Efficacy of a midwife-coordinated, individualized, and specialized maternity care intervention (ChroPreg) in addition to standard care in pregnant women with chronic disease: protocol for a parallel randomized controlled trial

Lost in the System: Responsibilisation and Burden for Women With Multiple Long-Term Health Conditions During Pregnancy

INTRODUCTION

Over a fifth of pregnant women are living with multiple long-term health conditions, which is associated with increased risks of adverse outcomes for mothers and infants. While there are many examples of research exploring individuals' experiences and care pathways for pregnancy with a single health condition, evidence relating to multiple health conditions is limited. This study aimed to explore experiences and care of women with multiple long-term health conditions around the time of pregnancy.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted between March 2022 and May 2023 with women with multiple long-term health conditions who were at least 28 weeks pregnant or had had a baby in the last 2 years, and healthcare professionals with experience of caring for these women. Participants were recruited from across the United Kingdom. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven women and 51 healthcare professionals participated. Five themes were identified. Women with long-term health conditions and professionals recognised that it takes a team to avoid inconsistent care and communication, for example, medication management. Often, women were required to take a care navigation role to link up their healthcare providers. Women described mixed experiences regarding care for their multiple identities and the whole person. Postnatally, women and professionals recognised a downgrade in care, particularly for women's long-term health conditions. Some professionals detailed the importance of engaging with women's knowledge, and recognising their own professional boundaries of expertise. Many participants described difficulties in providing informational continuity and subsequent impacts on care. Specifically, the setup of care systems made it difficult for everyone to access necessary information, especially when care involved multiple sites.

CONCLUSION

Pregnant women with long-term health conditions can experience a substantial burden of responsibility to maintain communication with their care team, often feeling vulnerable, patronised, and let down by a lack of acknowledgement of their expertise. These results will be used to inform the content of coproduction workshops aimed at developing a list of care recommendations for affected women. It will also inform future interventional studies aimed at improving outcomes for these women and their babies.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Our Patient and Public Involvement group were involved in the design of the study and the analysis and interpretation of the data, and a public study investigator was part of the author group.

Midwife continuity of care models versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women globally and there is a need to establish whether there are differences in effectiveness between midwife continuity of care models and other models of care. This is an update of a review published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of midwife continuity of care models with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (17 August 2022), as well as the reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife continuity of care models or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion criteria, scientific integrity, and risk of bias, and carried out data extraction and entry. Primary outcomes were spontaneous vaginal birth, caesarean section, regional anaesthesia, intact perineum, fetal loss after 24 weeks gestation, preterm birth, and neonatal death. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies involving 18,533 randomised women. We assessed all studies as being at low risk of scientific integrity/trustworthiness concerns. Studies were conducted in Australia, Canada, China, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. The majority of the included studies did not include women at high risk of complications. There are three ongoing studies targeting disadvantaged women. Primary outcomes Based on control group risks observed in the studies, midwife continuity of care models, as compared to other models of care, likely increase spontaneous vaginal birth from 66% to 70% (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.07; 15 studies, 17,864 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), likelyreduce caesarean sections from 16% to 15% (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99; 16 studies, 18,037 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and likely result in little to no difference in intact perineum (29% in other care models and 31% in midwife continuity of care models, average RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.12; 12 studies, 14,268 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may belittle or no difference in preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (6% under both care models, average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.16; 10 studies, 13,850 participants; low-certainty evidence). We arevery uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models on regional analgesia (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.92; 15 studies, 17,754 participants, very low-certainty evidence), fetal loss at or after 24 weeks gestation (average RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.13; 12 studies, 16,122 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and neonatal death (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.71; 10 studies, 14,718 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likely reduce instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum) from 14% to 13% (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.96; 14 studies, 17,769 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduceepisiotomy 23% to 19% (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91; 15 studies, 17,839 participants; low-certainty evidence). When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likelyresult in little to no difference inpostpartum haemorrhage (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.03; 11 studies, 14,407 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and admission to special care nursery/neonatal intensive care unit (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 13 studies, 16,260 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in induction of labour (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; 14 studies, 17,666 participants; low-certainty evidence), breastfeeding initiation (average RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12; 8 studies, 8575 participants; low-certainty evidence), and birth weight less than 2500 g (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 9 studies, 12,420 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models compared to other models of care onthird or fourth-degree tear (average RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.49; 7 studies, 9437 participants; very low-certainty evidence), maternal readmission within 28 days (average RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.96; 1 study, 1195 participants; very low-certainty evidence), attendance at birth by a known midwife (average RR 9.13, 95% CI 5.87 to 14.21; 11 studies, 9273 participants; very low-certainty evidence), Apgar score less than or equal to seven at five minutes (average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24; 13 studies, 12,806 participants; very low-certainty evidence) andfetal loss before 24 weeks gestation (average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.01; 12 studies, 15,913 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No maternal deaths were reported across three studies. Although the observed risk of adverse events was similar between midwifery continuity of care models and other models, our confidence in the findings was limited. Our confidence in the findings was lowered by possible risks of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision of some estimates. There were no available data for the outcomes: maternal health status, neonatal readmission within 28 days, infant health status, and birth weight of 4000 g or more. Maternal experiences and cost implications are described narratively. Women receiving care from midwife continuity of care models, as opposed to other care models, generally reported more positive experiences during pregnancy, labour, and postpartum. Cost savings were noted in the antenatal and intrapartum periods in midwife continuity of care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Women receiving midwife continuity of care models were less likely to experience a caesarean section and instrumental birth, and may be less likely to experience episiotomy. They were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth and report a positive experience. The certainty of some findings varies due to possible risks of bias, inconsistencies, and imprecision of some estimates. Future research should focus on the impact on women with social risk factors, and those at higher risk of complications, and implementation and scaling up of midwife continuity of care models, with emphasis on low- and middle-income countries.

Antepartum severe maternal morbidity: A population-based study of risk factors and delivery outcomes

BACKGROUND

Severe maternal morbidity (SMM) is a key indicator of maternal health. Generally explored without distinction by the timing of the event, it mainly reflects postpartum SMM. Although antepartum (pre-labour) SMM presents specific challenges in its need to optimise the risk-benefit balance for both mother and foetus, its features remain inadequately explored.

OBJECTIVES

We explored risk factors of antepartum SMM and described adverse delivery and neonatal outcomes associated with antepartum SMM.

METHODS

We designed a population-based nested case-control study based on data from the EPIMOMS study (119 maternity hospitals of 6 French regions, 2012-2013, N = 182,309 deliveries in the source cohort). This study included all women with antepartum SMM (cases, n = 601) compared to a randomly selected sample of women who gave birth without SMM in the same hospitals (controls, n = 3651). Antepartum SMM risk factors were identified with multivariable logistic regression following imputations for missing data.

RESULTS

Antepartum SMM complicated 0.33% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30, 0.36) of pregnancies. Antepartum SMM risk factors were maternal age ≥35 years (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.55, 95% CI 1.22, 1.97), increased body mass index (OR for 5 kg/m² increase, 1.24, 95% CI 1.14, 1.36), maternal birth in sub-Saharan Africa (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.29, 2.53), pre-existing medical condition (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.99, 3.30), nulliparity (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.83, 2.80), previous pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders (OR 4.94, 95% CI 3.36, 7.26), multiple pregnancy (OR 5.79, 95% CI 3.75, 7.26), irregular prenatal care (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.27, 2.72). For women with antepartum SMM, preterm delivery, neonatal mortality and transfer to the neonatal intensive care unit were 10 times more frequent than for controls. Emergency caesarean and general anaesthesia were more frequent in women with antepartum SMM.

CONCLUSIONS

Antepartum SMM is rare but associated with increased rates of adverse delivery and neonatal outcomes.

Monitored but not sufficiently guided - A qualitative descriptive interview study of maternity care experiences and needs in women with chronic medical conditions

OBJECTIVE

To explore maternity care experiences and needs of women with various types of chronic medical conditions receiving specialised maternity care. Design A qualitative descriptive study.

SETTING

A highly specialised hospital providing maternity care to women with high-risk pregnancies in Copenhagen, Denmark. Participants Fourteen purposefully selected women referred to specialist maternity care at a large tertiary hospital due to one or more chronic medical conditions.

METHODS

Individual in-depth interviews (n = 14) were performed between January 2018 and June 2019. Analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

One overarching theme was identified: Monitored but not sufficiently guided. Three main themes unfolding this overarching theme were: Chronic condition as determining pregnancy care, Childbearing woman as messenger and interpreter, and Feelings of abandonment after giving birth.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

Across various types of chronic medical conditions, women expressed a need for increased continuity in specialised maternity care. Healthcare professionals should help women with chronic medical conditions navigate the healthcare system and interpret complex information.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Pregnancy should be recognised as a significant life event, even though the childbearing woman is living with a chronic medical condition, and professionals should emphasise the aspects of pregnancy that develop uncomplicated. Information about the anticipated development of chronic medical conditions postpartum and concerns regarding breastfeeding could preferably be addressed during pregnancy. Continuity of care was particularly important to the women and could relieve some of the worrying women experienced during pregnancy.

Effects of a Midwife-Coordinated Maternity Care Intervention (ChroPreg) vs. Standard Care in Pregnant Women with Chronic Medical Conditions: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial

The proportion of childbearing women with pre-existing chronic medical conditions (CMC) is rising. In a randomized controlled trial, we aimed to evaluate the effects of a midwife-coordinated maternity care intervention (ChroPreg) in pregnant women with CMC. The intervention consisted of three main components: (1) Midwife-coordinated and individualized care, (2) Additional ante-and postpartum consultations, and (3) Specialized known midwives. The primary outcome was the total length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcomes measuring psychological well-being and satisfaction with maternity care, health utilization, and maternal and infant outcomes. A total of 362 women were randomized to the ChroPreg intervention (n = 131) or Standard Care (n = 131). No differences in LOS were found between groups (median 3.0 days, ChroPreg group 0.1% lower LOS, 95% CI −7.8 to 7%, p = 0.97). Women in the ChroPreg group reported being more satisfied with maternity care measured by the Pregnancy and Childbirth Questionnaire (PCQ) compared with the Standard Care group (mean PCQ 104.5 vs. 98.2, mean difference 6.3, 95% CI 3.0–10.0, p < 0.0001). In conclusion, the ChroPreg intervention did not reduce LOS. However, women in the ChroPreg group were more satisfied with maternity care.

Psychometric properties of the Five-item World Health Organization Well-being Index used in mental health services: Protocol for a systematic review

AIMS

To synthesize evidence of the psychometric properties of the Five-item World Health Organization Well-being Index in mental health settings and critically appraise the methodologies of the included studies.

DESIGN

Protocol for a systematic psychometric review.

METHODS

The review protocol has been registered in the International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews. The bibliographic databases MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science will be searched for relevant studies. The psychometric properties of each study will be evaluated according to the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurements Instruments.

DISCUSSION

The results of our psychometric review will synthesize the psychometric properties of the Five-item World Health Organization Well-being Index in mental health settings and identify possible gaps in the literature regarding methodological quality and its reliability, validity, and responsiveness to change.

IMPACT

The evaluation of patient well-being is important, and the Five-item World Health Organization Well-being Index is an increasingly used patient-reported outcome measure. It is simple to collect, free to use, and consists of five questions using positive health statements. Although the number of studies assessing the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the questionnaire is increasing worldwide, there is a need to summarize the existing evidence of the psychometric properties of this questionnaire. The proposed study's findings will contribute to future research recommendations and help midwives and nurses in different settings pick an effective, appropriate questionnaire to evaluate patient well-being.