Group Prenatal Care Reduces Risk of Preterm Birth and Low Birth Weight: A Matched Cohort Study

Health care use and health consequences of geographic lack of access to abortion and maternity care

BACKGROUND

Recent years have brought substantial declines in geographic access to abortion facilities and maternity care across the US. The purpose of this study was to identify the reproductive health consequences of living in a county without access to comprehensive reproductive health care services.

METHODS

We analyzed National Center for Health Statistics data on all live births occurring in the US in 2020. We used data on locations of abortion facilities and availability of maternity care in order to classify counties by level of access to comprehensive reproductive health care services and defined comprehensive reproductive health care deserts as counties that did not have an abortion facility in the county or in any neighboring county and did not have any maternity care practitioners. We fit modified Poisson regression models with generalized estimating equations to estimate the degree to which living in a comprehensive reproductive health care desert was associated with receipt of timely and adequate prenatal care and risk of preterm birth, controlling for individual-level and county-level characteristics.

RESULTS

In 2020, one third of counties in the US were comprehensive reproductive health care deserts (n = 1082), and 136,272 births occurred in these counties. In adjusted models, there was no difference in prenatal health care use (timeliness or adequacy of care) between persons in comprehensive reproductive health care deserts and those with full access to care, but the risk of preterm birth was significantly elevated (aRR =1.09, 95% CI = 1.06, 1.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of access to comprehensive reproductive health care services may increase the incidence of preterm birth.

Women's experiences with Centering-Based Group Care in Zhejiang China: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

The group prenatal care model, which caters to women with low medical needs but high support needs, has become a highly prevalent and innovative approach implemented globally. For Centering-Based Group Care (CBGC) to remain effective, women's evaluations of the quality of care and perspectives about the model are crucial.

AIM

This study aimed to describe women's appraisal of CBGC quality and explore the experiences of women in the mixed-methods pilot study conducted in Zhejiang, China.

METHODS

From August 2021 to December 2022, 20 women provided complete quantitative data using the Quality of Prenatal Care Questionnaire before hospital discharge. Semi-structured interviews were conducted at 6 months postpartum. Qualitative data were analysed using Colaizzi's method.

FINDINGS

The mean (standard deviation) total score (of the 5) of the questionnaire was 4.43 (0.1) with a good quality of CBGC. Qualitative research identified five themes: motivations and concerns for participation, the appeal of interactive learning, the development of community ties and social support, healing from psychological trauma with CBGC, and suggestions for CBGC enhancement.

DISCUSSION

Women rated CBGC quality as good and benefited significantly from it in the study. As a new alternative option, the women's accounts suggested that CBGC performed excellently in enhancing knowledge, strengthening social bonds, and providing psychological support.

CONCLUSION

CBGC quality cannot be determined based on limited the sample size. This pilot study provides evidence regarding the beneficial effects of knowledge, socialization, and psychological healing on CBGC. Further research is suggested to measure CBGC effectiveness and quality.

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.

The maternal factors associated with infant low birth weight: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

In this umbrella review, we systematically evaluated the evidence from meta-analyses and systematic reviews of maternal factors associated with low birth weight.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched to identify all relevant published studies up to August 2023. We included all meta-analysis studies (based on cohort, case-control, cross-sectional studies) that examined the association between maternal factors (15 risk factors) and risk of LBW, regardless of publication date. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the summary effect size along with the 95% confidence interval (CI), 95% prediction interval, and heterogeneity (I2) in all meta-analyses. Hedges' g was used as the effect size metric. The effects of small studies and excess significance biases were assessed using funnel plots and the Egger's test, respectively. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 tool.

RESULTS

We included 13 systematic Review with 15 meta-analysis studies in our study based on the inclusion criteria. The following 13 maternal factors were identified as risk factors for low birth weight: crack/cocaine (odds ratio [OR] 2.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.26-3.52), infertility (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.2-1.48), smoking (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.76-2.28), periodontal disease (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.67-3.47), depression (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.34-2.53), anemia (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.13-1.55), caffeine/coffee (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.14-1.57), heavy physical workload (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.00-3.47), lifting ≥ 11 kg (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.02-2.48), underweight (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.20-2.67), alcohol (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.46), hypertension (OR 3.90, 95% CI 2.73-5.58), and hypothyroidism (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.01-1.94). A significant negative association was also reported between antenatal care and low birth weight.

CONCLUSIONS

This umbrella review identified drug use (such as crack/cocaine), infertility, smoking, periodontal disease, depression, caffeine and anemia as risk factors for low birth weight in pregnant women. These findings suggest that pregnant women can reduce the risk of low birth weight by maintaining good oral health, eating a healthy diet, managing stress and mental health, and avoiding smoking and drug use.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN

A descriptive qualitative design was used as an exploratory method.

SETTING/LOCAL PROBLEM

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

PARTICIPANTS

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

INTERVENTION/MEASUREMENTS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

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

Birth Outcomes for Medically High-Risk Pregnancies: Comparing Group to Individual Prenatal Care

OBJECTIVES

 Group prenatal care models were initially designed for women with medically low-risk pregnancies, and early outcome data focused on these patient populations. Pregnancy outcome data for women with medically high-risk pregnancies participating in group prenatal care is needed to guide clinical practice. This study compares rates of preterm birth, low birth weight, and neonatal intensive care unit admissions among women with medical risk for poor birth outcomes who receive group versus individual prenatal care.

STUDY DESIGN

 This retrospective cohort study uses vital statistics data to compare pregnancy outcomes for women from 21 obstetric practices participating in a statewide expansion project of group prenatal care. The study population for this paper included women with pregestational or gestational hypertension, pregestational or gestational diabetes, and high body mass index (BMI > 45 kg/m2). Patients were matched using propensity scoring, and outcomes were compared using logistic regression. Two levels of treatment exposure based on group visit attendance were evaluated for women in group care: any exposure (one or more groups) or minimum threshold (five or more groups).

RESULTS

 Participation in group prenatal care at either treatment exposure level was associated with a lower risk of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions (10.2 group vs. 13.8% individual care, odds ratio [OR] = 0.708, p < 0.001). Participating in the minimum threshold of groups (five or more sessions) was associated with reduced risk of preterm birth (11.4% group vs. 18.4% individual care, OR = 0.569, p < 0.001) and NICU admissions (8.4% group vs. 15.9% individual care, OR = 0.483, p < 0.001). No differences in birth weight were observed.

CONCLUSION

 This study provides preliminary evidence that women who have or develop common medical conditions during pregnancy are not at greater risk for preterm birth, low birth weight, or NICU admissions if they participate in group prenatal care. Practices who routinely exclude patients with these conditions from group participation should reconsider increasing inclusivity of their groups.

KEY POINTS

· This study compares outcomes for women who receive group versus individual prenatal care. · The study population was limited to women with diabetes, hypertension, and/or high BMI.. · Group participants did not have higher rates of preterm birth, low birth weight, or NICU admissions..

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.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Phthalate Exposure and Preterm Birth: A Pooled Study of Sixteen U.S. Cohorts

BACKGROUND

Phthalate exposures are ubiquitous during pregnancy and may contribute to racial and ethnic disparities in preterm birth.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated race and ethnicity in the relationship between biomarkers of phthalate exposure and preterm birth by examining: a) how hypothetical reductions in racial and ethnic disparities in phthalate metabolites might reduce the probability of preterm birth; and b) exposure-response models stratified by race and ethnicity.

METHODS

We pooled individual-level data on 6,045 pregnancies from 16 U.S. cohorts. We investigated covariate-adjusted differences in nine urinary phthalate metabolite concentrations by race and ethnicity [non-Hispanic White (White, 43%), non-Hispanic Black (Black, 13%), Hispanic/Latina (38%), and Asian/Pacific Islander (3%)]. Using g-computation, we estimated changes in the probability of preterm birth under hypothetical interventions to eliminate disparities in levels of urinary phthalate metabolites by proportionally lowering average concentrations in Black and Hispanic/Latina participants to be approximately equal to the averages in White participants. We also used race and ethnicity-stratified logistic regression to characterize associations between phthalate metabolites and preterm birth.

RESULTS

In comparison with concentrations among White participants, adjusted mean phthalate metabolite concentrations were consistently higher among Black and Hispanic/Latina participants by 23%-148% and 4%-94%, respectively. Asian/Pacific Islander participants had metabolite levels that were similar to those of White participants. Hypothetical interventions to reduce disparities in metabolite mixtures were associated with lower probabilities of preterm birth for Black [13% relative reduction; 95% confidence interval (CI): - 34 % , 8.6%] and Hispanic/Latina (9% relative reduction; 95% CI: - 19 % , 0.8%) participants. Odds ratios for preterm birth in association with phthalate metabolites demonstrated heterogeneity by race and ethnicity for two individual metabolites (mono-n-butyl and monoisobutyl phthalate), with positive associations that were larger in magnitude observed among Black or Hispanic/Latina participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Phthalate metabolite concentrations differed substantially by race and ethnicity. Our results show hypothetical interventions to reduce population-level racial and ethnic disparities in biomarkers of phthalate exposure could potentially reduce the probability of preterm birth. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP12831.

Midwifery Workforce Density Moderates the Association Between Independent Practice and Pregnancy Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Studies comparing pregnancy outcomes before and after state transition to independent midwifery practice have found little change in primary cesarean birth and preterm birth rates. One reason may be the failure to control for midwife density. The objective was to test if the local midwife density moderates the association between state independent midwifery practice and pregnancy outcomes.

METHODS

Birth records were abstracted from the State Inpatient Databases for 6 states. The Area Health Resource File provided county variables. Midwife density was operationalized as no midwives, low midwife density (<4.5 per 1000 births), and high midwife density (≥4.5 midwives per 1000 births). Multivariate logistic regression models compared primary cesarean birth and preterm birth, controlling for maternal and county characteristics. Moderation was tested by including an interaction term (independent practice × density) to the regression models. The magnitude of association for the interaction was measured by stratifying the models.

RESULTS

The study included 875,156 women; most (79.7%) resided in a county with low midwife density. Restricted midwifery practice was associated with increased odds of both primary cesarean birth and preterm birth. The interaction term was significant for both preterm birth and primary cesarean, indicating moderation. The largest magnitude of difference was the increased odds of preterm birth in counties with a high midwife density and restricted practice (odds ratio, 3.50; 95% CI, 2.43-5.06) compared with those with high midwife density and independent practice.

DISCUSSION

Midwife density moderates the association between independent midwifery practice and primary cesarean birth and preterm birth. Moderation may explain why prior studies found small or no changes in outcomes when states adopted independent practice. Moderation models can improve testing for associations with independent practice. Both midwife independent practice and increasing midwifery workforce size can be strategies to improve state pregnancy outcomes.

Using Community-Based Participatory Research to Design a Patient and Practitioner-Centered Group Prenatal Care Model

In response to disproportionately high rates of infant mortality and preterm birth among women of color and women in poverty in Fresno County, California, community and academic partners coordinated a community-based participatory research (CBPR) project with local residents. Social isolation and stress, inaccessible prenatal care, and dissatisfaction with care experiences were identified as leading predictors of poor birth outcomes. The PRECEDE-PROCEED framework was used to lead the CBPR effort that resulted in the development of a model of group prenatal care, named Glow! Group Prenatal Care Program (Glow! Program). Group prenatal care (GPNC), which focuses on pregnancy health assessments, education, and peer support, has the potential to address the health and social priorities of women during pregnancy. As a result of the employed CBPR process and the extensive participation from stakeholders, this modified GPNC model responds to the unique needs of the at-risk community members, the agencies aiming to improve maternal-child health experiences and outcomes, and the prenatal care providers offering it to their patients. The methods from this study can be applied in the design and implementation of community-based health care interventions. Returning to community partners throughout the design, implementation, and evaluation phases underscored that health care interventions cannot be designed in silos, and require flexibility to respond to factors that promote improved maternal and infant outcomes, which affect the end goal for the intervention.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

CenteringPregnancy: A Review of Implementation and Outcomes

Importance

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

Objective

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

Evidence

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Innovations and Opportunities in Care for Black Mothers and Birthing People

In recent years, there has been increased attention given to how racism fuels health inequities, including the inadequacy of prenatal care (PNC) that Black women and Black birthing people receive. This increase of attention has brought notable advancements in research, practice, and policy that intend to better understand and address these systemic inequities within the health care system. This review aims to provide an overview of promising developments in the study of Black mothers' and birthing people's experiences in PNC and delivery, to detail current research surrounding interventions to improve quality and mitigate bias in obstetric care, and to offer ways in which legislation can support such strategies targeting the root causes of inequities in care.

Group Prenatal Care vs. Traditional Prenatal Care: A Parity-Matched Comparison of Perinatal Outcomes in a Rural Community

PURPOSE

Prenatal care is important for positive outcomes for both mother and infant. The traditional one-on-one method remains the most common. This study aimed to compare perinatal outcomes of patients attending group prenatal care with traditional prenatal care. Most previously published comparisons did not match for parity, a key predictor of perinatal outcome.

DESCRIPTION

We collected perinatal outcome data for 137 group prenatal care patients and 137 traditional prenatal care patients, matched for contemporaneous delivery and parity, who delivered at our small rural hospital during 2015-2016. We included key public health variables, including the initiation of breastfeeding, and smoking at the time of delivery.

ASSESSMENT

There was no difference between the two groups for maternal age or infant ethnicity, induced or augmented labor, preterm deliveries, APGAR scores less than 7, low birth weight, NICU admissions, or cesarean deliveries. Group care patients had more prenatal visits and were more likely to initiate breastfeeding and were less likely to report smoking at the time of delivery.

CONCLUSION

In our rural population matched for contemporaneous delivery and parity, we found no difference in traditional perinatal outcome measures and that group care was positively associated with the key public health variables of not smoking and initiating breastfeeding. If future studies in other populations have similar findings, it may be wise to provide group care more widely to rural populations.

Intimate partner violence and barriers to prenatal care

RATIONALE

Past research has shown that intimate partner violence (IPV) is associated with less adequate access to prenatal care. However, less is known about why IPV creates challenges for accessing prenatal care, including how IPV is related to unique barriers to prenatal care.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to examine the association between physical IPV around the time of pregnancy (preconception IPV, prenatal IPV, or both preconception and prenatal IPV) and (1) adequacy of prenatal care, and (2) barriers to prenatal care.

METHODS

Data are from 35 sites (34 states and New York City) from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) for years 2009-2016 (n = 166,840). Adequacy of prenatal care is examined using multinomial logistic regression and measures of barriers to prenatal care are assessed using negative binomial regression and logistic regression.

RESULTS

The findings reveal that women with IPV exposure-especially those who experience IPV both before and during pregnancy-are more likely to experience inadequate prenatal care. In addition, women with IPV exposure incur a higher rate of barriers to prenatal care, as well as several specific barriers to prenatal care including not having transportation, not being able to get time off work, being too busy, being unable to find child care, and keeping a pregnancy a secret.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the adverse consequences of both IPV and inadequate access to prenatal care for maternal and child health, the findings of this study highlight the need for public health interventions that both reduce the prevalence of IPV and remove barriers to prenatal care for IPV-exposed women.

The relationship between maternal health and neonatal low birth weight in Amman, Jordan: a case-control study

This study aimed to examine the relationship between maternal health during pregnancy and low birth weight (LBW), as well as the impact of COVID-19 on the socio-economic status of pregnant women and its effect on LBW. The study was conducted in Amman, Jordan, and included 2260 mothers who visited Abu-Nusair comprehensive health center between January and December 2020. A matched case-control design was used with 72 cases and 148 controls selected for data collection through medical records and face-to-face interviews. Results showed that factors such as a monthly income of 400 JD or less, living with an extended family, exposure to passive smoking, maternal weight gain of 6-10 kg, maternal anemia, maternal hypertension, delivery by cesarean section, and previous history of LBW newborns were positively associated with an increased risk of LBW. Conversely, factors such as a monthly income above 700 JD, living with a core family, daily intake of iron, calcium, and vitamin D, prenatal visits, healthy food intake, and planning for pregnancy were associated with a lower risk of LBW. COVID-19 infection and its effects on work, family finances, antenatal care visits, and food supply were also positively linked with LBW. In conclusion, socioeconomic status, maternal health, COVID-19, and its impacts were significant risk factors for LBW.

Evaluation of an Evidence-Based Prenatal Breastfeeding Education Curriculum Adapted for the COVID-19 Pandemic: Ready, Set, Baby Live COVID-19 Edition

In response to the cessation of in-person prenatal education services during the COVID-19 pandemic, we adapted an evidence-based curriculum to a live virtual format entitled Ready, Set, Baby Live COVID-19 Edition (RSB Live). In a sample of 146 pregnant people, participation in RSB Live was associated with high levels of knowledge about the benefits of breastfeeding, early infant hunger cues, and recommended maternity care practices, as well as high levels of satisfaction with adaptations to the session's content and virtual delivery. Participation was also associated with a significant increase in prenatal breastfeeding intention, a known predictor of breastfeeding outcomes. This study supports live, virtual education with a standardized curriculum as an effective and acceptable means of providing prenatal education.

Group vs traditional prenatal care for improving racial equity in preterm birth and low birthweight: the Centering and Racial Disparities randomized clinical trial study

BACKGROUND

The United States has persistently high rates of preterm birth and low birthweight and is characterized by significant racial disparities in these rates. Innovative group prenatal care models, such as CenteringPregnancy, have been proposed as a potential approach to improve the rates of preterm birth and low birthweight and to reduce disparities in these pregnancy outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to test whether participation in group prenatal care would reduce the rates of preterm birth and low birthweight compared with individual prenatal care and whether group prenatal care would reduce the racial disparity in these rates between Black and White patients.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a randomized controlled trial among medically low-risk pregnant patients at a single study site. Eligible patients were stratified by self-identified race and ethnicity and randomly allocated 1:1 between group and individual prenatal care. The primary outcomes were preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation and low birthweight of <2500 g. The primary analysis was performed according to the intent-to-treat principle. The secondary analyses were performed according to the as-treated principle using modified intent-to-treat and per-compliance approaches. The analysis of effect modification by race and ethnicity was planned.

RESULTS

A total of 2350 participants were enrolled, with 1176 assigned to group prenatal care and 1174 assigned to individual prenatal care. The study population included 952 Black (40.5%), 502 Hispanic (21.4%), 863 White (36.8%), and 31 "other races or ethnicity" (1.3%) participants. Group prenatal care did not reduce the rate of preterm birth (10.4% vs 8.7%; odds ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.63; P=.17) or low birthweight (9.6% vs 8.9%; odds ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.45; P=.62) compared with individual prenatal care. In subgroup analysis, greater attendance in prenatal care was associated with lower rates of preterm birth and low birthweight. This effect was most noticeable for the rates of low birthweight for Black participants in group care: intent to treat (51/409 [12.5%]), modified intent to treat (36/313 [11.5%]), and per compliance (20/240 [8.3%]). Although the rates of low birthweight were significantly higher for Black participants than White participants seen in individual care (adjusted odds ratio, 2.00; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-3.50), the difference was not significant for Black participants in group care compared with their White counterparts (adjusted odds ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-3.34).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in the overall rates of preterm birth or low birthweight between group and individual prenatal care. With increased participation in group prenatal care, lower rates of preterm birth and low birthweight for Black participants were observed. The role of group care models in reducing racial disparities in these birth outcomes requires further study.

Group Care in the first 1000 days: implementation and process evaluation of contextually adapted antenatal and postnatal group care targeting diverse vulnerable populations in high-, middle- and low-resource settings

Background

Group care (GC) improves the quality of maternity care, stimulates women’s participation in their own care and facilitates growth of women’s social support networks. There is an urgent need to identify and disseminate the best mechanisms for implementing GC in ways that are feasible, context appropriate and sustainable. This protocol presents the aims and methods of an innovative implementation research project entitled Group Care in the first 1000 days (GC_1000), which addresses this need.

Aims

The aim of GC_1000 is to co-create and disseminate evidence-based implementation strategies and tools to support successful implementation and scale-up of GC in health systems throughout the world, with particular attention to the needs of ‘vulnerable’ populations.

Methods

By working through five inter-related work packages, each with specific tasks, objectives and deliverables, the global research team will systematically examine and document the implementation and scale-up processes of antenatal and postnatal GC in seven different countries. The GC_1000 project is grounded theoretically in the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR), while the process evaluation is guided by ‘Realistic Evaluation’ principles. Data are gathered across all research phases and analysis at each stage is synthesized to develop Context-Intervention-Mechanism-Outcome configurations.

Discussion

GC_1000 will generate evidence-based knowledge about the integration of complex interventions into diverse health care systems. The 4-year project also will pave the way for sustained implementation of GC, significantly benefitting populations with adverse pregnancy and birthing experiences as well as poor outcomes.

Modeling the Likelihood of Low Birth Weight: Findings from a Chicago-Area Health System

OBJECTIVE

This study presents a statistical model of the incidence of low birth weight (LBW) births in a large, Chicago-area hospital system. The study was undertaken to provide a strategic framework for future health system interventions.

METHODS

Administrative and electronic health records were matched to census Zip Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA) household poverty data for 42,681 births in 2016-2019 at seven system hospitals, serving a diverse patient population. A logistic regression model of LBW incidence was estimated to test the independent significance of maternal sociodemographic characteristics after controlling for clinical risk factors.

RESULTS

The incidence of LBW was 6.3% overall but 11.3% among non-Hispanic Black patients as compared to 5.1% among non-Hispanic White patients. LBW incidence ranged from 9.2% for patients from the poorest ZCTA (20% + poor households) compared to 5.6% of patients from the most affluent (< 5% poor) ZCTA. Nulliparous patients, patients with pre-existing chronic conditions, and patients with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy were significantly more likely to have LBW births. After controlling for clinical risk factors and poverty level, non-Hispanic Black patients were still over 80% more likely and to have a LBW birth.

DISCUSSION

Study findings reveal the joint effects of social and clinical risk factors. Findings profile our highest-risk populations for targeted interventions. Promising prenatal care redesign programs include pregnancy patient navigators, home and group visits, eHealth telemonitoring, improved mental health screening, and diversification of the maternity care workforce. Decreasing LBW births should be a national public health policy priority and will require major investments in the most impacted communities.

Risk of Adverse Birth Outcomes in Two Cohorts of Pregnant Women With HIV in Zambia

BACKGROUND

A trial of progesterone to prevent preterm birth among HIV-infected Zambian women [Improving Pregnancy Outcomes with Progesterone (IPOP)] found no treatment effect, but the risk of the primary outcome was among the lowest ever documented in women with HIV. In this secondary analysis, we compare the risks of preterm birth (<37 weeks), stillbirth, and a composite primary outcome comprising the two in IPOP versus an observational pregnancy cohort [Zambian Preterm Birth Prevention Study (ZAPPS)] in Zambia, to evaluate reasons for the low risk in IPOP.

METHODS

Both studies enrolled women before 24 gestational weeks, during August 2015-September 2017 (ZAPPS) and February 2018-January 2020 (IPOP). We used linear probability and log-binomial regression to estimate risk differences and risk ratios (RR), before and after restriction and standardization with inverse probability weights.

RESULTS

The unadjusted risk of composite outcome was 18% in ZAPPS (N = 1450) and 9% in IPOP (N = 791) (RR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.6, 2.6). After restricting and standardizing the ZAPPS cohort to the distribution of IPOP baseline characteristics, the risk remained higher in ZAPPS (RR = 1.6; 95% CI = 1.0, 2.4). The lower risk of preterm/stillbirth in IPOP was only partially explained by measured risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Possible benefits in IPOP of additional monetary reimbursement, more frequent visits, and group-based care warrant further investigation.

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

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

Weekly 17 alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate to prevent preterm birth among women living with HIV: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Women with HIV face an increased risk of preterm birth. 17 alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17P) has been shown in some trials to reduce early delivery among women with a history of spontaneous preterm birth. We investigated whether 17P would reduce this risk among women with HIV.

METHODS

We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in pregnant women with HIV at the University Teaching Hospital and Kamwala District Health Centre in Lusaka, Zambia. Eligible patients were women aged 18 years or older with confirmed HIV-1 infection, viable intrauterine singleton pregnancy at less than 24 weeks of gestation, and were receiving or intending to commence antiretroviral therapy during pregnancy. Exclusion criteria were major uterine or fetal anomaly; planned or in situ cervical cerclage; evidence of threatened miscarriage, preterm labour, or ruptured membranes at screening; medical contraindication to 17P; previous participation in the trial; or history of spontaneous preterm birth. Eligible participants provided written informed consent and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 250 mg intramuscular 17P or placebo once per week, starting between 16 and 24 weeks of gestation until delivery, stillbirth, or reaching term (37 weeks). Participants and study staff were masked to assignment, except for pharmacy staff who did random assignment and prepared injections but did not interact with participants. The primary outcome was a composite of delivery before 37 weeks or stillbirth at any gestational age. Patients attended weekly visits for study drug injections and antenatal care. We estimated the absolute and relative difference in risk of the primary outcome and safety events between treatment groups by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03297216, and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 7, 2018 and Jan 13, 2020, we assessed 1042 women for inclusion into the study. 242 women were excluded after additional assessments, and 800 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive intramuscular 17P (n=399) or placebo (n=401). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Adherence to study drug injections was 98% in both groups, no patients were lost to follow-up, and the final post-partum visit was on Aug 6, 2020. 36 (9%) of 399 participants assigned to 17P had preterm birth or stillbirth, compared with 36 (9%) of 401 patients assigned to placebo (risk difference 0·1, 95% CI -3·9 to 4·0; relative risk 1·0, 95% CI 0·6 to 1·6; p=0·98). Intervention-related adverse events were reported by 140 (18%) of 800 participants and occurred in similar proportions in both randomisation groups. No serious adverse events were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Although 17P seems to be safe and acceptable to participants, available data do not support the use of the drug to prevent preterm birth among women whose risk derives solely from HIV infection. The low risk of preterm birth in both randomisation groups warrants further investigation.

FUNDING

US National Institutes of Health and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

"When I think of mental healthcare, I think of no care." Mental Health Services as a Vital Component of Prenatal Care for Black Women

PURPOSE

Black people give birth joyously despite disproportionate rates of adverse perinatal outcomes. Given that group prenatal care shows promise in mitigating these inequities, we sought to solicit the opinions of Black peripartum women on how group prenatal care could be tailored to fit their specific needs. In this study, we describe attitudes about a proposed Black group prenatal care in a single focus group of 11 Black women who receive maternal health services from Black Infant Health (BIH, a state and federal funded state-wide program for Black pregnant people with the goal to improve infant and maternal health). These data were used to design a race-conscious group prenatal care curriculum specifically for Black women at UCSF.

DESCRIPTION

This study was an analysis of focus group data generated as part of a larger project focused on community involvement in Black maternal health. English speaking pregnant or recently postpartum women age 18 or older who receive services from BIH were recruited to participated in the focus group analyzed in this study. All facilitators of the focus group were Black women in order to facilitate candid conversation about racism in prenatal care.

ASSESSMENT

The need for mental health care was common thread underlying all conversations about prenatal health improvements desired by our focus groups. Participants expressed the centrality of mental health access during our discussion of other themes (e.g.: ease of access, inclusion of partners, special classes for teen moms) by discussing them in terms of their relationship to mental health. Our participants' clear expression of the centrality of mental health care to their prenatal health guided our decision to focus on mental health as a necessary pillar of any group prenatal care intervention designed to mitigate perinatal healthcare disparities in this paper. Three themes related to mental health integration into group prenatal care emerged from thematic analysis of the transcripts. Participants expressed insufficient access and advocacy, and provider distrust.

CONCLUSION

Evidence exists supporting group prenatal care as a tool for mitigation of perinatal health disparities among Black women. There is also a large body of data describing the disproportionate burden of mental health needs among Black women. The rich data we present here from Black women on their desire for the integration of these two needs fits well into the parallel conversation occurring in the literature. To our knowledge, this is the first study investigating desires of Black women regarding group prenatal care designed specifically for them. They expressed a strong desire for more access to mental health care providers who are racially conscious and aware of white supremacy, and nuanced opinions on the role of racial concordance in health equity.

Explaining the Black-White Disparity in Preterm Birth: A Consensus Statement From a Multi-Disciplinary Scientific Work Group Convened by the March of Dimes

In 2017–2019, the March of Dimes convened a workgroup with biomedical, clinical, and epidemiologic expertise to review knowledge of the causes of the persistent Black-White disparity in preterm birth (PTB). Multiple databases were searched to identify hypothesized causes examined in peer-reviewed literature, 33 hypothesized causes were reviewed for whether they plausibly affect PTB and either occur more/less frequently and/or have a larger/smaller effect size among Black women vs. White women. While definitive proof is lacking for most potential causes, most are biologically plausible. No single downstream or midstream factor explains the disparity or its social patterning, however, many likely play limited roles, e.g., while genetic factors likely contribute to PTB, they explain at most a small fraction of the disparity. Research links most hypothesized midstream causes, including socioeconomic factors and stress, with the disparity through their influence on the hypothesized downstream factors. Socioeconomic factors alone cannot explain the disparity's social patterning. Chronic stress could affect PTB through neuroendocrine and immune mechanisms leading to inflammation and immune dysfunction, stress could alter a woman's microbiota, immune response to infection, chronic disease risks, and behaviors, and trigger epigenetic changes influencing PTB risk. As an upstream factor, racism in multiple forms has repeatedly been linked with the plausible midstream/downstream factors, including socioeconomic disadvantage, stress, and toxic exposures. Racism is the only factor identified that directly or indirectly could explain the racial disparities in the plausible midstream/downstream causes and the observed social patterning. Historical and contemporary systemic racism can explain the racial disparities in socioeconomic opportunities that differentially expose African Americans to lifelong financial stress and associated health-harming conditions. Segregation places Black women in stressful surroundings and exposes them to environmental hazards. Race-based discriminatory treatment is a pervasive stressor for Black women of all socioeconomic levels, considering both incidents and the constant vigilance needed to prepare oneself for potential incidents. Racism is a highly plausible, major upstream contributor to the Black-White disparity in PTB through multiple pathways and biological mechanisms. While much is unknown, existing knowledge and core values (equity, justice) support addressing racism in efforts to eliminate the racial disparity in PTB.

Group Pregnancy Care for refugee background women: a codesigned, multimethod evaluation protocol applying a community engagement framework and an interrupted time series design

INTRODUCTION

Pregnancy and early parenthood are key opportunities for interaction with health services and connecting to other families at the same life stage. Public antenatal care should be accessible to all, however barriers persist for families from refugee communities to access, navigate and optimise healthcare during pregnancy. Group Pregnancy Care is an innovative model of care codesigned with a community from a refugee background and other key stakeholders in Melbourne, Australia. Group Pregnancy Care aims to provide a culturally safe and supportive environment for women to participate in antenatal care in a language they understand, to improve health literacy and promote social connections and inclusion. This paper outlines Froup Pregnancy Care and provides details of the evaluation framework.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The evaluation uses community-based participatory research methods to engage stakeholders in codesign of evaluation methods. The study is being conducted across multiple sites and involves multiple phases, use of quantitative and qualitative methods, and an interrupted time series design. Process and cost-effectiveness measures will be incorporated into quality improvement cycles. Evaluation measures will be developed using codesign and participatory principles informed by community and stakeholder engagement and will be piloted prior to implementation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approvals have been provided by all six relevant authorities. Study findings will be shared with communities and stakeholders via agreed pathways including community forums, partnership meetings, conferences, policy and practice briefs and journal articles. Dissemination activities will be developed using codesign and participatory principles.

Association of Delivery Outcomes With the Number of Childbirth Education Sessions

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

Effectiveness of the CenteringPregnancy program on maternal and birth outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization has emphasized the critical role of prenatal care in achieving the Millennium Development Goals to reduce child and maternal mortality. The CenteringPregnancy program is a widely recognized model of prenatal care. Several countries have attempted to implement the program in prenatal care practice; however, its effectiveness on maternal and birth outcomes has not been systematically evaluated and analyzed.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of the CenteringPregnancy program on improving maternal and birth outcomes, including low birth weight, preterm birth, and postpartum depression.

DESIGN

This study evaluated and analyzed randomized controlled trials by comparing the CenteringPregnancy program with o0bstetric led prenatal care. Maternal and birth outcomes of interest included low birthweight, preterm birth, and postpartum depressive symptoms.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library were utilized in this systematic review. Additionally, a supplemental Google Scholar search was performed to capture all relevant articles.

METHODS

All data were extracted independently by two trained researchers, who evaluated the quality of the study by examining the risk of bias. The biases of selection, allocation, measurement, reporting, and loss of follow-up were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias for these included randomized controlled trials. A meta-analysis of eligible randomized controlled trials was conducted using Review Manager. Heterogeneity of studies was assessed using the I² statistic.

RESULTS

Out of 591 articles reviewed, seven randomized controlled trials were included in this study. Findings showed that the CenteringPregnancy program was not associated with lower rates of preterm birth (0.88 [0.71-1.07], p = 0.20, I² = 0%), low birth weight (0.87 [0.68-1.12], p =0.29, I² = 0%), or 12-month postpartum depressive symptoms (0.07 [-0.12-0.26], p =0.46, I² = 69%). However, the CenteringPregnancy program was associated with reduced rates of 6-month postpartum depressive symptoms (0.49 [0.40-0.59], p < 0.01, I² = 40%).

CONCLUSIONS

Existing evidence suggests that the CenteringPregnancy program and obstetric led care have similar effects on reducing the rates of preterm birth and low birth weight but different effects on postpartum depressive symptoms. More studies are needed to examine the effect of the CenteringPregnancy program on the improvement of postpartum depressive symptoms. PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42020171831. Tweetable abstract: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to determine the effects of the CenteringPregnancy program on improving maternal and birth outcomes, including low birth weight, preterm birth, and postpartum depressive symptoms. Seven randomized controlled trials were included in this study. The findings suggested that the CenteringPregnancy program and obstetric led care had similar effects in reducing the rates of preterm birth and low birth weight. More studies are needed to examine the effect of the CenteringPregnancy program on the improvement of postpartum depressive symptoms.

Bridging the Chasm between Pregnancy and Health over the Life Course: A National Agenda for Research and Action

BACKGROUND

Many pregnant people find no bridge to ongoing specialty or primary care after giving birth, even when clinical and social complications of pregnancy signal need. Black, indigenous, and all other women of color are especially harmed by fragmented care and access disparities, coupled with impacts of racism over the life course and in health care.

METHODS

We launched the initiative "Bridging the Chasm between Pregnancy and Health across the Life Course" in 2018, bringing together patients, advocates, providers, researchers, policymakers, and systems innovators to create a National Agenda for Research and Action. We held a 2-day conference that blended storytelling, evidence analysis, and consensus building to identify key themes related to gaps in care and root causes of inequities. In 2019, more than 70 stakeholders joined six working groups to reach consensus on strategic priorities based on equity, innovation, effectiveness, and feasibility.

FINDINGS

Working groups identified six key strategic areas for bridging the chasm. These include: 1) progress toward eliminating institutional and interpersonal racism and bias as a requirement for accreditation of health care institutions, 2) infrastructure support for community-based organizations, 3) extension of holistic team-based care to the postpartum year and beyond, with integration of doulas and community health workers on the team, 4) extension of Medicaid coverage and new quality and pay-for-performance metrics to link maternity care and primary care, 5) systems to preserve maternal narratives and data across providers, and 6) alignment of research with women's lived experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

The resulting agenda presents a path forward to remedy the structural chasms in women's health care, with key roles for advocates, policymakers, researchers, health care leaders, educators, and the media.

Delivering Perinatal Health Information via a Voice Interactive App (SMILE): Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Perinatal health care is critically important for maternal health outcomes in infants. The United States fares considerably worse than comparable countries for maternal and infant mortality rates. As such, alternative models of care or engagement are warranted. Ubiquitous digital devices and increased use of digital health tools have the potential to extend the reach to women and infants in their everyday lives and make a positive impact on their health outcomes. As voice technology becomes more mainstream, research is prudent to establish evidence-based practice on how to best leverage voice technology to promote maternal-infant health.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of using voice technology to support perinatal health and infant care practices.

METHODS

Perinatal women were recruited from a large Midwest Children's Hospital via hospital email announcements and word of mouth. Owing to the technical aspects of the intervention, participants were required to speak English and use an iPhone. Demographics, patterns of technology use, and technology use specific to perinatal health or self-care practices were assessed at baseline. Next, participants were onboarded and asked to use the intervention, Self-Management Intervention-Life Essentials (SMILE), over the course of 2 weeks. SMILE provided users with perinatal health content delivered through mini podcasts (ranging from 3 to 8 minutes in duration). After each podcast, SMILE prompted users to provide immediate verbal feedback to the content. An exit interview was conducted with participants to gather feedback on the intervention and further explore participants' perceptions of voice technology as a means to support perinatal health in the future.

RESULTS

In total, 19 pregnant women (17 to 36 weeks pregnant) were consented. Themes identified as important for perinatal health information include establishing routines, expected norms, and realistic expectations and providing key takeaways. Themes identified as important for voice interaction include customization and user preferences, privacy, family and friends, and context and convenience. Qualitative analysis suggested that perinatal health promotion content delivered by voice should be accurate and succinctly delivered and highlight key takeaways. Perinatal health interventions that use voice should provide users with the ability to customize the intervention but also provide opportunities to engage family members, particularly spouses. As a number of women multitasked while the intervention was being deployed, future interventions should leverage the convenience of voice technology while also balancing the influence of user context (eg, timing or ability to listen or talk versus nonvoice interaction with the system).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate the short-term feasibility of disseminating evidence-based perinatal support via podcasts and curate voice-captured data from perinatal women. However, key areas of improvement have been identified specifically for perinatal interventions leveraging voice technology. Findings contribute to future content, design, and delivery considerations of perinatal digital health interventions.

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.

The contribution of group prenatal care to maternal psychological health outcomes: A systematic review

PROBLEM

Poor mental health remains a significant cause of morbidity for childbearing women globally.

BACKGROUND

Group care has been shown to be effective in reducing select clinical outcomes, e.g., the rate of preterm birth, but less is known about the effect of Group Prenatal Care (GPC) on mental health outcomes of stress, depression and anxiety in pregnant women.

AIM

To conduct a systematic review of the current evidence of the effect of group pregnancy care on mental health and wellbeing outcomes (i.e., stress, depression and/or anxiety) in childbearing women.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of published studies in Medline, PsychInfo, CINAHL, ProQuest databases, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar. Databases were systematically searched without publication period restriction until Feb 2020. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (including quasi-experimental) and observational studies comparing group care with standard pregnancy care. Included were studies published in English, whose primary outcome measures were stress, depression and/or anxiety.

RESULTS

Nine studies met the inclusion criteria, five randomized controlled trials and four observational studies, involving 1585 women (39%) in GPC and 2456 women (61%) in standard (individual) pregnancy care. Although evidence is limited, where targeted education was integrated into the group pregnancy care model, significant reductions in depressive symptoms were observed. In addition, secondary analysis across several studies identified a subset of GPC women, i.e., higher risk for psychological symptoms, who reported a decrease in their depression, stress and anxiety symptoms, postpartum. Due to the diversity of group care structure and content and the lack of outcomes measures universally reported, a comprehensive meta-analysis could not be performed.

CONCLUSION

The evidence suggests improvements in some markers of psychological health outcomes with group pregnancy care. Future research should involve larger well-designed studies encompassing cross-population data using a validated scale that is comparable across diverse childbearing populations and clinical settings to better understand the impact of group pregnancy care.

Incarceration Exposure and Barriers to Prenatal Care in the United States: Findings from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System

Previous research demonstrates that exposure to incarceration during pregnancy - either personally or vicariously through a partner - worsens parental care. However, little is known about the specific barriers to parental care that are associated with incarceration exposure. Using data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (years 2009-2016), the current study examines the relationship between exposure to incarceration during pregnancy and barriers to prenatal care in the United States. Negative binomial and logistic regression models were used to assess the association between the recent incarceration of a woman or her partner (i.e., incarceration that occurred in the 12 months prior to the focal birth) and several barriers to prenatal care. Findings indicate that exposure to incarceration, either personally or vicariously through a partner, increases the overall number of barriers to prenatal care and this association operates through several specific barriers including a lack of transportation to doctor's appointments, having difficulty finding someone to take care of her children, being too busy, keeping pregnancy a secret, and a woman not knowing she was pregnant. Policies designed to help incarceration exposed women overcome these barriers can potentially yield benefits for enhancing access to parental care.

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

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