An evaluation of Interprofessional group antenatal care: a prospective comparative study

Recreating the village: the patient experience with a hybrid model of Group Perinatal Care (GPPC) in an academic family health team

BACKGROUND

Group prenatal care (GPC) has been shown to have a positive impact on social support, patient knowledge and preparedness for birth. We developed an interprofessional hybrid model of care whereby the group perinatal care (GPPC) component was co-facilitated by midwives (MW) and family medicine residents (FMR) and alternating individual visits were provided by family physicians (FP's) within our academic family health team (FHT) In this qualitative study, we sought to explore the impact of this program and how it supports patients through pregnancy and the early newborn period.

METHODS

Qualitative study that was conducted using semi-structured telephone interviews with 18 participants who had completed GPPC in the Mount Sinai Academic Family Health Team in Toronto, Canada and delivered between November 2016 and October 2018. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was conducted by team members using grounded theory.

RESULTS

Four over-arching themes emerged from the data: (i) Participants highly valued information they received from multiple trusted sources, (ii) Participants felt well cared for by the collaborative and coordinated interprofessional team, (iii) The design of GPPC enabled a shared experience, allowing for increased support of the pregnant person, and (iv) GPPC facilitated a supportive transition into the community which positively impacted participants' emotional well- being.

CONCLUSIONS

The four constructs of social support (emotional, informational, instrumental and appraisal) were central to the value that participants found in GPPC. This support from the team of healthcare providers, peers and partners had a positive impact on participants' mental health and helped them face the challenges of their transition to parenthood.

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.

Interprofessional qualification of prenatal care in the context of primary health care

This study aims to describe and analyze an interprofessional educational intervention for the qualification of prenatal care in the context of primary health care.

METHOD

action-research comprising a prenatal care qualification course with 65 primary health care professionals. Collaborative learning activities were conducted in synchronous and asynchronous meetings.

RESULTS

the reflexive thematic analysis of participants' experiences, views and perceptions on the meanings of the intervention revealed three categories: quality of prenatal care: conceptions and meanings; collaborative learning: strategy to overcome linear and isolated care; the need to evolve from acting locally to thinking globally.

CONCLUSION

the analysis of the interprofessional educational intervention for the qualification of prenatal care in the context of primary health care showed that constructivist, participatory and interprofessional approaches are relevant and pertinent to broaden theoretical perceptions and give new meanings to the work process at different settings of the health network.

Group antenatal care compared with standard antenatal care for Somali-Swedish women: a historically controlled evaluation of the Hooyo Project

OBJECTIVES

Comparing language-supported group antenatal care (gANC) and standard antenatal care (sANC) for Somali-born women in Sweden, measuring overall ratings of care and emotional well-being, and testing the feasibility of the outcome measures.

DESIGN

A quasi-experimental trial with one intervention and one historical control group, nested in an intervention development and feasibility study.

SETTING

Midwifery-led antenatal care clinic in a mid-sized Swedish town.

PARTICIPANTS

Pregnant Somali-born women (<25 gestational weeks); 64 women in gANC and 81 in sANC.

INTERVENTION

Language-supported gANC (2017-2019). Participants were offered seven 60-minute group sessions with other Somali-born women led by one to two midwives, in addition to 15-30 min individual appointments with their designated midwife.

OUTCOMES

Primary outcomes were women's overall ratings of antenatal care and emotional well-being (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS)) in gestational week ≥35 and 2 months post partum. Secondary outcomes were specific care experiences, information received, social support, knowledge of pregnancy danger signs and obstetric outcomes.

RESULTS

Recruitment and retention of participants were challenging. Of eligible women, 39.3% (n=106) declined to participate. No relevant differences regarding overall ratings of antenatal care between the groups were detected (late pregnancy OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.16 and 6-8 weeks post partum OR 2.71, 95% CI 0.88 to 9.41). The reduction in mean EPDS score was greater in the intervention group when adjusting for differences at baseline (mean difference -1.89; 95% CI -3.73 to -0.07). Women in gANC were happier with received pregnancy and birth information, for example, caesarean section where 94.9% (n=37) believed the information was sufficient compared with 17.5% (n=7) in standard care (p<0.001) in late pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

This evaluation suggests potential for language-supported gANC to improve knowledge acquisition among pregnant Somali-born women with residence in Sweden ˂10 years. An adequately powered randomised trial is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03879200).

Group antenatal care (gANC) for Somali-speaking women in Sweden - a process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Language supported group antenatal care (gANC) for Somali-born women was implemented in a Swedish public ANC clinic. The women were offered seven 60-min sessions, facilitated by midwives and starting with a presentation of a selected topic, with an additional 15-min individual appointment before or after. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility for participants and midwives of implementing The Hooyo ("mother" in Somali) gANC intervention, including implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors.

METHODS

A process evaluation was performed, using The Medical Research Council (MRC) guidelines for evaluating complex interventions as a framework. A range of qualitative and quantitative data sources were used including observations (n = 9), complementary, in-depth and key-informant interviews (women n = 6, midwives n = 4, interpreters and research assistants n = 3) and questionnaire data (women n = 44; midwives n = 8).

RESULTS

Language-supported gANC offered more comprehensive ANC that seemed to correspond to existing needs of the participants and could address knowledge gaps related to pregnancy, birth and the Swedish health care system. The majority of women thought listening to other pregnant women was valuable (91%), felt comfortable in the group (98%) and supported by the other women (79%), and they said that gANC suited them (79%). The intervention seemed to enhance knowledge and cultural understanding among midwives, thus contributing to more women-centred care. The intervention was not successful at involving partners in ANC.

CONCLUSIONS

The Hooyo gANC intervention was acceptable to the Somali women and to midwives, but did not lead to greater participation by fathers-to-be. The main mechanisms of impact were more comprehensive ANC and enhanced mutual cultural understanding. The position of women was strengthened in the groups, and the way in which the midwives expanded their understanding of the participants and their narratives was promising. To be feasible at a large scale, gANC might require further adaptations and the "othering" of women in risk groups should be avoided.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03879200).

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.

Towards an understanding of GPs' viewpoint on diagnosing postnatal depression in general practice: a small-scale realist evaluation

BACKGROUND

Less than half of postnatal depression cases are identified in routine clinical assessment. Guidelines and current literature suggest that general practitioners (GPs) may have an opportunistic role in detecting postnatal depression due to their early contact and existing rapport with many new mothers. There is limited research on the diagnostic approaches chosen by GPs in different GP-patient contexts. Our small-scale study evaluates the thought processes of seven GPs based in one practice when forming a clinical diagnosis of postnatal depression under different contexts.

METHODS

Seven GP participants were interviewed using case vignettes about postnatal depression, based on an adapted Johari's window framework. A realist approach to analysis was undertaken with the intention of understanding GPs' responses to different situations. Context-mechanism-outcome configurations were constructed, and a programme theory was formed to consolidate the findings.

FINDINGS

Findings suggest that diagnoses may be a clinician-led or collaborative process between GP and patient. In collaborative contexts, stigmatising views were addressed by GPs, time for self-reflection was encouraged and mothers' views were accounted for. Clinician-led diagnoses often occurred in contexts where there was a lack of acknowledgement of symptoms on behalf of the patient or where safety was a concern. The personal and clinical experience of GPs themselves, as well as effective communication channels with other primary care professionals, was significant mechanisms.

CONCLUSION

GPs use a variety of strategies to support patient disclosure and acceptance of their condition. The complexity of GP-patient contexts may influence the clinical thought process. We address some of the gaps in existing literature by exploring postnatal depression diagnosis in primary care and provide tentative explanations to suggest what works, for whom and in what contexts.