observational study used linked birth certificate data and hospital discharge records of women who received prenatal care (PNC) in South Carolina Midlands' obstetric clinics between 2015 and 2019. Linear and multinomial logistic regressions were used to compare participants in CP (n = 568) versus IPNC on weight gain, measured by total GWG (delivery weight minus prepregnancy weight), weekly rate of weight gain, and meeting the Institute of Medicine's recommendations (inadequate, adequate, and excessive GWG). Nonrandom assignment to program was controlled by propensity scoring. Results: CP participants differed from IPNC participants in race, nulliparous, education, and type of health insurance, but not in parity or month PNC began (p-Value <0.05). CP and IPNC participants had a similar GWG experience: total GWG (coef(β) = -0.054; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.78 to 0.6), total weekly weight gain (coef(β) = -0.004; 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), total GWG category (inadequate GWG: RRR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.64-1.21, and excessive GWG: relative risk ratio (RRR) = 0.92, 95% CI 0.71-1.20 vs. adequate), and weekly weight gain category (inadequate GWG: RRR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-1.01, and excessive GWG: RRR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.61-1.13 vs. adequate). Conclusion: The CP program with an enhanced nutritional knowledge component was not associated with achieving recommended GWG. Further investigation is needed to explain the lack of impact.

Maternal satisfaction with group care: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This review examined the quantitative relationship between group care and overall maternal satisfaction compared with standard individual care.

DATA SOURCES

We searched CINAHL, Clinical Trials, The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from the beginning of 2003 through June 2023.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included studies that reported the association between overall maternal satisfaction and centering-based perinatal care where the control group was standard individual care. We included randomized and observational designs.

METHODS

Screening and independent data extraction were carried out by 4 researchers. We extracted data on study characteristics, population, design, intervention characteristics, satisfaction measurement, and outcome. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane tools for Clinical Trials (RoB2) and observational studies (ROBINS-I). We summarized the study, intervention, and satisfaction measurement characteristics. We presented the effect estimates of each study descriptively using a forest plot without performing an overall meta-analysis. Meta-analysis could not be performed because of variations in study designs and methods used to measure satisfaction. We presented studies reporting mean values and odds ratios in 2 separate plots. The presentation of studies in forest plots was organized by type of study design.

RESULTS

A total of 7685 women participated in the studies included in the review. We found that most studies (ie, 17/20) report higher satisfaction with group care than standard individual care. Some of the noted results are lower satisfaction with group care in both studies in Sweden and 1 of the 2 studies from Canada. Higher satisfaction was present in 14 of 15 studies reporting CenteringPregnancy, Group Antenatal Care (1 study), and Adapted CenteringPregnancy (1 study). Although indicative of higher maternal satisfaction, the results are often based on statistically insignificant effect estimates with wide confidence intervals derived from small sample sizes.

CONCLUSION

The evidence confirms higher maternal satisfaction with group care than with standard care. This likely reflects group care methodology, which combines clinical assessment, facilitated health promotion discussion, and community-building opportunities. This evidence will be helpful for the implementation of group care globally.

Comparing Group Versus Individual Prenatal Care on Breastfeeding Practice and Motivational Factors

OBJECTIVE

Although breastfeeding in the first 6 months postpartum benefits both infants and mothers, breastfeeding rates remain low. This study examined whether group prenatal care was associated with an increased breastfeeding initiation and duration compared with those receiving usual, individual prenatal care. A secondary aim was to investigate whether sociodemographic and motivational factors were associated with breastfeeding initiation and duration across prenatal care groups.

METHODS

Pregnant women in their third trimester (n = 211) from an innercity university medical center participated. Prenatal care type was identified from the medical chart, and data on breastfeeding duration at 1, 3, and 6 months postpartum were collected. Breastfeeding motivational factors were assessed with a survey. Logistic regressions and independent-samples t tests were used for data analyses.

RESULTS

After controlling for demographic factors, group prenatal care was associated with increased breastfeeding at 6 months postpartum (odds ratio = 2.66; P = .045) compared with individual care. Breastfeeding intention (P < .001), competence (P = .003), and autonomous motivation (P < .001) were significantly higher, while amotivation (P = .034) was significantly lower in group compared with individual prenatal care.

CONCLUSIONS

Breastfeeding persistence was higher among women receiving group prenatal care, potentially due to motivational factors. Future studies should investigate how breastfeeding motivational factors could be effectively targeted in prenatal care to increase breastfeeding persistence.

Centering PrEP: utilizing ADAPT-ITT to inform group PrEP care for sex workers in Chicago

BACKGROUND

Sex workers, those who trade sex for monetary or nonmonetary items, experience high rates of HIV transmission but have not been adequately included in HIV prevention and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) adherence program development research. Community-empowered (C.E.) approaches have been the most successful at reducing HIV transmission among sex workers. Centering Healthcare (Centering) is a C.E. model proven to improve health outcomes and reduce health disparities in other populations, such as pregnant women, people with diabetes, and sickle cell disease. However, no research exists to determine if Centering can be adapted to meet the unique HIV prevention needs of sex workers.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to explain the process by which we collaboratively and iteratively adapted Centering to meet the HIV prevention and PrEP retention needs of sex workers.

METHODS

We utilized the Assessment, Decision, Adaptation, Production, Topical Experts, Integration, Training, Testing (ADAPT-ITT) framework, a model for adapting evidence-based interventions. We applied phases one through six of the ADAPT-ITT framework (Assessment, Decision, Adaptation, Production, Topical Experts, Integration) to the design to address the distinct HIV prevention needs of sex workers in Chicago. Study outcomes corresponded to each phase of the ADAPT-ITT framework. Data used for adaptation emerged from collaborative stakeholder meetings, individual interviews (n = 36) and focus groups (n = 8) with current and former sex workers, and individual interviews with care providers (n = 8). In collaboration with our community advisory board, we used a collaborative and iterative analytical process to co-produce a culturally adapted 3-session facilitator's guide for the Centering Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (C-PrEP +) group healthcare model.

RESULTS

The ADAPT-ITT framework offered structure and facilitated this community-empowered innovative adaptation of Centering Healthcare. This process culminated with a facilitator's guide and associated materials ready for pilot testing.

CONCLUSIONS

In direct alignment with community empowerment, we followed the ADAPT-ITT framework, phases 1-6, to iteratively adapt Centering Healthcare to suit the stated HIV Prevention and PrEP care needs of sex workers in Chicago. The study represents the first time the first time Centering has been adapted to suit the HIV prevention and PrEP care needs of sex workers. Addressing a gap in HIV prevention care for sex workers, Centering PrEP harnesses the power of community as it is an iteratively adapted model that can be piloted and replicated regionally, nationally, and internationally.

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.

Contributions of CenteringPregnancy to women's health behaviours, health literacy, and health care use in the Netherlands

The objective of this study was to assess the effects of CenteringPregnancy (CP) in the Netherlands on different health outcomes. A stepped wedged cluster randomized trial was used, including 2132 women of approximately 12 weeks of gestation, from thirteen primary care midwifery centres in and around Leiden, Netherlands. Data collection was done through self-administered questionnaires. Multilevel intention-to-treat analysis and propensity score matching for the entire group and separately for nulliparous- and multiparous women were employed. The main outcomes were: health behaviour, health literacy, psychological outcomes, health care use, and satisfaction with care. Women's participation in CP is associated with lower alcohol consumption after birth (OR = 0.59, 95 %CI 0.42-0.84), greater consistency with norms for healthy eating and physical activity (β = 0.19, 95 %CI 0.02-0.37), and higher knowledge about pregnancy (β = 0.05, 95 %CI 0.01-0.08). Compared to the control group, nulliparous women who participating in CP reported better compliance to the norm for healthy eating and physical activity (β = 0.28, 95 %CI0.06-0.51)) and multiparous CP participants consumed less alcohol after giving birth (OR = 0.42, 95 %CI 0.23-0.78). Health care use and satisfaction rates were significantly higher among CP participants. A non-significant trend toward lower smoking rates was documented among CP participants. Overall, the results of this study reveal a positive (postpartum) impact on fostering healthy behaviours among participants.

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.

A scoping review of interventions seeking to improve aspects of patient–provider relationships involving Black pregnant and post‐partum people

AIMS

To provide a map of the evidence related to interventions targeting patient-provider relationships among Black perinatal people.

DESIGN

A scoping review of the literature was conducted.

DATA SOURCES

The database search included English language articles within three databases: PubMed, the Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Medline without date restriction on June 15 and16 2022.

REVIEW METHODS

This scoping review used the six-stage process first described by Arksey and O'Malley and recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute: (1) specify the research question, (2) identify relevant literature, (3) select studies, (4) map out the data, (5) synthesize, and report the results and (6) consult experts. Studies were included if they (1) reported results of intervention studies related to patient-provider interaction, (2) were written in English and (3) were original research. The articles were reviewed with content analysis methodology to categorize and interpret the findings.

RESULTS

Studies included randomized controlled trials (n = 5) and qualitative studies (n = 3) published between 2001 and 2018. Black pregnant people made up more than half of the participants in five of the eight studies (63%). Interventions were divided into three categories: delivery models (n = 4), mHealth risk assessment tools (n = 2) and patient-provider communication tools (n = 2).

CONCLUSION

This study addressed the unknown role of patient-provider relationship interventions in improving the quality of care received by Black perinatal people. Findings suggest that structural and interpersonal components may have the potential to improve outcomes for Black pregnant people but could be further improved if culturally tailored. Further research is urgently needed to address discrimination and stigma in patient-provider relationships. The findings of this study could inform novel intervention development and should drive research.

IMPACT

A scoping review determined that there are no interventions with Black pregnant people which targeted discrimination and bias in patient-provider relationships.

NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The authors did not include stakeholders such as patients, service users, caregivers or members of the public in the development of this scoping review, as it is a work that serves to set the stage for further community-based work. The results will however be communicated to community members at a planned advisory board in the future.

The Social Contexts of Birthing People with Public- and Private-Payer Prenatal Care: Illuminating an Understudied Aspect of the Patient Experience

Purpose

In pursuit of more equitable and person-centered health care, patients and professional medical societies increasingly call for better clinician understanding of patients' perspectives and social contexts. A foundational but understudied aspect of patients' social contexts are the ideas they encounter about health-related behaviors. We investigated this aspect of the social contexts of birthing people, comparing those with public versus private insurance to discover setting-specific insights.

Methods

Based on ethnographic fieldwork, we created an original survey featuring 29 statements about 12 prenatal, perinatal, and postpartum health behaviors (e.g., drinking alcohol, epidural use, breastfeeding). Participants were 248 individuals receiving prenatal care in Northern California in 2009-2011, split evenly between public- and private-payer coverage. Participants reported whether they were familiar or unfamiliar with each statement.

Results

Ninety-eight percent of all participants had heard contradictory ideas about ≥1 health behavior (mean=3.9 behaviors for public- and 5.4 for private-coverage respondents). For 20 of the 29 behavior-related ideas, exposure varied significantly by coverage type. Among other differences, public-coverage respondents were much more familiar with ideas related to risk and constrained autonomy (e.g., that serious perinatal complications are common; that new mothers should try to breastfeed even if they do not want to).

Conclusions

Birthing people are exposed to a wide range of ideas about health behaviors, many of which vary by the structural systems in which they are embedded. Understanding and engaging this complexity can help clinicians to provide more respectful, person-centered, and equitable maternity care.

The Experience of Pregnant Women in the Health Management Model of Internet-Based Centering Pregnancy: A Qualitative Study

Background

CenteringPregnancy Care is a promising group prenatal care innovation that combines assessment, education, and peer support. In China, it is not clear how best to integrate the CenteringPregnancy Care into existing maternal health care models. This qualitative study aimed to explore Chinese pregnant women’s experience in the Internet-based CenteringPregnancy management model.

Methods

The Internet-based CenteringPregnancy was applied in a tertiary hospital between 2018 and 2019 in Wuhan, Hubei Province. Through purposive sampling, a total of 9 pregnant women who had experienced Internet-based CenteringPregnancy were recruited. A semi-structured interview was used to collect qualitative data, and Colaizzi’s 7-step method of phenomenological data analysis was used to analyze the collected data.

Results

Three themes were extracted from the participants’ interviews, including: 1) empowerment; 2) psychological and social support; 3) challenges of the Internet-based CenteringPregnancy. The Internet-based CenteringPregnancy management model retained advantages of CenteringPregnancy, emphasizing the pregnant woman as the subject of health care and promoting them to participate in health care. Participants believed that they could exchange pregnancy knowledge, help each other, and improve mood both timely and efficiently from the new model. However, it was found that there were challenges in seminar time arrangement, topic selection, and discussion management.

Conclusion

The Internet-based CenteringPregnancy management model positively affected pregnant women’s empowerment, psychological, and social support. It is recommended to improve the seminar’s design in future studies.

Impact of Group vs. Individual Prenatal Care Provision on Women’s Knowledge of Pregnancy-Related Topics: An Open, Controlled, Semi-Randomized Community Trial

The importance of acquiring knowledge of pregnant women on prenatal care lies in its leading to confidence and ability in decision-making. There is a growing need for a model of prenatal care that will allow nurses to provide the most efficient pregnancy-related guidance with minimum need for additional staff. This study compares the level of knowledge on subjects pertaining to pregnancy and birth in low-risk pregnancies when delivered in group versus individual settings. The study is an open, controlled, semi-randomized community trial. The intervention arm received prenatal care services in a group setting led by a nurse. The control arm received prenatal care services in routine individual meetings with a nurse. Knowledge of prenatal subjects was evaluated by questionnaires. The level of knowledge of the women in the group setting for the pre-service questionnaire was lower than that of the women in the individual group, but higher for the final questionnaire. After accounting for a starting point difference (the women in the individual care arm started with a higher knowledge score), the women in the group setting had a three-fold improvement in score compared to the women in the individual setting (p = 0.043). Prenatal care provided in a group setting may lead to better knowledge acquisition, leading to better awareness of pregnancy-related medical conditions and to enhanced adherence to recommended pregnancy tests and healthy lifestyle.

"Taking care of your pregnancy": a mixed-methods study of group antenatal care in Kakamega County, Kenya

BACKGROUND

Traditional antenatal care (ANC) models often do not meet women's needs for information, counseling, and support, resulting in gaps in quality and coverage. Group ANC (GANC) provides an alternative, person-centered approach where pregnant women of similar gestational age meet with the same health provider for facilitated discussion. F studies show associations between GANC and various outcomes.

METHODS

We employed a pre-post quasi-experimental design using mixed methods to assess a GANC model (Lea Mimba Pregnancy Clubs) at six health facilities in Kakamega County, Kenya. Between April 2018 and January 2019, we tracked 1652 women assigned to 162 GANC cohorts. Using an intention-to-treat approach, we conducted baseline (N = 112) and endline surveys (N = 360) with women attending immunization visits to assess outcomes including experience of care, empowerment and self-efficacy, knowledge of healthy practices and danger signs, and practice of healthy behaviors, including ANC retention. At endline, we conducted 29 in-depth interviews (IDIs) and three focus group discussions with women who were currently and previously participating in GANC, and 15 IDIs with stakeholders.

RESULTS

The proportion of survey respondents with knowledge of three or more danger signs during pregnancy more than tripled, from 7.1% at baseline to 26.4% at endline (OR: 4.58; 95% CI: 2.26-10.61). We also found improvements in women's reports about their experience of care between baseline and endline, particularly in their assessment of knowledge and competence of health workers (OR: 2.52 95% CI: 1.57-4.02), respect shown by ANC providers (OR: 1.82, 95% CI: 1.16-2.85), and women's satisfaction with overall quality of care (OR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.03-2.53). We saw an increase from 58.9% at baseline to 71.7% at endline of women who strongly agreed that they shared their feelings and experiences with other women (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.1-2.7). The mean number of ANC visits increased by 0.89 visits (95% CI: 0.47-1.42) between baseline (4.21) and endline (5.08). No changes were seen in knowledge of positive behaviors, empowerment, self-efficacy, and several aspects related to women's experience of care and adoption of healthy behavior constructs. Qualitatively, women and stakeholders noted improved interactions between health providers and women, improved counseling, increased feelings of empowerment to ask questions and speak freely and strengthened social networks and enhanced social cohesion among women.

CONCLUSIONS

GANC offers promise for enhancing women's experience of care by providing improved counseling and social support. Additional research is needed to develop and test measures for empowerment, self-efficacy, and experience of care, and to understand the pathways whereby GANC effects changes in specific outcomes.

An Exploratory Spatiotemporal Analysis of Socio-Environmental Patterns in Severe Maternal Morbidity

OBJECTIVES

Severe Maternal Morbidity (SMM) is a group of pregnancy complications in which a woman nearly dies. Despite its increasing prevalence, little research has evaluated geographic patterns of SMM and the underlying social determinants that influence excess risk. This study examined the spatial clustering of SMM across South Carolina, US, and its associations with place-based social and environmental factors.

METHODS

Hospitalized deliveries from 2012 to 2017 were analyzed using Kulldorff's spatial scan statistic to locate areas with abnormally high rates of SMM. SMM patients inside and outside risk clusters were compared using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) to determine underlying individual and community-level risk factors.

RESULTS

GEE models revealed that the odds of living in a high-risk SMM21 (SMM including blood transfusions) cluster was 2.49 times higher among Black patients (p < .001) compared to those outside of a high-risk cluster. Women residing in a high-risk SMM20 (SMM excluding blood transfusions) cluster were 1.38 times more likely to experience the most number of extremely hot days and 1.70 times more likely to present with obesity than women in a low-risk SMM cluster (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to characterize the geographic clustering of SMM risk in the US. Our geospatial approach contributes a novel understanding to factors which influence SMM beyond patient-level characteristics and identifies the impact of hot ambient temperature on maternal morbidity. Findings address an important literature gap surrounding place-based risk factors by explaining the contextual social and built environmental factors that drive SMM risk.

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.

A paradigm shift to address racial inequities in perinatal healthcare

Health inequities are not caused by personal failings or shortcomings within disadvantaged groups, which can be erased with behavioral interventions. The scope of the problem is much greater and will only fully be addressed with the examination of the systems, structures, and policies that perpetuate racism, classism, and an economic, class, race, or gender divide between patients and the people who care for them. Solution-oriented strategies to achieve health equity will remain elusive if researchers continue to focus on behavior modification in patients while failing to do harder work that includes focusing on the institutions, community, and societal contexts in which pregnant women are living; addressing social determinants of health; considering racism in study design, analysis, and reporting; valuing the voices of patients, practitioners, and researchers from historically disadvantaged groups; disseminating research findings back to the community; and developing policy and reimbursement structures to support care delivery change that advances equitable outcomes. A case study shows us how group prenatal care may be one viable vehicle through which to affect this change. Group prenatal care is one of the few interventions shown to improve pregnancy outcomes for black women. Studies of group prenatal care have predominantly focused on the patient, but here we propose that the intervention may exert its greatest impact on clinicians and the systems in which they work. The underlying mechanism through which group prenatal care works may be through increased quantity and quality of patient and practitioner time together and communication. We hypothesize that this, in turn, fosters greater opportunity for cross-cultural exposure and decreases clinician implicit bias, explicit bias, and racism, thus increasing the likelihood that practitioners advocate for systems-level changes that directly benefit patients and improve perinatal outcomes.

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.

Lactation Outcomes Among Dyads Following Participation in a Model of Group Prenatal Care for Patients with Prenatally Diagnosed Fetal Anomalies

Introduction: MamaCare is an adaptation of the CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care model designed to support women when the pregnancy has been complicated by the presence of known congenital anomalies. The lactation-related outcomes of participants were unknown. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective descriptive cohort study describing the lactation-related outcomes of participants of MamaCare over 43 months. Data collection included abstraction of maternal demographic data, maternal group prenatal care session participation data, maternal pregnancy and delivery data, as well as documented lactation and breastfeeding data. Results: The total cohort consisted of 92 dyads. Of the 81 women who received an individualized prenatal nutrition consultation, 65 (80.2%) voiced a prenatal feeding goal of human milk and breastfeeding only, while the remaining 16 (19.8%) expressed goals of combination feeding (human milk and infant formula). For the surviving 85 infants, 91.8% of the mothers initiated lactation on the delivery day and the remaining 7 women initiated lactation on postpartum day 1. Also at the time of discharge from the initial intensive care unit stay, 87.1% of infants were receiving maternal human milk. Discussion: For families who participate in MamaCare, not only do they form a sense of community and learn about human milk and breastfeeding before delivery, the MamaCare facilitators and presenters normalize their experience to help MamaCare participants best meet their personal breastfeeding goals as well.

Postpartum Contraceptive Use and Other Reproductive Health Outcomes Among CenteringPregnancy Group Prenatal Care Participants

Background: CenteringPregnancy^® is a model of group prenatal care (PNC) that reduces preterm birth and increases patient satisfaction. Less is known about postpartum outcomes. Methods: This study aimed to evaluate whether CenteringPregnancy participants have more favorable postpartum reproductive health outcomes compared with traditional PNC participants. Our primary outcome was utilization of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). As secondary outcomes, we examined breastfeeding at the postpartum visit, follow-up at the postpartum visit, and rapid repeat pregnancy. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 422 women who received PNC and delivered at tertiary care hospital in Atlanta, Georgia between 2011 and 2015. Participants were eligible to participate if they were enrolled in Medicaid and received at least three PNC visits with a Certified Nurse Midwife in either CenteringPregnancy (n = 248) or traditional PNC (n = 174). Demographic and clinical data were abstracted from the electronic medical record. Multivariable log binomial regression was used to compare CenteringPregnancy participants and women who received traditional PNC. Results: One quarter of women (26%) chose LARC for postpartum contraception. There was no difference in overall contraceptive uptake between CenteringPregnancy and traditional PNC groups. CenteringPregnancy participants were 70% more likely to use LARC postpartum compared with women receiving traditional PNC (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.76; p < 0.01). CenteringPregnancy participants were significantly more likely to initiate breastfeeding before hospital discharge (aRR 1.14, p = 0.01) and to report exclusive breastfeeding at the postpartum visit (relative risk [RR] 2.54; p < 0.01). Women in the CenteringPregnancy group were marginally more likely to report any breastfeeding at the postpartum visit and to attend the postpartum visit (RR 1.31, p = 0.05 and RR 1.17, p = 0.05 respectively), but were no less likely to have a rapid repeat pregnancy (RR 0.90, p = 0.57). Conclusion: Women in CenteringPregnancy groups had increased uptake of LARC compared with a similar cohort of women in traditional PNC. Other potential benefits of CenteringPregnancy, including breastfeeding and attendance at the postpartum visit require further study.

The impact of supply-side and demand-side interventions on use of antenatal and maternal services in western Kenya: a qualitative study

Background

Antenatal care (ANC) and delivery by skilled providers have been well recognized as effective strategies to prevent maternal and neonatal mortality. ANC and delivery services at health facilities, however, have been underutilized in Kenya. One potential strategy to increase the demand for ANC services is to provide health interventions as incentives for pregnant women. In 2013, an integrated ANC program was implemented in western Kenya to promote ANC visits by addressing both supply- and demand-side factors. Supply-side interventions included nurse training and supplies for obstetric emergencies and neonatal resuscitation. Demand-side interventions included SMS text messages with appointment reminders and educational contents, group education sessions, and vouchers to purchase health products.

Methods

To explore pregnant mothers’ experiences with the intervention, ANC visits, and delivery, we conducted focus group discussions (FGDs) at pre- and post-intervention. A total of 19 FGDs were held with pregnant mothers, nurses, and community health workers (CHWs) during the two assessment periods. We performed thematic analyses to highlight study participants’ perceptions and experiences.

Results

FGD data revealed that pregnant women perceived the risks of home-based delivery, recognized the benefits of facility-based delivery, and were motivated by the incentives to seek care despite barriers to care that included poverty, lack of transport, and poor treatment by nurses. Nurses also perceived the value of incentives to attract women to care but described obstacles to providing health care such as overwork, low pay, inadequate supplies and equipment, and insufficient staff. CHWs identified the utility and limitations of text messages for health education.

Conclusions

Future interventions should ensure that adequate workforce, training, and supplies are in place to respond to increased demand for maternal and child health services stimulated by incentive programs.

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.

Assessing the newborn screening education needs of families living in medically underserved areas

Newborn screening (NBS) is a public health service available to all babies born in the United States (US). NBS is one of the first experiences families have in the US healthcare system with a new baby. A positive experience with NBS can give families a strong start to their child's health care and build trusting relationships with providers. A lack of easily accessible NBS education for families can exacerbate health inequalities through negative interactions with the healthcare system. Expecting Health, a maternal and child health education and advocacy initiative of Genetic Alliance, partnered with RTI International to implement an online survey assessing needs and preferences around NBS-related health education, with a particular interest in those of families living within medically underserved areas (MUAs). A total of 500 participants completed the survey, including 200 participants living in MUAs. The results of the survey showed that, compared with US families living outside of MUAs, families living in MUAs are generally less aware of NBS and do not receive NBS education at the optimal time (i.e., before birth), which could indicate they experience inequities in NBS education. While families across different geographic areas seem to have similar preferences in terms of content for NBS education, the results show that some distinct communication methods are needed to reach families living in MUAs. To bridge the gap in NBS education to families living in MUAs, the Expecting Health team built an online NBS educational module, using preferred communication methods-specified through the survey-for families living in MUAs.

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.

Nurses' and midwives' experiences of providing group antenatal and postnatal care at 18 health centers in Rwanda: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

The East Africa Preterm Birth Initiative-Rwanda began a cluster randomized controlled trial of group antenatal care (ANC) and postnatal care (PNC) in Rwanda in 2017. That trial will report its primary outcome, gestational length at birth, after data collection concludes in 2019. This nested study includes providers of ANC and/or PNC at the 18 health centers randomized to provide the group model of ANC/PNC and the 18 health centers randomized to continue providing ANC/PNC in the traditional, individual visit model. The objective of this study is to understand the experiences of providers of group ANC/PNC and compare their job satisfaction and perceived stress with individual ANC/PNC providers.

METHODS

We collected both quantitative and qualitative data from providers (nurses and midwives) who were recruited by health center directors to participate as group ANC and PNC facilitators at intervention sites and from a similar number of providers of standard ANC and PNC at control sites. Quantitative data was collected with questionnaires administered at baseline and approximately 9 months later (follow up). Qualitative data was collected in 3 focus groups of group ANC/PNC providers conducted one year after group care began.

RESULTS

Eighty-six percent of nurses and midwives surveyed who implemented group ANC and PNC reported that they prefer group care to the traditional individual model of ANC and PNC. Perceived stress levels and job satisfaction results were similar between groups. Mixed focus group discussions among both nurses and midwives experienced in group ANC and PNC suggest that the group model of care has advantages for both service beneficiaries and providers. When providers described implementation challenges, their peers in the focus groups offered them suggestions to cope and improve service delivery.

DISCUSSION

These results are consistent with studies of providers of group ANC and PNC in other LMIC contexts with respect to the perceived benefits of group care. This study adds new insights into the ways peer providers can help one another solve implementation problems. When given the opportunity to meet as a group, these study participants offered one another peer support and shared knowledge about best practices for successful implementation of group ANC/PNC. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03154177.

Implementing CenteringPregnancy Group Prenatal Care for Minority Women Living with HIV at an Urban University Hospital

INTRODUCTION

Pregnant women with HIV require sustained education and support throughout pregnancy to achieve healthy perinatal outcomes. To enhance prenatal care for women with HIV, the Prenatal Immunology Service at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine adapted the Centering Healthcare Institute's CenteringPregnancy curriculum to include HIV content. Nurse-midwives introduced the curriculum in a pilot project to learn if women would enroll in group prenatal care. A retrospective record review was conducted to evaluate perinatal outcomes among women with HIV who received prenatal care in a group setting.

METHODS

Data were collected from the electronic health records of women with HIV who received either CenteringPregnancy-HIV group prenatal care or traditional prenatal care between March 2015 and July 2016. Sociodemographic factors, HIV immune markers, and pregnancy and birth outcomes were reviewed. Univariate and bivariate statistics and multiple regression models assessed differences between women in CenteringPregnancy-HIV group prenatal care compared with women with HIV in traditional care.

RESULTS

Among women with HIV who received prenatal care during the pilot project, 128 met eligibility criteria for review. Perinatal outcomes were analyzed for 117 women who had a live birth; of these, 14 participated in CenteringPregnancy-HIV group prenatal care, and 103 received traditional care. Demographic profiles were similar in both groups. No significant differences in perinatal outcomes were observed among women in CenteringPregnancy-HIV group prenatal care compared with women with HIV in traditional prenatal care.

DISCUSSION

Women with HIV can often feel stigmatized and isolated. Group prenatal care can foster patient engagement, self-management, and social support to improve adherence to antiretroviral and other health regimens that promote healthy outcomes for both woman and newborn. Although results of this pilot study were not statistically significant, they show that CenteringPregnancy-HIV group prenatal care may be an option for women with HIV, but the benefits need further exploration in larger studies.

The Impact of CenteringPregnancy Group Prenatal Care on Birth Outcomes in Medicaid Eligible Women

Background: CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care (GPNC) has been shown to reduce rates of preterm birth (PTB). We evaluated the impact of GPNC on spontaneous PTB (sPTB) as a first step in exploring the possible mechanism by which GPNC may decrease rates of PTB. We also evaluated whether attending more than five GPNC sessions affected PTB risk and examined all differences by race/ethnicity. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among women delivering at a single institution between April 2009 and March 2014. Birth outcome data from vital statistics records were appended to patient records, and detailed chart abstraction was used to determine spontaneous versus indicated PTB. The association between GPNC and attending more than five GPNC sessions and birth outcomes (i.e., PTB, sPTB, low birth weight [LBW], and neonatal intensive care unit [NICU] admissions) was analyzed using generalized estimating equation log binomial regression models. We examined effect modification of the associations by race/ethnicity. Results: The analysis included 1,292 women in GPNC and 8,703 in traditional individual prenatal care (IPNC). After controlling for potential confounders, the risk of PTB (risk ratio [RR] 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.47), sPTB (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.38-0.63), LBW (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.37-0.56), and NICU admissions (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.37-0.57) was lower in GPNC compared to IPNC women. Results differed by maternal race/ethnicity, with the strongest associations among non-Hispanic white mothers and the weakest associations among Hispanic mothers, especially for sPTB. Similarly, the risk of PTB, LBW, and NICU admissions was lower among GPNC women who attended more than five sessions. Conclusion: Participation in GPNC demonstrated a decreased risk for sPTB, as well as other adverse birth outcomes. In addition, participation in more than five GPNC sessions demonstrated a decreased risk for adverse birth outcomes. Prospective longitudinal studies are needed to further explore mechanisms associated with these findings.

Group prenatal care experiences among pregnant women in a Bangladeshi community

Background

Complications during pregnancy, childbirth, and following delivery remain significant challenges that contribute to maternal morbidity and mortality, thus affecting health systems worldwide. Group prenatal care (GPC) is an integrated approach incorporating peer support and health education that provides prenatal care in a group setting. The GPC approach was piloted in a district of Bangladesh to measure the feasibility and effectiveness of GPC compared to individual care. Understanding the experiences of women of receiving this grouped care approach is crucial to understand the perspectives, perception, and acceptability of the programme among mothers, which are lack in Bangladesh. The objective of the present study was to understand the core experiences and perspectives of mothers who participated in GPC sessions during their pregnancy period.

Methods

A qualitative research approach was used to understand the experiences of women receiving GPC. A total of 21 in-depth interviews were conducted in this study targeting pregnant mothers who attended all recommended GPC sessions. Face-to-face interviews were conducted by trained and experienced interviewers using a specific interview guideline to achieve detailed responses. Thematic analysis was conducted to analyse the data.

Results

Mothers appreciated receiving pregnancy care in group setting and expressed their preferences towards GPC compared to individual care. Themes included the comprehensiveness of GPC, prescheduled appointments and reduced waiting time, social gathering, coping with common discomforts, relationship with service providers, birth preparedness, and recommendations from participating mothers. The themes conveyed overall positive experiences of the participating mothers, with suggestions for further betterment of the programme. Nevertheless, the reported experiences of women involved in the study suggests that the inclusion of a specialist in group care, post-partum care, and family planning advice will be more beneficial in the GPC model.

Conclusions

The overall experiences of the women in the present study suggest that GPC is helpful for them, and it is useful to reduce complications during pregnancy. The GPC model promises movement towards family-supported care, as explained by the participants.

Gestational weight gain and group prenatal care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Group visits for chronic medical conditions in non-pregnant populations have demonstrated successful outcomes including greater weight loss compared to individual visits for weight management. It is plausible that group prenatal care can similarly assist women in meeting gestational weight gain goals. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of group vs. traditional prenatal care on gestational weight gain.

METHODS

A keyword search of Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, clinicaltrials.gov, and Google Scholar was performed up to April 2017. Studies were included if they compared gestational weight gain in a group prenatal care setting to traditional prenatal care in either randomized controlled trials, cohort, or case-control studies. The primary and secondary outcomes were excessive and adequate gestational weight gain according to the Institute of Medicine guidelines. Heterogeneity was assessed with the Q test and I² statistic. Pooled relative risks (RRs) and confidence intervals (CI) were reported with random-effects models from the randomized controlled trials (RCT) and cohort studies.

RESULTS

One RCT, one secondary analysis of an RCT, one study with "random assignment", and twelve cohort studies met the inclusion criteria for a total of 13,779 subjects. Thirteen studies used the CenteringPregnancy model, defined by 10 sessions that emphasize goal setting and self-monitoring. Studies targeted specific populations such as adolescents, African-Americans, Hispanics, active-duty military or their spouses, and women with obesity or gestational diabetes. There were no significant differences in excessive [7 studies: pooled rates 47% (1806/3582) vs. 43% (3839/8521), RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.97-1.23] or adequate gestational weight gain [6 studies: pooled rates 31% (798/2875) vs. 30% (1410/5187), RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.08] in group and traditional prenatal care among the nine studies that reported categorical gestational weight gain outcomes in the meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Group prenatal care was not associated with excessive or adequate gestational weight gain in the meta-analysis. Since outcomes were overall inconsistent, we propose that prenatal care models (e.g., group vs. traditional) should be evaluated in a more rigorous fashion with respect to gestational weight gain.

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.

Effects of customer self-audit on the quality of maternity care in Tabriz: A cluster-randomized controlled trial

Objective

To study the effects of customer self-audit on the service quality (SQ) and customer quality (CQ) of maternity care.

Design

A community-based cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Setting

Twenty-one health centres and health posts in Tabriz, Iran.

Participants

Of 21 health centres/health posts, 10 were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 11 randomly assigned to the control group. Participants were 185 pregnant women selected from health centre/post registration lists (intervention group: n = 92; control group: n = 93).

Interventions

The intervention was a customer self-audit based on the CenteringPregnancy^® model of prenatal group care. The intervention group attended group support sessions focused on participants’ opinions, questions, and self-management concerns. They also received sessions on experiential learning, coping, problem-solving, and goal-setting by a family health expert, a midwife, and a doctor. Control group participants continued to receive individual care.

Primary outcome measures

SQ and CQ were assessed using questionnaires. Patients rated the importance and performance of non-health quality dimensions. SQ was calculated as: SQ = 10 − (Importance × Performance).

Results

Total mean SQ scores were 7.63 (0.91) and 8.91 (0.76) for the control and intervention groups, respectively, a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). Compared with the control group, the intervention group scored higher on the SQ aspects confidentiality, communication, autonomy, availability of support group, dignity, safety, prevention, and accessibility. Total mean CQ scores for the control and intervention groups were 82.63(7.21) and 87.47 (6.75), respectively, a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). After intervention, 82.6% of intervention group participants and 50.5% of control group participants reached the highest stage of self-management, showing an ability to take care of themselves under stress and financial constraints.

Conclusions

The group prenatal care customer self-audit improved the SQ and CQ of maternity care by increased involvement of participants and giving them active roles in the care process.

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.

Transcultural Modifications of a Japanese Language Group Prenatal Care Program for Transcultural Adaptation

INTRODUCTION

The CenteringPregnancy model has been demonstrated to improve birth outcomes for certain cultural and ethnic groups, but the literature lacks examples on how to modify their guidelines for socioculturally isolated women. Our aim is to examine the modifications we made to the CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care for Japanese women and to examine the implications for transcultural modification.

METHODS

Using a descriptive case study design, we examined the cultural fit and modifications of our Japanese prenatal group approach. We report the aspects that do not require modifications and the transcultural modifications that are needed. Based on this descriptive case, we discuss the lessons learned for making transcultural modifications that may apply to other cultural groups.

RESULTS

Many aspects of the CenteringPregnancy were readily adopted. We made 10 substantive transcultural modifications and articulate considerations for transcultural modifications.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

This research illustrates transcultural considerations for modifying the CenteringPregnancy model and provides implications for use in other isolated populations of pregnant women.

The effects of centering pregnancy on maternal and fetal outcomes in northern Nigeria; a prospective cohort analysis

Background

Maternal and infant mortality remains high in Nigeria primarily due to low use of skilled birth attendants. Huge disparities exist between southern and northen Nigeria on use of skilled birth attendants with south significantly higher than the north. We assessed the effect of centering pregnancy group (CPG) antenatal care on the uptake of antenatal care (ANC), facility delivery and immunization rates for infants in Kano state.

Methods

Between December 2012 and May 2014, pregnant women with similar sociodemographics and obstetric history were enrolled into intervention (CPG) and control groups and followed up prospectively. Chi-square tests were conducted to compare the differences between the intervention and the control groups with respect to background characteristics and intervention outcomes. Logistic regression was used to measure the associations between CPG and uptake of services for mother-baby pairs in care.

Results

A total of 517 (260 in the control group and 257 in the CPG) pregnant women enrolled and participated in the study. Thirty-six percent of women in the control group attended ANC at least once in 2nd and 3nd trimester compared to 49% of respondents in the CPG (p < 0.01). Health facility delivery was higher among CPG (13% vs. 8%; p < 0.01). When controlled for age, number of previous pregnancies, number of term deliveries, number of children alive and occupation of respondent or their spouses, respondents who participated in the CPGs compared to those who did not, were more likely to attend at least one antenatal care (ANC) session in the third trimester [adjusted risk ratio (ARR):1.52; 95% CI:1.36–1.69], more likely to immunize their babies at six weeks [ARR: 2.23; 95% CI: 1.16–4.29] and fourteen weeks [ARR: 3.46; 95% CI: 1.19–10.01] and more likely to use health services [ARR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.06–2.13].

Conclusion

Centering or group pregnancy showed a positive effect on the use of antenatal services, facility delivery and postnatal services and thus is a promising intervention to increase uptake of maternal health care services in northern Nigeria. The low facility delivery remains a cause for alarm and requires further investigation to improve facility delivery in northern Nigeria.

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.

A systematic review, evidence synthesis and meta-analysis of quantitative and qualitative studies evaluating the clinical effectiveness, the cost-effectiveness, safety and acceptability of interventions to prevent postnatal depression

BACKGROUND

Postnatal depression (PND) is a major depressive disorder in the year following childbirth, which impacts on women, their infants and their families. A range of interventions has been developed to prevent PND.

OBJECTIVES

To (1) evaluate the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, acceptability and safety of antenatal and postnatal interventions for pregnant and postnatal women to prevent PND; (2) apply rigorous methods of systematic reviewing of quantitative and qualitative studies, evidence synthesis and decision-analytic modelling to evaluate the preventive impact on women, their infants and their families; and (3) estimate cost-effectiveness.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index and other databases (from inception to July 2013) in December 2012, and we were updated by electronic alerts until July 2013.

REVIEW METHODS

Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts with consensus agreement. We undertook quality assessment. All universal, selective and indicated preventive interventions for pregnant women and women in the first 6 postnatal weeks were included. All outcomes were included, focusing on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), diagnostic instruments and infant outcomes. The quantitative evidence was synthesised using network meta-analyses (NMAs). A mathematical model was constructed to explore the cost-effectiveness of interventions contained within the NMA for EPDS values.

RESULTS

From 3072 records identified, 122 papers (86 trials) were included in the quantitative review. From 2152 records, 56 papers (44 studies) were included in the qualitative review. The results were inconclusive. The most beneficial interventions appeared to be midwifery redesigned postnatal care [as shown by the mean 12-month EPDS score difference of -1.43 (95% credible interval -4.00 to 1.36)], person-centred approach (PCA)-based and cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT)-based intervention (universal), interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT)-based intervention and education on preparing for parenting (selective), promoting parent-infant interaction, peer support, IPT-based intervention and PCA-based and CBT-based intervention (indicated). Women valued seeing the same health worker, the involvement of partners and access to several visits from a midwife or health visitor trained in person-centred or cognitive-behavioural approaches. The most cost-effective interventions were estimated to be midwifery redesigned postnatal care (universal), PCA-based intervention (indicated) and IPT-based intervention in the sensitivity analysis (indicated), although there was considerable uncertainty. Expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) for efficacy data was in excess of £150M for each population. Given the EVPPI values, future trials assessing the relative efficacies of promising interventions appears to represent value for money.

LIMITATIONS

In the NMAs, some trials were omitted because they could not be connected to the main network of evidence or did not provide EPDS scores. This may have introduced reporting or selection bias. No adjustment was made for the lack of quality of some trials. Although we appraised a very large number of studies, much of the evidence was inconclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions warrant replication within randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Several interventions appear to be cost-effective relative to usual care, but this is subject to considerable uncertainty.

FUTURE WORK RECOMMENDATIONS

Several interventions appear to be cost-effective relative to usual care, but this is subject to considerable uncertainty. Future research conducting RCTs to establish which interventions are most clinically effective and cost-effective should be considered.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012003273.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Trends in Early Prenatal Care Among Women with Pre-Existing Diabetes: Have Income Disparities Changed?

BACKGROUND

Women with pre-existing diabetes are at high maternal risk for comorbidities and death, particularly when early prenatal care is not received. Low income is a known barrier to early prenatal care. It is unknown whether recent policies to expand access to prenatal care have reduced income disparities. We hypothesized that income disparities would be minimized and that the odds of receipt of first trimester prenatal care among women with pre-existing diabetes would become similar across income strata over time.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Using the Colorado birth certificate registry from 2007 to 2014, receipt of prenatal care was assessed retrospectively in 2,497 women with pre-existing diabetes. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between high (>$50,000), medium ($25,000-50,000), and low (<$25,000) income strata and receipt of first trimester prenatal care by birth year, adjusted for demographics.

RESULTS

High, medium, and low income represented 29.5%, 19.0%, and 51.5% of the cohort, respectively. Women with high income were more likely to receive first trimester care than women with low income from 2007 [adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 2.16 (1.18, 3.96)] through 2013 [1.66 (1.01, 2.73)], but significant differences were no longer observed in 2014 [1.59 (0.89, 2.84)]. The likelihood of receiving first trimester prenatal care was not significantly different between medium- and low-income strata from 2007 [1.07 (0.66, 1.74)] through 2014 [0.77 (0.48, 1.23)].

CONCLUSIONS

From 2007 to 2013, women in Colorado with diabetes were more likely to receive early prenatal care if they were in the highest income stratum than in the lowest stratum. In 2014, receipt of first trimester care became equitable across all income strata. Future work should examine national patterns of income with receipt of prenatal care and outcomes among women with pre-existing diabetes.

Effectiveness of CenteringPregnancy on Breastfeeding Initiation Among African Americans: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

While breastfeeding initiation rates for African American mothers are low, an innovative model of group prenatal care, CenteringPregnancy, holds promise to increase breastfeeding rates. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effects of CenteringPregnancy versus individual prenatal care on breastfeeding initiation among African American mothers. Using a systematic approach and PRISMA guidelines, 4 electronic databases were used to search the literature. English-language studies, comparing CenteringPregnancy and individual prenatal care, including African American participants, and specifying breastfeeding initiation as an outcome were screened for inclusion. Study strength and quality were assessed and 7 studies were systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed. Participation in CenteringPregnancy increased the probability of breastfeeding initiation by 53% (95% confidence interval = 29%-81%) (n = 8047). A subgroup analysis of breastfeeding initiation among only African American participants was performed on 4 studies where data were available. Participation in CenteringPregnancy increased the probability of breastfeeding initiation by 71% (95% confidence interval = 27%-131%) (n = 1458) for African American participants. CenteringPregnancy is an effective intervention to increase breastfeeding initiation for participants, especially for African Americans. To close the racial gap in breastfeeding initiation, high-quality research providing specific outcomes for African American participants in CenteringPregnancy are needed.

Differentiating Research, Quality Improvement, and Case Studies to Ethically Incorporate Pregnant Women

Pregnant women have been called therapeutic orphans because data supporting common interventions, medications, health teaching, and models of care are meager. The generation of quality evidence benefits from proactive approaches that ensure ethical standards are met to protect participants. The purpose of this article is to differentiate among health care, quality improvement, and research and to discuss ethical involvement of women who are pregnant and potentially childbearing in these initiatives. Health care is provided to protect and improve individual health. Quality improvement aims to enhance delivery of care for all those receiving care in particular settings. Research, whether retrospective or prospective, is designed to contribute to generalizable knowledge. This review includes vignettes to distinguish between research, quality improvement, and case study dissemination and to highlight the value of publication of information with applicability beyond a single site. As a community, perinatal care providers will be able to contribute more evidence to guide care if they err on the side of seeking institutional review board approval for activities that examine the care and outcomes of pregnant women and the fetus. Traditional research activities, including clinical trials, remain crucial. However, to fill gaps in knowledge, we must expedite our ability to report informative cases, examine clinical data, share lessons learned during quality improvement campaigns, and publish and disseminate these findings. Accelerating improvements in care demands expansion of the evidence base.

Where Are the Dads? A Pilot Study of a Dads-Only Session in Group Prenatal Care

Despite suggestions that paternal engagement is one potential strategy to impact the multifaceted problem of infant mortality, fathers' involvement in prenatal care has received little attention or study. While there is evidence that fathers want information about assisting partners and caring for newborns, the best mechanism for providing this information is unknown. A pilot study was conducted using a father-only session designed to provide information in an informal, interactive setting within a model of group prenatal care. All 5 of the fathers approached agreed to participate. The fathers participating in this session indicated that the session was beneficial and found it to be a valuable addition to the group care model. Implications for health providers include identifying opportunities that allow fathers to share concerns and anxieties regarding care for partners and newborns. Implementing fathering activities into group prenatal care or developing other opportunities for fathers to be involved prenatally needs further investigation.

A systematic review of concepts related to women's empowerment in the perinatal period and their associations with perinatal depressive symptoms and premature birth

BACKGROUND

The perinatal period, which we here define as pregnancy and the first year postpartum, is a time in women's lives that involves significant physiological and psychosocial change and adjustment, including changes in their social status and decision-making power. Supporting women's empowerment at this particular time in their lives may be an attractive opportunity to create benefits for maternal and infant health outcomes such as reductions in perinatal depressive symptoms and premature birth rates. Thus, we here systematically review and critically discuss the literature that investigates the effects of empowerment, empowerment-related concepts and empowerment interventions on reductions in perinatal depressive symptoms, preterm birth (PTB), and low birthweight (LBW).

METHODS

For this systematic review, we conducted a literature search in PsychInfo, PubMed, and CINAHL without setting limits for date of publication, language, study design, or maternal age. The search resulted in 27 articles reporting on 25 independent studies including a total of 17,795 women.

RESULTS

The majority of studies found that, for the most part, measures of empowerment and interventions supporting empowerment are associated with reduced perinatal depressive symptoms and PTB/LBW rates. However, findings are equivocal and a small portion of studies found no significant association between empowerment-related concepts and perinatal depressive symptoms and PTB or LBW.

CONCLUSION

This small body of work suggests, for the most part, that empowerment-related concepts may be protective for perinatal depressive symptoms and PTB/LBW. We recommend that future theory-driven and integrative work should include an assessment of different facets of empowerment, obtain direct measures of empowerment, and address the relevance of important confounders, including for example, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

A systematic overview of the literature regarding group prenatal care for high-risk pregnant women

BACKGROUND

Group prenatal care (GPC) models have been gaining popularity in recent years. Studies of high-risk groups have shown improved outcomes. Our objective was to review and summarize outcomes for women in GPC for women with specific high-risk conditions.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of Ovid, PubMed, and Google Scholar was performed to identify studies reporting the effects of group prenatal care in high-risk populations. Studies were included if they reported on pregnancy outcome results for women using GPC. We also contacted providers known to be utilizing GPC for specific high-risk women. Descriptive results were compiled and summarized by high-risk population.

RESULTS

We identified 37 reports for inclusion (8 randomized trials, 23 nonrandomized studies, 6 reports of group outcomes without controls). Preterm birth was found to be decreased among low-income and African American women. Attendance at prenatal visits was shown to increase among women in GPC in the following groups: Opioid Addiction, Adolescents, and Low-Income. Improved weight trajectories and compliance with the IOM's weight recommendations were found in adolescents. Increased rates of breastfeeding were found in adolescents and African Americans. Increased satisfaction with care was found in adolescents and African Americans. Pregnancy knowledge was increased among adolescents, as was uptake of LARC. Improved psychological outcomes were found among adolescents and low-income women. Studies in women with diabetes demonstrated that fewer women required treatment with medication when exposed to GPC, and for those requiring treatment with insulin, GPC individuals required less than half the dose. Among women with tobacco use, those who had continued to smoke after finding out they were pregnant were 5 times more likely to quit later in pregnancy if they were engaged in GPC.

CONCLUSIONS

Several groups of high-risk pregnant women may have benefits from engaging in group prenatal care. Because there is a paucity of high-quality, well-controlled studies, more trials in high-risk women are needed to determine whether it improves outcomes and costs of pregnancy-related care.

Improving health literacy through group antenatal care: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

To examine whether exposure to group antenatal care increased women's health literacy by improving their ability to interpret and utilize health messages compared to women who received standard, individual antenatal care in Ghana.

METHODS

We used a prospective cohort design. The setting was a busy urban district hospital in Kumasi, the second most populous city in Ghana. Pregnant women (N = 240) presenting for their first antenatal visit between 11 and 14 weeks gestation were offered participation in the study. A 27% drop-out rate was experienced due to miscarriage, transfer or failure to return for follow-up visits, leaving 184 women in the final sample. Data were collected using an individual structured survey and medical record review. Summary statistics as well as two sample t-tests or chi-square were performed to evaluate the group effect.

RESULTS

Significant group differences were found. Women participating in group care demonstrated improved health literacy by exhibiting a greater understanding of how to operationalize health education messages. There was a significant difference between women enrolled in group antenatal care verses individual antenatal care for preventing problems before delivery, understanding when to access care, birth preparedness and complication readiness, intent to use a modern method of family planning postpartum, greater understanding of the components of breastfeeding and lactational amenorrhea for birth spacing, and intent for postpartum follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Group antenatal care as compared to individual care offers an opportunity to increase quality of care and improve maternal and newborn outcomes. Group antenatal care holds the potential to increase healthy behaviors, promote respectful maternity care, and generate demand for services. Group ANC improves women's health literacy on how to prevent and recognize problems, prepare for delivery, and care for their newborn.

Group versus traditional prenatal care in low-risk women delivering at term: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Group prenatal care (GC) models are receiving increasing attention as a means of preventing preterm birth; yet, there are limited data on whether group care improves perinatal outcomes in women who deliver at term. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our institutional experience with GC over the past decade and test the hypothesis that GC, compared with traditional individual care (TC), improves perinatal outcomes in women who deliver at term.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective cohort study of women delivering at term who participated in GC compared with TC. A group of 207 GC patients who delivered at term from 2004 to 2014 were matched in a 1:2 ratio to 414 patients with term singleton pregnancies who delivered at our institution during the same period by delivery year, maternal age, race and insurance status. The primary outcome was low birth weight (<2500 g). Secondary outcomes included early term birth (37.0 to 38 6/7 weeks), 5 min APGAR score <7, special care nursery admission, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, neonatal demise, cesarean section and number of prenatal visits. Outcomes were compared between the two groups using univariable statistics.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between the two matched groups. GC was associated with a significant reduction in low birth weight infants compared with TC (11.1% vs 19.6%; relative risk (RR) 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.87). Patients in GC were significantly less likely than controls to require cesarean delivery, have low 5 min APGAR scores and need higher-level neonatal care (NICU: 1.5% vs 6.5%; RR 0.22; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.72). There were no significant differences in rates of early term birth and neonatal demise.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-risk women participating in GC and delivering at term had a lower risk of low birth weight and other adverse perinatal outcomes compared with women in TC. This suggests GC is a promising alternative to individual prenatal care to improve perinatal outcomes in addition to preterm birth.

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.

Centering and Racial Disparities (CRADLE study): rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial of centeringpregnancy and birth outcomes

Background

In the United States, preterm birth (PTB) before 37 weeks gestational age occurs at an unacceptably high rate, and large racial disparities persist. To date, medical and public health interventions have achieved limited success in reducing rates of PTB. Innovative changes in healthcare delivery are needed to improve pregnancy outcomes. One such model is CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care (GPNC), in which individual physical assessments are combined with facilitated group education and social support. Most existing studies in the literature on GPNC are observational. Although the results are promising, they are not powered to detect differences in PTB, do not address the racial disparity in PTB, and do not include measures of hypothesized mediators that are theoretically based and validated. The aims of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) are to compare birth outcomes as well as maternal behavioral and psychosocial outcomes by race among pregnant women who participate in GPNC to their counterparts in individual prenatal care (IPNC) and to investigate whether improving women’s behavioral and psychosocial outcomes will explain the potential benefits of GPNC on birth outcomes and racial disparities.

Methods/design

This is a single site RCT study at Greenville Health System in South Carolina. Women are eligible if they are between 14–45 years old and enter prenatal care before 20 6/7 weeks of gestational age. Eligible, consenting women will be randomized 1:1 into GPNC group or IPNC group, stratified by race. Women allocated to GPNC will attend 2-h group prenatal care sessions according to the standard curriculum provided by the Centering Healthcare Institute, with other women due to deliver in the same month. Women allocated to IPNC will attend standard, traditional individual prenatal care according to standard clinical guidelines. Patients in both groups will be followed up until 12 weeks postpartum.

Discussion

Findings from this project will provide rigorous scientific evidence on the role of GPNC in reducing the rate of PTB, and specifically in reducing racial disparities in PTB. Establishing the improved effect of GPNC on pregnancy and birth outcomes can change the way healthcare is delivered, particularly with populations with higher rates of PTB.

Trial registration

NCT02640638 Date Registered: 12/20/2015.