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.

Perspectives of Certified Nurse-Midwives and Physicians on the Structural and Institutional Barriers that Contribute to the Reproductive Inequities of Black Birthing People in the San Francisco Bay Area

INTRODUCTION

Black birthing people in the United States disproportionately endure inequitable experiences and outcomes during pregnancy and childbirth via structural, interpersonal, and obstetric racism. In this study, the researchers explore provider perspectives of how racism is perpetuated in institutional perinatal and reproductive health care.

METHODS

Critical Race Theory, Reproductive Justice, and midwifery theory were operationalized through secondary thematic analysis of existing qualitative data from the Community Racial Equity and Training Interventions and Evaluation of Current and Future Healthcare Clinicians Study. Twenty-four perinatal providers (certified nurse-midwives [n = 7] and physicians [n = 17]) voluntarily participated in interviews. A comparative approach was used to determine how professional identity and model of care influence physicians' and certified nurse-midwives' perceptions of equity.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis produced 5 themes: racism as a comorbidity, health care systems' inability to address the needs of Black birthing people, health care systems prioritizing providers over patients are failed systems, patients are the experts in the optimal health care model, and benefits of interprofessional teams grounded in Reproductive Justice. Additionally, both physicians and midwives expressed a need for a new care model.

DISCUSSION

With these findings, our team proposes a modification of the midwifery model for application by all provider types that could radically shift the experience and outcomes of perinatal and reproductive health care and reduce mortality. Using a human rights approach to care, a Reproductive Justice-Public Health Critical Race praxis-informed midwifery model may be operationalized by all perinatal and reproductive health care providers. This novel model reflects an iterative process that may offer institutions and providers methods to build on past research supporting midwifery-centered care for improving outcomes for all patients by specifically focusing on improving care of Black birthing people. The implications of this work offer broad application in current clinical practice, quality improvement, research, technology, and patient resources.

Elevating Voices, Addressing Depression, Toxic Stress, and Equity Through Group Prenatal Care: A Pilot Study

Introduction

Elevating Voices, Addressing Depression, Toxic Stress and Equity (EleVATE) is a group prenatal care (GC) model designed to improve pregnancy outcomes and promote health equity for Black birthing people. This article outlines the foundational community-engaged process to develop EleVATE GC and pilot study results.

Methods

We used community-based participatory research principles and the Ferguson Commission Report to guide creation of EleVATE GC. The intervention, designed by and for Black birthing people, centers trauma-informed care, antiracism, and integrates behavioral health strategies into group prenatal care to address unmet mental health needs. Using a convenience sample of patients seeking care at one of three safety-net health care sites, we compared preterm birth, small for gestational age, depression scores, and other pregnancy outcomes between patients in individual care (IC), CenteringPregnancy™ (CP), and EleVATE GC.

Results

Forty-eight patients enrolled in the study (n=11 IC; n=14 CP; n=23 EleVATE GC) and 86% self-identified as Black. Patients participating in group prenatal care (EleVATE GC or CP) were significantly less likely to experience a preterm birth <34 weeks. Rates of small for gestational age, preterm birth <37 weeks, depression scores, and other pregnancy outcomes were similar across groups. Participants in CP and EleVATE GC were more likely to attend their postpartum visit and breastfeed at hospital discharge than those in IC.

Discussion

Our findings model a systematic approach to design a feasible, patient-centered, community-based, trauma-informed, antiracist intervention. Further study is needed to determine whether EleVATE GC improves perinatal outcomes and promotes health equity.

Inflammatory markers in serum and placenta in a randomized controlled trial of group prenatal care

BACKGROUND

Racial and socioeconomic disparities in preterm birth and small for gestational age births are growing in the United States, increasing the burden of morbidity and mortality particularly among Black women and birthing persons and their infants. Group prenatal care is one of the only interventions to show potential to reduce the disparity, but the mechanism is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this project was to identify if group prenatal care, when compared with individual prenatal care, was associated with a reduction in systemic inflammation during pregnancy and a lower prevalence of inflammatory lesions in the placenta at delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

The Psychosocial Intervention and Inflammation in Centering Study was a prospective cohort study that exclusively enrolled participants from a large randomized controlled trial of group prenatal care (the Cradle study, R01HD082311, ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02640638) that was performed at a single site in Greenville, South Carolina, from 2016 to 2020. In the Cradle study, patients were randomized to either group prenatal care or individual prenatal care, and survey data were collected during the second and third trimesters. The Psychosocial Intervention and Inflammation in Centering Study cohort additionally provided serum samples at these 2 survey time points and permitted collection of placental biopsies for inflammatory and histologic analysis, respectively. We examined associations between group prenatal care treatment and a composite of z scored serum inflammatory biomarkers (C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, interleukin-10, and tumor necrosis factor α) in both the second and third trimesters and the association with the prevalence of acute and chronic maternal placental inflammatory lesions. Analyses were conducted using the intent to treat principle, and the results were also examined by attendance of visits in the assigned treatment group (modified intent to treat and median or more number of visits) and were stratified by race and ethnicity.

RESULTS

A total of 1256 of 1375 (92%) Cradle participants who were approached enrolled in the Psychosocial Intervention and Inflammation in Centering Study, which included 54% of all the Cradle participants. The Psychosocial Intervention and Inflammation in Centering Study cohort did not differ from the Cradle cohort by demographic or clinical characteristics. Among the 1256 Psychosocial Intervention and Inflammation in Centering Study participants, 1133 (89.6%) had placental data available for analysis. Among those, 549 were assigned to group prenatal care and 584 of 1133 were assigned to individual prenatal care. In the intent to treat and modified intent to treat cohorts, participation in group prenatal care was associated with a higher serum inflammatory score, but it was not associated with an increased prevalence of placental inflammatory lesions. In the stratified analyses, group prenatal care was associated with a higher second trimester inflammatory biomarker composite (modified intent to treat: B=1.17; P=.02; and median or more visits: B=1.24; P=.05) among Hispanic or Latine participants.

CONCLUSION

Unexpectedly, group prenatal care was associated with higher maternal serum inflammation during pregnancy, especially among Hispanic or Latine participants.

The effects of CenteringPregnancy on maternal and infant health outcomes: a moderation analysis

BACKGROUND

CenteringPregnancy (CP) has been expected to produce beneficial outcomes for women and their infants. However, previous studies paid little attention to testing variations in CP's effects across women from different demographic groups. This study aimed to test how multiple demographic factors (obesity, race, ethnicity, marital status and socioeconomic status) moderate CP's effects on health outcomes.

METHODS

This study employed a quasi-experimental design. De-identified hospital birth data were collected from 216 CP participants and 1159 non-CP participants. We estimated the average treatment effect of CP on outcome variables as a baseline. Then we estimated the average marginal effect of CP by adding each of the moderating variables in regression adjustment models.

RESULTS

CP produced salutary effects among those who were obese or overweight and unmarried as well as women with lower socioeconomic status. These salutary effects were also strengthened as maternal age increased. However, CP was ineffective for Hispanic/Latinx women.

CONCLUSIONS

CP produced more beneficial health outcomes for high-risk women such as obese, unmarried women and those with lower socioeconomic status. These are meaningful findings from a public health perspective.

Randomized Controlled Trial on the Effect of Group Versus Individual Prenatal Care on Psychosocial Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of group prenatal care (GPNC) compared with individual prenatal care (IPNC) on psychosocial outcomes in late pregnancy, including potential differences in outcomes by subgroups.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

An academic medical center in the southeastern United States.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 2,348 women with low-risk pregnancies who entered prenatal care before 20 6/7 weeks gestation were randomized to GPNC (n = 1,175) or IPNC (n = 1,173) and stratified by self-reported race and ethnicity.

METHODS

We surveyed participants during enrollment (M = 12.21 weeks gestation) and in late pregnancy (M = 32.51 weeks gestation). We used standard measures related to stress, anxiety, coping strategies, empowerment, depression symptoms, and stress management practices in an intent-to-treat regression analysis. To account for nonadherence to GPNC treatment, we used an instrumental variable approach.

RESULTS

The response rates were high, with 78.69% of participants in the GPNC group and 83.89% of participants in the IPNC group completing the surveys. We found similar patterns for both groups, including decrease in distress and increase in anxiety between surveys and comparable levels of pregnancy empowerment and stress management at the second survey. We identified greater use of coping strategies for participants in the GPNC group, particularly those who identified as Black or had low levels of partner support.

CONCLUSION

Group prenatal care did not affect stress and anxiety in late pregnancy; however, the increased use of coping strategies may suggest a benefit of GPNC for some participants.

Well Child Visit Attendance for Group Prenatal Care Participants

OBJECTIVES

Participation in group prenatal care (GPNC) has been associated with increased attendance at prenatal, family planning and postpartum visits. We explored whether GPNC participation is associated with pediatric care engagement by measuring well-child visit (WCV) attendance among infants whose births were covered by Medicaid.

METHODS

We used Medicaid claims and vital statistics from the South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services and GPNC site participation records (2013-2018). We compared WCV attendance of CenteringPregnancy GPNC patients to a propensity-score matched cohort of individual prenatal care patients (IPNC) across 21 prenatal care practices using linear probability models. The primary outcome measure was attending 6 or more WCVs in the first 15 months, a Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) performance measure.

RESULTS

No differences in WCV were observed when comparing any exposure to GPNC (one or more sessions) to IPNC. We identified 3191 patients who participated in GPNC and matched these with 5184 in IPNC. Participation in 5 or more GPNC sessions compared to 5 or more prenatal visits was associated with higher rates of WCV compliance over the first 15 months (4.7 percentage point difference [95% CI 3.1-6.3%, P < .001]), with stronger associations between GPNC and WCV attendance for low birthweight infants, for Black infants, and for infants of mothers with no previous live births.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests GPNC may modestly influence WCV attendance. The potential mechanisms and dose response require further investigation. Gaps in WCV attendance compared to benchmarks persist regardless of PNC model.

EngagINg the COmmunity to Reduce Preterm birth via Adherence To an Individualized Prematurity Prevention Plan (INCORPorATe IP3): intervention development and future pilot study design

OBJECTIVE

Non-Hispanic Black birthing individuals are at increased risk of preterm birth compared to other racial and ethnic groups. In our clinical setting, we offer a tailored package of recommendations to reduce the risk of preterm birth known as an individualized prematurity prevention plan (IP3). Patient-centered, community engaged interventions that address patient-perceived barriers to preterm birth prevention are urgently needed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We engaged a group of stakeholders to develop a mutli-level (patient-centered and community-involved) intervention that will increase adherence to an individualized prematurity prevention plan (IP3) by addressing barriers identified during our prior qualitative studies.

RESULTS

The intervention includes trained doulas from a community-led, Black owned doula group. The doulas will moderate group prenatal social support sessions. In between the group sessions, participants will be encouraged to continue interacting with one another and the doulas using a private Facebook™ group page. We will pilot test the intervention in a cohort of pregnant, self-identified non-Hispanic Black patients with a history of prior preterm birth.

CONCLUSION

We present a novel, patient-centered, community engaged intervention to reduce preterm birth in high-risk non-Hispanic Black birthing individuals. If the intervention is feasible based on the pilot study findings, we anticipate conducting an appropriately powered study to determine whether the intervention achieves our goal of reducing preterm birth.

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.

Experiential Training Workshops for Group Antenatal Care in Malawi

The positive effects of the CenteringPregnancy group antenatal care (ANC) model on perinatal outcomes in the United States has led to its adaptation and implementation in many low- and middle-income countries. Facilitative discussions are a core component of this group ANC model. Facilitator training lays a critical foundation for delivery of this paradigm-shifting model as practitioners learn to adapt their approach to health education from didactive to facilitative. However, there is little rigorous research focused on best practices for training group health care facilitators and none that is guided by a theoretical framework. Kolb's experiential learning theory offers a theoretical framework to guide the development of training workshops that allow trainees to experience, reflect on, and practice the facilitation skills needed to deliver this evidence-based intervention. This article describes an experiential learning-based training workshop that was implemented as part of an ongoing effectiveness-implementation trial of a Centering-based group ANC model in Blantyre District, Malawi. We provide a blueprint for conducting group ANC facilitator trainings that, in addition to imparting knowledge, effectively builds confidence and buy-in to this paradigm-changing approach to ANC delivery. This blueprint can be adapted for use in designing and implementing group health care across settings in the United States and globally.

Melanated Group Midwifery Care: Centering the Voices of the Black Birthing Community

Access to safe and dignified pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum experiences is a fundamental right for all pregnant and postpartum people. In the United States, systemic racism fuels distrust and disengagement in a health care system that continues to dehumanize the Black community. The respectful maternity care literature explains how these systemic, structural, and institutional failings produce maternal health disparities and expose a pattern whereby Black women receive less adequate maternity care. The implementation of trustworthy policies and practices is urgently needed because no single intervention has or will substantially reduce maternal disparities. The purpose of this article is to describe a multicomponent maternity care innovation, Melanated Group Midwifery Care (MGMC). MGMC was codesigned with community partners and is responsive to the needs and desires of Black women, making MGMC a culturally adapted and patient-centered model. Racial concordance among care providers and patients, group prenatal care, perinatal nurse navigation, and 12 months of in-home postpartum doula support are 4 evidence-based interventions that are bundled in MGMC. We posit that a model that restructures maternity care to increase health system accountability and aligns with the needs and desires of Black pregnant and postpartum people will increase trust in the health care system and result in better clinical, physical, emotional, and social outcomes.

CenteringPregnancy in the Netherlands: Who engages, who doesn't, and why

BACKGROUND

CenteringPregnancy (CP), a model of group antenatal care, was implemented in 2012 in the Netherlands to improve perinatal health; CP is associated with improved pregnancy outcomes. However, motivating women to participate in CP can be difficult. As such, we explored the characteristics associated with CP uptake and attendance and then investigated whether participation differs between health care facilities. In addition, we examined the reasons why women may decline participation and the reasons for higher or lower attendance rates.

METHODS

Data from a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial were used. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine associations among women's health behavior, sociodemographic and psychosocial characteristics, health care facilities, and participation and attendance in CP.

RESULTS

A total of 2562 women were included in the study, and the average participation rate was 31.6% per health care facility (range of 10%-53%). Nulliparous women, women <26 years old or >30 years old, and women reporting average or high levels of stress were more likely to participate in CP. Participation was less likely for women who had stopped smoking before prenatal intake, or who scored below average on lifestyle/pregnancy knowledge. For those participating in CP, 87% attended seven or more out of the 10 sessions, and no significant differences were found in women's characteristics when compared for higher or lower attendance rates. After the initial uptake, group attendance rates remained high.

CONCLUSION

A more comprehensive understanding of the variation in participation rate between health care facilities is required, in order to develop effective strategies to improve the recruitment of women, especially those with less knowledge and understanding of health issues and smoking habits.

Emotional and Birth Outcomes Associated With Different Types of Prenatal Care for Women With Low Income

This article summarizes findings from the literature on the emotional and birth outcomes of women with low income receiving different types of prenatal care. This literature review included studies published between 2015 and 2020. The results indicated that women with low income have challenging experiences in traditional models of prenatal care. Evidence of improved birth outcomes with nontraditional prenatal care is mixed, but qualitative findings indicate that it is associated with better emotional outcomes for women with low income when compared to traditional prenatal care. Future research should investigate ways to improve the negative interpersonal and structural dimensions that can characterize prenatal care for women with low income.

Effects of March of Dimes Supportive Pregnancy Care on Social Support and Postpartum Depression

PURPOSE

Group prenatal care, which integrates medical care with patient education and empowerment in a group setting, has the potential to build social support among pregnant women and reduce the risk of postpartum depression (PPD). Past research on group care's effects on social support or PPD has produced inconsistent findings. Studies have tended to (1) examine direct effects on social support or PPD and (2) treat group care participation as a dichotomous variable. This study tests the hypothesis that group care has an indirect effect on PPD through its effect on social support. It uses both a dichotomous measure of group care participation and an ordinal measure of social contact with group members.

METHOD

This study used survey data from 199 women at two Tennessee health care sites who participated in traditional care (TC) or Supportive Pregnancy Care (SPC), a new group program developed by March of Dimes. Path analysis was employed, estimating standardized path coefficients with propensity score weighted multilevel modeling.

RESULTS

The study found no evidence of an indirect relationship between SPC and PPD symptoms when modeling the dichotomous measure. Modeling the ordinal measure revealed more favorable PPD outcomes among women reporting high group member contact (compared with TC) and adverse outcomes among women reporting low group member contact.

CONCLUSION

SPC may be useful for preventing PPD symptoms among women socially engaged with other group care patients. Given the adverse effect among women who do not engage with other group members, group facilitators should encourage women to interact outside of scheduled sessions.

The Influence of Four Constructs of Social Support on Pregnancy Experiences in Group Prenatal Care

Objective: This study aimed to identify the influence of the four constructs of social support on positive pregnancy experiences in CenteringPregnancy, a group prenatal care (GPNC) model. Methods: Using a qualitative descriptive design, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 women who had participated in at least 6 of 10 GPNC sessions at a family practice medicine residency. Participants were asked to describe their experiences in GPNC. Results: Using a standard content analysis, four constructs of social support (emotional, informational, instrumental, and appraisal) were identified through three major themes: (1) informational support, offered by peers in GPNC settings, promotes learning and prepares women for motherhood; (2) emotional and appraisal support, offered by peers in GPNC, improves emotional well-being and helps women build lasting, supportive connections with peers, and (3) emotional, informational, instrumental, and appraisal support work in tandem to create positive relationships between women and health care providers. Conclusion: Social support provided a means to a positive prenatal health care experience that facilitated the attainment of new knowledge and the formation of positive relationships with health care providers and peers. The findings of this study can provide health care providers with a framework to examine and enhance their practice and care of women in the perinatal period.

A paradigm shift to address racial inequities in perinatal healthcare

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

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

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

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

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

Evaluation of human immunodeficiency virus-adapted group prenatal care

BACKGROUND

Efforts to further decrease perinatal transmission of HIV include efforts to improve engagement and retention in prenatal care. Group prenatal care has been reported to have benefits in certain other high-risk groups of pregnant women but has not been previously evaluated in pregnant women living with HIV.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate changes in HIV knowledge, stigma, social support, depression, self-efficacy, and medication adherence after HIV-adapted group prenatal care.

STUDY DESIGN

All women living with HIV who presented for prenatal care at ≤30 weeks' gestation in Harris Health System (Houston, TX) between September 2013 and December 2017 were offered either group or individual HIV-focused prenatal care. Patients were recruited for the study at their initial prenatal visit. HIV topics, such as HIV facts, disclosure, medication adherence, safe sex and conception, retention in care, and postdelivery baby testing, were added to the standard CenteringPregnancy curriculum (ten 2-hour sessions per pregnancy). Knowledge and attitudes toward factors associated with adherence to HIV treatment regimens (stigma, loneliness, perceived social support, and depressive symptoms) were compared on written pre- and postsurveys. Surveys included 58 items derived from validated scales, with Likert and dichotomous responses. McNemar's test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and paired t-tests compared pre- and postsurvey responses.

RESULTS

A total of 190 women living with HIV received prenatal care in the clinic during the study period, 93 (49%) of whom participated in CenteringHIV. A total of 66 Centering participants enrolled in the study and 42 of those completed the pre- and postsurveys. Among women in the Centering program who completed pre- and postsurveys, significant differences were noted with improved perceived social support from family (P=.011) and friends (P=.005), decreased depression (Edinburg Postnatal Depression Scale, ≥10; 43% vs 18%; P<.001; Edinburg Postnatal Depression Scale score mean (standard deviation), 9.3 (5.8) pre vs 5.2 (4.9) post; P<.001), and decreased missed medication doses related to depressed mood (P=.014). No statistically significant differences were noted in HIV knowledge, HIV stigma, attitude, or self-efficacy.

CONCLUSION

HIV-focused group prenatal care may positively affect perceived social support and depression scores, factors that are closely associated with antiretroviral adherence and retention in the care for pregnant women living with HIV.

The effect of group prenatal care for women with diabetes on social support and depressive symptoms: a pilot randomized trial

Objective: To measure the impact of group prenatal care (GPC) on diabetes-specific peer support and depressive symptoms in women with pregnancies complicated by diabetes.Materials and methods: This is a planned secondary analysis of a two-center pilot randomized controlled trial conducted at Denver health (DH) and Washington University in St. Louis (WU) including Spanish (DH) or English (WU) speaking women with type 2 or gestational diabetes. Women were randomized to diabetes GPC or individual prenatal care (IPC) in the resident diabetes clinic. Participants completed an Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) at randomization, at 38-week gestation and at 6-12 weeks postpartum. The diabetes support scale (DSS), which includes 12 questions answered on a Likert scale, was administered at 38 weeks. Analysis was by intention to treat (clincaltrials.gov#NCT02444325).Results: A total of 84 women were consented and randomized. Six withdrew consent (two from each cohort) or were lost to follow-up (two from IPC), and three did not complete the 38-week assessment (two from GPC and one from IPC), resulting in primary outcome data available for 75 women: 38 in GPC and 37 in IPC. More women randomized to GPC reported composite positive peer support on the DSS (52.5 versus 26.3%; p < .02). There were no differences in EPDS scores, depression (EPDS >10), or rates of improved EPDS score from baseline to 38 weeks.Conclusion: GPC for women with diabetes is associated with improved diabetes-specific peer social support with no significant impact on depressive symptoms.Clinical trial registration: Clincaltrials.gov NCT02444.

A Model of Group Prenatal Care for Patients with Prenatally Diagnosed Fetal Anomalies

The model of group prenatal care was initially developed to include peer support and to improve education and health-promoting behaviors during pregnancy. This model has since been adapted for populations with unique educational needs. Mama Care is an adaptation of the CenteringPregnancy Model of prenatal care. Mama Care is situated within a national and international referral center for families with prenatally diagnosed fetal anomalies. In December 2013, the Center for Fetal Diagnosis and Treatment at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia began offering a model of group prenatal care to women whose pregnancies are affected by a prenatal diagnosis of a fetal anomaly. The model incorporates significant adaptations of CenteringPregnancy in order to accommodate these women, who typically transition their care from community-based settings to the Center for Fetal Diagnosis and Treatment in the late second or early third trimester. Unique challenges associated with caring for families within a referral center include a condensed visit schedule, complex social needs such as housing and psychosocial support, as well as an increased need for antenatal surveillance and frequent preterm birth. Outcomes of the program are favorable and suggest group prenatal care models can be developed to support the needs of patients with prenatally diagnosed fetal anomalies.

Model fidelity of group antenatal and postnatal care: a process analysis of the first implementation of this innovative service model by the Preterm Birth Initiative-Rwanda

Background: For a large trial of the effect of group antenatal care on perinatal outcomes in Rwanda, a Technical Working Group customized the group care model for implementation in this context. This process analysis aimed to understand the degree of fidelity with which the group antenatal care model was implemented during the trial period.

Methods: We used two discreet questionnaires to collect data from two groups about the fidelity with which the group antenatal care model was implemented during this trial period. Group care facilitators recorded descriptive data about each visit and self-assessed process fidelity with a series of yes/no checkboxes. Master Trainers assessed process fidelity with an 11-item tool using a 5-point scale of 0 (worst) to 4 (best).

Results: We analyzed 2763 questionnaires completed by group care facilitators that documented discreet group visits among pregnant and postnatal women and 140 questionnaires completed by Master Trainers during supervision visits. Data recorded by both groups was available for 84 group care visits, and we compared these assessments by visit. Approximately 80% of all group visits were provided as intended, with respect to both objective measures (e.g. group size) and process fidelity. We did not find reliable correlations between conceptually-related items scored by Master Trainers and self-assessment data reported by group visit facilitators.

Conclusions: We recommend both the continued participation of expert observers at new and existing group care sites and ongoing self-assessment by group care facilitators. Finally, we present two abbreviated assessment tools developed by a Rwanda-specific Technical Working Group that reviewed these research results.

Key Considerations for Implementing Group Prenatal Care: Lessons from 60 Practices

INTRODUCTION

Group prenatal care combines clinical care with peer support and education. Research has indicated neutral or positive results for group care when compared with traditional individual prenatal visits. A national initiative, Strong Start II, was implemented to determine if specific prenatal care interventions such as group prenatal care can reduce the rate of preterm birth, improve health outcomes, and lower costs. This study explored barriers to implementation and sustainability and strategies for overcoming barriers and sustaining the model.

METHODS

Results from prenatal care provider-level qualitative case studies for the independent evaluation of Strong Start were examined. Case studies for sites implementing group prenatal care were based on a total of 313 interviews with 441 Strong Start key informants (eg, prenatal care providers, project staff, and health administrators involved in group care) and 53 focus groups with 428 Strong Start participants from 2013 to 2016. Supplemental interviews with 25 additional stakeholders were also conducted. Case study data were queried using content analysis followed by a grounded theory-based analysis of these findings.

RESULTS

Barriers to implementation existed at patient, provider, administrator, system, and funding levels and included inflexible appointment times, lack of childcare, lack of appropriate meeting space, new scheduling and training needs, meeting requirements of graduate medical education programs, prenatal care provider and administrator reluctance to adopt new practices, and Medicaid payment policies. Sites newly implementing group prenatal care had varying degrees of success sustaining their programs. Both new and established sites identified provider champions and opt-out enrollment approaches as critical for maintaining buy-in.

DISCUSSION

Successful implementation of group prenatal care depends on systematic strategies at the practice, payer, provider, patient, and policy levels to implement, reimburse for, and sustain the model. Strategies for overcoming barriers can assist practices in offering this transformative approach, including practices with graduate medical education programs or those serving women with clinical, demographic, or psychosocial risk factors for preterm birth.

Women-centered care: Implementation of CenteringPregnancy® in The Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

In response to a relatively high perinatal mortality rate in The Netherlands, the Dutch Health Ministry recommended changes to maternity care, opening a pathway toward more integrated woman-centered services. Because of its potential to positively influence risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes, CenteringPregnancy (CP) group prenatal care was implemented.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study (n = 2318) and survey on women's experiences (n = 222) in eight primary care midwifery practices to investigate outcome differences between CP and traditional individual prenatal care. Data from the period 2011-2013 were analyzed.

RESULTS

Primiparous and multiparous CP women attended more prenatal care visits compared with women who received individual care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.23 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-1.29] and 1.29 [1.21-1.36]). Fewer primiparous CP women used pain relief during labor (0.56 [0.43-0.73]), and they initiated breastfeeding more often (1.74 [1.15-2.62]). Women participating in CP were more likely to feel that their wishes with respect to medication use (69.1% vs 54.4%, P = 0.039), physical activities (72.8% vs 52.5%, P = 0.008), and relaxation exercises (67.9% vs 35.6%, P ≤ 0.001) were listened to by care providers. They also felt more supported to actively participate in their care (89.6% vs 68.5%, P = 0.001) and felt more able to voice opinions about care (92.7% vs 73.9%, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The CP model is a good approach aligning with Dutch policy calling for women-centered care and responding to the needs of pregnant women. This study supports CP scale-up in The Netherlands and adds to the pool of international knowledge about CP implementation.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION

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

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

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

Women's Perceived Quality of Care and Self-Reported Empowerment With CenteringPregnancy Versus Individual Prenatal Care

OBJECTIVE

To compare perceived quality of prenatal care and pregnancy-related self-reported empowerment between women participating in CenteringPregnancy versus those receiving individual prenatal care provided by certified nurse-midwives in the same clinic.

DESIGN

Nonexperimental, longitudinal, descriptive feasibility study of two independent groups.

SETTING/LOCAL PROBLEM

A prenatal clinic in northern Texas where all care is provided by certified nurse-midwives.

PARTICIPANTS

The study assessed 51 women receiving self-selected prenatal care in the form of individual prenatal care (n = 37) or CenteringPregnancy (n = 14).

INTERVENTION/MEASUREMENTS

Outcomes analyzed included perceived quality of prenatal care and pregnancy-related self-reported empowerment.

RESULTS

The results showed no statistical significance between the individual prenatal care and CenteringPregnancy groups with regard to perceived quality of prenatal care or pregnancy-related self-reported empowerment.

CONCLUSION

CenteringPregnancy has the capability to provide women with quality of care equal to that achieved through traditional prenatal care. Despite the lack of statistically significant findings, this study exposes several areas of interest and provides guidance for future studies evaluating prenatal care.

Design and Implementation of a Group Prenatal Care Model for Somali Women at a Low-Resource Health Clinic

OBJECTIVE

To design and implement group prenatal care (GPC) for Somali women and to evaluate participants' satisfaction, knowledge, and care engagement.

DESIGN

Quality improvement project.

SETTING/LOCAL PROBLEM

A federally qualified health center in an urban Midwestern setting, which serves a largely East African immigrant and refugee population.

PARTICIPANTS

Pregnant Somali women at more than 20 weeks gestation receiving prenatal care at the project site. Many participants were non-English speaking.

INTERVENTION/MEASUREMENTS

While honoring the 13 essential elements of CenteringPregnancy, the model was adapted to the East African population at the project site and offered to all eligible women receiving individual prenatal care at the clinic. Women attended biweekly sessions, including individual assessment and education, exposure to integrative health therapies, and group discussion. Pre- and postintervention data were collected in surveys and in-depth interviews from March through August 2017.

RESULTS

Seventeen Somali women attended a median of two sessions (range = 1-7). Self-reported results for knowledge of safe exercise in pregnancy (p = .02), exclusive breastfeeding (p = .04), what happens in the hospital (p = .02), and stress management (p = .03) increased after GPC participation. Ninety-three percent of women preferred GPC to individual care.

CONCLUSION

When adapted to meet the needs of Somali women, GPC has the potential to improve care satisfaction, increase knowledge, and reduce stress during pregnancy and the postpartum period. This model may interest women and care providers in similar community health care settings.

Group Prenatal Care for Women Receiving Medication-Assisted Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder in Pregnancy: An Interprofessional Approach

Opioid use disorder among pregnant women is common and rapidly increasing nationwide. Group prenatal care is an innovative alternative to individual care for pregnant women and has been shown to improve women's and health care providers' satisfaction and adherence to care. We describe a novel group prenatal care program colocated in an opioid treatment program that integrates prenatal care, substance use disorder counseling, and medication-assisted treatment. Our interprofessional model draws on the unique contributions of physicians, midwives, nurses, and mental health professionals to address the complex needs of pregnant women with opioid use disorder. Participants reported increased trust and engagement with health care providers and peers, improved prenatal care and birth experience, and increased resilience for relapse prevention. Group prenatal care is an accepted and promising model for women with opioid use disorder in pregnancy and has the potential to improve outcomes for women and newborns.

Activity Tracking Devices in Group Prenatal Care: A Feasibility Study

To evaluate the feasibility (adherence to the study protocol and satisfaction) of using an activity tracking device (ATD) in group prenatal care. Women participated if they (1) were in group prenatal care, (2) owned a smartphone, and (3) had no activity restrictions. Women were instructed to wear and sync the ATD daily. Protocol adherence and satisfaction were assessed via surveys. Mixed models assessed the relationship between gestational age and ATD data. Self-reported energy expenditure from the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire (PPAQ) was compared with ATD-calculated energy expenditure. The baseline characteristics of the 49 women were as follows: 24 years old, prepregnancy body mass index 28, 80% Hispanic, 86% nulliparas, and 21 weeks of gestation. Of the 30 women who completed the follow-up survey, 47% self-reported wearing the ATD daily, 27% reported a lost or broken ATD, and 22% reported technical problems; however, 97% enjoyed wearing it, 100% would recommend it to a pregnant friend, and 77% thought it helped them reach activity goals. According to ATD data, the median active days were 47 (interquartile range [IQR] 21-79) and the median proportion of active days of potential days was 43.7% (IQR 15.4-77.1). For women who wore the ATD for the first 7 days, mean steps/day were 7574 (range 3076-15,828), active minutes/day were 277 (range 145-475), and sedentary hours/day were 12 (range 7.8-16.2). As gestational age increased, mean log steps decreased, mean active minutes decreased, and mean sedentary hours increased in unadjusted and adjusted models (p < 0.001 all comparisons). There were no differences in mean energy expenditure (MET-h/week) by PPAQ or ATD data at 28 weeks of gestation [231 (62-927 range) vs. 238 (212-290 range), p = 0.74] and at 36 weeks of gestation [145 (35-581 range) vs. 222 (196-272 range), p = 0.27]. Most women reported high satisfaction with an ATD in group prenatal care, yet adherence to the study protocol was low and ATD technical problems were common. As gestational age increased, activity decreased while sedentary time increased, suggesting that additional research is needed to find ways to engage women in physical activity during pregnancy.

Use of a Facilitated Group Process to Design and Implement a Group Antenatal and Postnatal Care Program in Rwanda

INTRODUCTION

The government of Rwanda is exploring strategies that may reduce the incidence of prematurity and low birth weight. Large-scale implementation of group antenatal care (ANC) and postnatal care (PNC) within the context of the Rwanda national health care system is under consideration. To launch a cluster randomized controlled trial of group ANC and PNC in 5 districts in Rwanda, the implementation team needed a customized group care model for this context and trained health care workers to deliver the program.

PROCESS

Adapting the group ANC and group PNC model for the Rwandan context was accomplished through a group process identical to that which is fundamental to group care. A technical working group composed of 10 Rwandan maternal-child health stakeholders met 3 times over the course of 3 months, for 4 to 8 hours each time. Their objectives were to consider the evidence on group ANC, agree on the priorities and constraints of their ANC delivery system, and ultimately define the content and structure of a combined group ANC and PNC model for implementation in Rwanda. The same group process was employed to train health care workers to act as group ANC facilitators.

OUTCOMES

A customized group ANC and PNC model and guidelines for its introduction were developed in the context of a cluster randomized controlled trial in 36 health centers. Descriptions of this model and the implementation plan are included in this article.

DISCUSSION

Our experience suggests that the group process fundamental to successful group ANC and PNC is an effective method to customize and implement this innovative health services delivery model in a new context and is instrumental in achieving local ownership.

The Mexican Experience Adapting CenteringPregnancy: Lessons Learned in a Publicly Funded Health Care System Serving Vulnerable Women

Group antenatal care is an innovative model of health care in which all components of antenatal care-clinical, educational, and supportive-happen in a group context with health care professionals as facilitators. CenteringPregnancy is the most studied model of group antenatal care, now widely implemented in the United States. This model has been shown to be effective in improving health and behavioral outcomes in the United States, but there is less known about the experience adapting group antenatal care in settings outside the US health care system. This article describes the adaptation of the CenteringPregnancy model to a Mexican context. We describe the Mexican health care context and our adaptation process and highlight key factors to consider when adapting the content and modality of the CenteringPregnancy model for diverse populations and health systems. Our findings are relevant to others seeking to implement group antenatal care in settings outside the US health care system.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

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

Association of Gestational Weight Gain with Prenatal Care Model

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to compare gestational weight gain (GWG) among women in group and traditional prenatal care.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of women who received prenatal care between 2011 and 2015 in a setting in which low-risk women had the option of group prenatal care. Women with height and initial and final weight were eligible. Women who chose group prenatal care were compared with women who chose traditional prenatal care and gave birth during the same study period. A propensity score analysis was used to create a matched control group from women who received traditional prenatal care. Bivariable comparisons of demographics, maternal characteristics, and GWG as a categorical variable (inadequate, adequate, or excessive per the 2009 Institute of Medicine guidelines) were performed with chi-square or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. A logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the association of group prenatal care with excessive GWG.

RESULTS

The final sample included 818 women who received either group or traditional prenatal care and were matched according to age, body mass index (BMI), nulliparity, and marital status. In the unadjusted analysis, women in group prenatal care had lower odds of excessive GWG (odds ratio [OR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57-0.99), but the statistical significance of this finding did not persist in the adjusted analysis (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.45-1.30). When the analyses were limited to women who had at least 5 group or traditional prenatal care visits, there were no differences in excessive GWG in unadjusted (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.59-1.16) or adjusted (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.24-3.96) analyses.

DISCUSSION

In this propensity score matched cohort study of predominantly Hispanic women, there were no differences in excessive GWG between women in group compared with traditional prenatal care. Further study is indicated to determine the relationship between prenatal care model and GWG outcomes.

Considerations for Implementing Group-Level Prenatal Health Interventions in Low-Resource Communities: Lessons Learned From Haiti

Haiti's high maternal and infant mortality rates evidence an urgent need for implementation of evidence-based strategies. A potential cost-effective strategy to mitigate high maternal and infant mortality rates is group prenatal care, an innovative model that combines antenatal clinical assessment with pregnancy education. Despite research demonstrating the effectiveness of this model in high-resource settings, less is known about the challenges of implementing it in low-resource settings. The purpose of this article is to provide recommendations for overcoming challenges of implementing group prenatal care in low-resources communities globally. Challenges addressed include language, literacy, space, cultural appropriateness of intervention content, and sociopolitical climate. Using examples from work conducted in Haiti, this information can be used to assist practitioners and researchers with overcoming challenges of implementing models of group care in international low-resource communities.

The Gestational Diabetes Group Program

The purpose of the Gestational Diabetes Group Program (GDGP) was to provide patients with diabetes self-management education that occurs in a supportive, prenatal group care setting. The Centering Pregnancy Interdisciplinary Model of Empowerment and the Chronic Care Model guided the program. The pilot project took place at an urban clinic that cares for a diverse, underserved population. The GDGP, a series of four prenatal group sessions after the diagnosis of gestational diabetes and one postpartum group, used an interprofessional/interdisciplinary approach to care with the groups cofacilitated by certified nurse-midwives, certified diabetes nurse-educators, and other community partners. The program was able to show statistically significant changes in knowledge and empowerment, optimal pregnancy outcomes, and high patient satisfaction.

Group prenatal care

Patients participating in group prenatal care gather together with women of similar gestational ages and 2 providers who cofacilitate an educational session after a brief medical assessment. The model was first described in the 1990s by a midwife for low-risk patients and is now practiced by midwives and physicians for both low-risk patients and some high-risk patients, such as those with diabetes. The majority of literature on group prenatal care uses CenteringPregnancy, the most popular model. The first randomized controlled trial of CenteringPregnancy showed that it reduced the risk of preterm birth in low-risk women. However, recent meta-analyses have shown similar rates of preterm birth, low birthweight, and neonatal intensive care unit admission between women participating in group prenatal care and individual prenatal care. There may be subgroups, such as African Americans, who benefit from this type of prenatal care with significantly lower rates of preterm birth. Group prenatal care seems to result in increased patient satisfaction and knowledge and use of postpartum family planning as well as improved weight gain parameters. The literature is inconclusive regarding breast-feeding, stress, depression, and positive health behaviors, although it is theorized that group prenatal care positively affects these outcomes. It is unclear whether group prenatal care results in cost savings, although it may in large-volume practices if each group consists of approximately 8-10 women. Group prenatal care requires a significant paradigm shift. It can be difficult to implement and sustain. More randomized trials are needed to ascertain the true benefits of the model, best practices for implementation, and subgroups who may benefit most from this innovative way to provide prenatal care. In short, group prenatal care is an innovative and promising model with comparable pregnancy outcomes to individual prenatal care in the general population and improved outcomes in some demographic groups.

Glycemic control, compliance, and satisfaction for diabetic gravidas in centering group care

PURPOSE

To determine if diabetic gravidas enrolled in Centering® group care have improved glycemic control compared to those attending standard prenatal care. To compare compliance and patient satisfaction between the groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of diabetics enrolled in centering group care from October 2013 to December 2015. Glycemic control, compliance and patient satisfaction (five-point Likert scale) were evaluated. Student's t-test, Chi-Square and mixed effects model were used to compare outcomes.

RESULTS

We compared 20 patients in centering to 28 standard prenatal care controls. Mean fasting blood sugar was lower with centering group care (91.0 versus 105.5 mg/dL, p =0.017). There was no difference in change in fasting blood sugar over time between the two groups (p = 0.458). The percentage of time patients brought their blood glucose logs did not differ between the centering group and standard prenatal care (70.7 versus 73.9%, p = 0.973). Women in centering group care had better patient satisfaction scores for "ability to be seen by a physician" (5 versus 4, p = 0.041) and "time in waiting room" (5 versus 4, p =0.001).

CONCLUSION

Fasting blood sugar was lower for patients in centering group care. Change in blood sugar over time did not differ between groups. Diabetic gravidas enrolled in centering group care report improved patient satisfaction.

A pilot study of prenatal care visits blended group and individual for women with low income

Healthy Pregnancy, Healthy Childbirth, Healthy Parenting (HPCP) is a blended prenatal care model that integrates group visits with individual prenatal visits. While group prenatal care has been found to have a positive impact on pregnancy outcomes, current models may not be feasible or desirable in all clinical settings. HPCP offers one educational group visit each trimester to improve knowledge of self-care during pregnancy and of childbirth and infant care. The program was piloted among women with low income in a southern metropolitan area. This article presents the findings of a pilot study that examined maternal knowledge acquisition and subsequent changes in self-efficacy and satisfaction with care. Suggestions for future use of a blended model for the delivery of prenatal care are shared.

Group prenatal care for women with gestational diabetes (.)

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine if group prenatal care affects the progression to A2 gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) when compared with conventional care for women with GDM.

METHODS

Prospective observational cohort of women diagnosed with GDM who attended group visits compared with a historical control group of women who received conventional obstetrical care in the year prior but would have met inclusion criteria for group care. The primary outcome was progression to A2 GDM. Secondary outcomes included antepartum, intrapartum and postpartum maternal outcomes and neonatal outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 165 subjects were included: 62 in group care and 103 in conventional care. Compared with patients with conventional care, group subjects were more likely to attend a postpartum visit (92% versus 66%; p = 0.002) and were almost 4 times more likely to receive recommended diabetes screening postpartum (OR 3.9, CI 1.8-8.6). Group subjects were much less likely to progress to A2 GDM (OR 0.15, CI 0.07-0.30). There were no differences in neonatal outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Group prenatal care for women with diabetes is associated with decreased progression to A2 GDM and improved postpartum follow-up for appropriate diabetes screening without significantly affecting obstetrical or neonatal outcomes.

The impact of group prenatal care on pregnancy and postpartum weight trajectories

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to investigate whether group prenatal care (Centering Pregnancy Plus [CP+]) has an impact on pregnancy weight gain and postpartum weight loss trajectories and to determine whether prenatal depression and distress might moderate these trajectories.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized trial of CP+ in 14 Community Health Centers and hospitals in New York City. Participants were pregnant women aged 14-21 years (n = 984). Medical record review and 4 structured interviews were conducted: in the second and third trimesters and 6 and 12 months postpartum. Longitudinal mixed modeling was utilized to evaluate the weight change trajectories in the control and intervention groups. Prenatal distress and depression were also assessed to examine their impact on weight change.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the intervention and control groups in baseline demographics. Thirty-five percent of the participants were overweight or obese, and more than 50% had excessive weight gain by Institute of Medicine standards. CP+ was associated with improved weight trajectories compared with controls (P < .0001): women at clinical sites randomized to group prenatal care gained less weight during pregnancy and lost more weight postpartum. This effect was sustained among women who were categorized as obese based on prepregnancy body mass index (P < .01). Prenatal depression and distress were significantly associated with higher antepartum weight gain and postpartum weight retention. Women with the highest levels of depression and prenatal distress exhibited the greatest positive impact of group prenatal care on weight trajectories during pregnancy and through 12 months postpartum.

CONCLUSION

Group prenatal care has a significant impact on weight gain trajectories in pregnancy and postpartum. The intervention also appeared to mitigate the effects of depression and prenatal distress on antepartum weight gain and postpartum weight retention. Targeted efforts are needed during and after pregnancy to improve weight gain trajectories and overall health.

Women's Perceptions Using the CenteringPregnancy Model of Group Prenatal Care

A qualitative nonexperimental thematic analysis was conducted at a hospital-based midwifery practice to explore the views of participants in group prenatal care and its impact on pregnancy, birth, and postnatal care. Ten women and three support people, recruited through purposive sampling, shared their feedback on the program. The findings conveyed three broad themes: program experience, midwife relationship, and support. Women enjoyed the opportunity for in-depth learning, and peer-group support led to normalizing of pregnancy concerns. Having support people as participants also helped during pregnancy, birth, and child care. The findings showed the enhanced opportunity for education, learning, and interpersonal support provided by CenteringPregnancy to expectant mothers had a positive impact on their pregnancy experiences.

The impact of Centering Pregnancy Group Prenatal Care on postpartum family planning

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to evaluate the impact of group prenatal care (GPNC) on postpartum family-planning utilization.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort of women continuously enrolled in Medicaid for 12 months (n = 3637) was used to examine differences in postpartum family-planning service utilization among women participating in GPNC (n = 570) and those receiving individual prenatal care (IPNC; n = 3067). Propensity scoring methods were used to derive a matched cohort for additional analysis of selected outcomes.

RESULTS

Utilization of postpartum family-planning services was higher among women participating in GPNC than among women receiving IPNC at 4 points in time: 3 (7.72% vs 5.15%, P < .05), 6 (22.98% vs 15.10%, P < .05), 9 (27.02% vs 18.42%, P < .05), and 12 (29.30% vs 20.38%, P < .05) months postpartum. Postpartum family-planning visits were highest among non-Hispanic black women at each interval, peaking with 31.84% by 12 months postpartum. After propensity score matching, positive associations between GPNC and postpartum family-planning service utilization remained consistent by 6 (odds ratio [OR], 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.92), 9 (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.08-1.90), and 12 (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.10-1.90) months postpartum.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate the potential that GPNC has to positively influence women's health outcomes after pregnancy and to improve the utilization rate of preventive health services. Utilization of postpartum family-planning services was highest among non-Hispanic black women, further supporting evidence of the impact of GPNC in reducing health disparities. However, despite continuous Medicaid enrollment, postpartum utilization of family-planning services remained low among all women, regardless of the type of prenatal care they received.

Exploring the group prenatal care model: a critical review of the literature

Few studies have compared perinatal outcomes between individual prenatal care and group prenatal care. A critical review of research articles that were published between 1998 and 2009 and involved participants of individual and group prenatal care was conducted. Two middle range theories, Pender's health promotion model and Swanson's theory of caring, were blended to enhance conceptualization of the relationship between pregnant women and the group prenatal care model. Among the 17 research studies that met inclusion criteria for this critical review, five examined gestational age and birth weight with researchers reporting longer gestations and higher birth weights in infants born to mothers participating in group prenatal care, especially in the preterm birth population. Current evidence demonstrates that nurse educators and leaders should promote group prenatal care as a potential method of improving perinatal outcomes within the pregnant population.

Outcomes of Latina women in CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care compared with individual prenatal care

INTRODUCTION

CenteringPregnancy is a client-centered model of group prenatal care that brings women together into small groups to receive care through assessment, education, and support. As Spanish-speaking CenteringPregnancy groups become more common, outcomes of Latinas who attend these groups must be assessed. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to compare pregnancy outcomes of Latina women who completed CenteringPregnancy in a public health clinic with women who completed individual care in the same clinic during the same time.

METHODS

Medical charts were reviewed retrospectively to examine differences in pregnancy outcomes and maternal factors in both prenatal care groups. Latina Spanish-speaking women who completed CenteringPregnancy were matched with Latina Spanish-speaking women who completed individual care within the same time frame. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine maternal and birth outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 487 patient charts were obtained for data collection (CenteringPregnancy n = 247, individual n = 240). No differences in low-birth-weight or preterm births were observed between the groups. Compared with women in individual care, women in CenteringPregnancy had higher odds of giving birth vaginally (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-5.36), attending prenatal care visits (aOR, 11.03; 95% CI, 4.53-26.83), attending postpartum care visits (aOR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.20-4.05), and feeding their infants formula only (aOR, 6.07; 95% CI, 2.57-14.3). Women in CenteringPregnancy also had lower odds of gaining below the recommended amount of gestational weight (aOR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.78).

DISCUSSION

Women in CenteringPregnancy had higher health care utilization, but there were no differences in preterm birth or low birth weight. Randomized studies are needed to eliminate selection bias.

Does the CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care program reduce preterm birth? The conclusions are premature

Prenatal care is promoted as a means to a healthy pregnancy outcome. In the United States great resources have been spent to expand the availability of a program of prenatal care, but without evidence for its effectiveness in the general population. Despite greater access to prenatal care over the last several decades, there has been no improvement in obstetric outcomes, such as preterm delivery. The CenteringPregnancy program of group prenatal visits is a novel form of prenatal care that, according to several studies, has been said to improve satisfaction with prenatal visits and with pregnancy outcomes. A careful reading of the studies shows that those goals are yet to be achieved. Innovation is welcome and essential, but larger studies are needed to achieve statistical significance to demonstrate improved outcome.

Promoting Healthy Pregnancies Through Perinatal Groups: A Comparison of CenteringPregnancy(R) Group Prenatal Care and Childbirth Education Classes

CenteringPregnancy(R) group prenatal care is growing in popularity and has commonalities with childbirth education classes. In order for leaders of childbirth education classes to best serve their clients' needs, it is important to be aware of new, emerging models of prenatal care such as CenteringPregnancy. This article provides an overview of CenteringPregnancy and similarities and differences between CenteringPregnancy and childbirth education classes. Providers of prenatal education, whether it is within CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care or in childbirth education classes, have a common important aim: promoting positive perinatal outcomes.