Which Pregnant Adolescents Would be Interested in Group-Based Care, and Why?

How to Support the Referral Towards Group Antenatal Care in Belgian Primary Healthcare Organizations: A Qualitative Study

Introduction

Group Antenatal Care (GANC) is an alternative for traditional antenatal care. Despite the model is well accepted among participants and is associated with positive effects on pregnancy outcomes, recruitment of participants can be an ongoing challenge, depending on the structure and financing of the wider health system. This is especially the case for primary care organizations offering GANC, which depend on other health care providers to refer potential participants. The main objective of this study is to understand what determinants are at play for health care providers to refer to GANC facilitators in primary care organizations. Accordingly, we make recommendations for strategies in order to increase the influx of women in GANC.

Methods

Qualitative findings were obtained from 31 interviews with healthcare providers responsible for the referral of women to the GANC facilitators working in primary care organizations, GANC facilitators and stakeholders indirectly involved in the referral. The domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) helped to develop interview questions and raise awareness of important elements during interviews and thematic analyses.

Results

The findings show that before health care providers decide to refer women, they undergo a complex process that is influenced by characteristics of the potential referrer, GANC facilitator, woman, professional relationship between the potential referrer and the GANC facilitator, organization and broader context.

Discussion

Based on these findings and current literature, we recommend that the GANC team implements strategies that anticipate relevant determinants: identify and select potential referrers based on their likelihood to refer, select champions, invest in communication, concretise the collaboration, provide practical tools, involve in policymaking.

Adolescents' experiences with group antenatal care: Insights from a mixed-methods study in Senegal

OBJECTIVES

Group antenatal care (G-ANC) is an innovative model in which antenatal care is delivered to a group of 8-12 women of similar gestational age. Evidence from high-income countries suggests G-ANC is particularly effective for women from marginalised populations, including adolescents. The objective of this study was to examine the experiences of Senegalese adolescents engaged in group antenatal care.

METHODS

This convergent parallel mixed-methods study is derived from a larger effectiveness-implementation hybrid pilot study conducted in Kaolack district, Senegal. Quantitative data for adolescent participants were collected through baseline and postnatal surveys and descriptively analysed. One-on-one interviews and focus-group discussions were conducted with adolescent participants, and qualitative data were analysed using qualitative descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-five adolescents aged 15-19 participated in G-ANC, with a median age of 18 years. The majority (93.3%) were married, and 64.4% were nulliparous. Findings indicated similar levels of G-ANC participation for adolescent and adult women. The majority (93.1%) of participants who had previously attended individual ANC indicated they would prefer G-ANC to individual care for a future pregnancy. Qualitative findings indicated key facets of consideration relevant to G-ANC for adolescents include social connectedness, the influence of social norms and the opportunity for engagement in healthcare.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that G-ANC has the potential to be an adolescent-responsive and culturally appropriate method of delivering antenatal care in Senegal.

Right-Sizing Prenatal Care to Meet Patients' Needs and Improve Maternity Care Value

Prenatal care is one of the most widely used preventive care services in the United States, yet prenatal care delivery recommendations have remained largely unchanged since just before World War II. The current prenatal care model can be improved to better serve modern patients and the health care providers who care for them in three key ways: 1) focusing more on promotion of health and wellness as opposed to primarily focusing on medical complications, 2) flexibly incorporating patient preferences, and 3) individualizing care. As key policymakers and stakeholders grapple with higher maternity care costs and poorer outcomes, including lagging access, equity, and maternal and infant morbidity and mortality in the United States compared with other high-income countries, the opportunity to improve prenatal care has been given insufficient attention. In this manuscript, we present a new conceptual model for prenatal care that incorporates both patients' medical and social needs into four phenotypes, and use human-centered design methods to describe how better matching patient needs with prenatal services can increase the use of high-value services and decrease the use of low-value services. Finally, we address some of the key challenges to implementing right-sized prenatal care, including capturing outcomes through research and payment.

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

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

Exploring the social determinants of racial/ethnic disparities in prenatal care utilization and maternal outcome

Rates of maternal morbidity and mortality are rising in the United States. Non-Hispanic Black women are at highest risk for these outcomes compared to those of other race/ethnicities. Black women are also more likely to be late to prenatal care or be inadequate users of prenatal care. Prenatal care can engage those at risk and potentially influence perinatal outcomes but further research on the link between prenatal care and maternal outcomes is needed. The objective of this article is to review literature illuminating the relationship between prenatal care utilization, social determinants of health, and racial disparities in maternal outcome. We present a theoretical framework connecting the complex factors that may link race, social context, prenatal care utilization, and maternal morbidity/mortality. Prenatal care innovations showing potential to engage with the social determinants of maternal health and address disparities and priorities for future research are reviewed.

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.