Pregnancy outcomes of adolescents enrolled in a CenteringPregnancy program

Adolescent pregnancy remains a significant social, economic, and health issue in the United States. The unique developmental needs of the pregnant adolescent require attention when designing prenatal care services. The CenteringPregnancy model of group prenatal care provides education and support for young women in an active and developmentally appropriate environment. Thirteen groups of adolescents (N = 124) have completed the Centering program at the Teen Pregnancy Center at Barnes Jewish Hospital in St. Louis, Missouri. Evaluation data suggest that the model has encouraged excellent health care compliance, satisfaction with prenatal care, and low rates of preterm birth and low birth weight infants.     

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.     

CenteringPregnancy and the current state of prenatal care

Prenatal care is often credited with improving pregnancy outcomes. Yet rates of low birthweight (LBW) and prematurity have risen in recent decades, calling into question the efficacy of traditional prenatal routines. Proposals have included broadening the objectives of prenatal care beyond prevention of LBW and enriching care to provide education and support for pregnant women. CenteringPregnancy, an innovative model of prenatal care that integrates extensive health education and group support with the standard prenatal exam, incorporates many of these elements. Impediments to wider implementation of CenteringPregnancy are explored, as well as proposals for addressing these challenges.     

Birth Outcomes Associated with Receipt of Group Prenatal Care Among Low‐Income Hispanic Women

Introduction: Although Hispanic women in the United States have preterm birth and low‐birth‐weight rates comparable to non‐Hispanic white women, their rates fall short of 2010 Healthy People goals, with variability found across states. This study examined the effectiveness of the CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care model in reducing preterm birth and low‐birth‐weight rates for Hispanic women. Methods: Pregnant Hispanic women at less than or equal to 20 weeks, gestation initiating prenatal care between January 2008 to July 2009 at 2 Palm Beach County, Florida, public health clinics selected either group or traditional prenatal care. Data on neonatal birth weight and gestational age were obtained through abstraction of Palm Beach County Health Department medical records. Records were abstracted for 97% of CenteringPregnancy (n = 150) and 94% of traditional care (n = 66) participants. Results: A statistically significant difference was found in the percentage of women giving birth to preterm neonates (5% group prenatal care vs 13% traditional care; P= .04). There were no statistically significant differences in the percentage of women having a low‐birth‐weight neonate when group and traditional care participants were compared. Discussion: The CenteringPregnancy model holds promise for improving the birth outcomes of Hispanic women. Future research should be conducted with larger sample sizes to replicate study findings using experimental designs and incorporating formal cost‐effectiveness analyses.     

Introduction of CenteringPregnancy in a Public Health Clinic

CenteringPregnancy is a promising group visit prenatal care innovation that provides substantial health promotion content. Elements unique to group care include peer support and self‐management training and activities. CenteringPregnancy was introduced at a large public health clinic serving predominantly low‐income African American pregnant women. All prenatal care at this clinic was provided by certified nurse‐midwives, and all providers were trained in the CenteringPregnancy model. One hundred and ten women received prenatal care in CenteringPregnancy groups. Focus groups of pregnant women, providers, and health center staff reported that the program benefited women despite implementation challenges such as scheduling changes. Compared to women in individual care, women in CenteringPregnancy had significantly more prenatal visits, increased weight gain, increased breast feeding rates, and higher overall satisfaction. This pilot project demonstrated that CenteringPregnancy can be implemented in a busy public health clinic serving predominantly low‐income pregnant women and is associated with positive health outcomes.     

Redesigning prenatal care through CenteringPregnancy

CenteringPregnancy is a model of group prenatal care that provides more than 20 hours of contact time between the childbearing care provider and a cohort of pregnant women with similar due dates. During this time, each woman has the opportunity to build community with other pregnant women, learn self-care skills, get assurance about the progression of her pregnancy, and gain knowledge about pregnancy, birth, and parenting. Ten essential elements have been defined, which contribute to the success of this model of prenatal care delivery. These elements correspond with the Institute of Medicine's 2001 challenge to improve the quality of health care in the United States. Foundational perspectives provide potential explanations for the model's growing influence and success. Implications for clinical practice and further research to link it with perinatal health outcomes are suggested.     

Prenatal care: limitations and opportunities

Prenatal care is a venerable tradition in the U.S. health care system and one that deserves critical examination. Inordinate amounts of public and personal resources are expended on a tradition of care that has not proven itself equal to current perinatal prevention challenges. In this article, the evolution of prenatal care is reviewed, its efficacy is critiqued, and efforts at restructuring the content and processes of care are examined. Three promising alternatives to the dominant medical model are described: the comprehensive prenatal care approach illustrated by many publicly funded prenatal clinics, the prenatal empowerment model as exemplified by midwifery care, and the prenatal group model as illustrated by CenteringPregnancy. Nurses are called upon to champion prenatal options for women.     

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. (BIRTH 40:1 March 2013)     

“I Wasn't Alone”—A Study of Group Prenatal Care in the Military

The military has recognized that health and quality of life for service members are closely tied to the resources for their families, including how they are cared for during pregnancy and childbirth. However, there has been little examination of women's experience with different models of prenatal care (PNC) in military settings. The purpose of this article is to describe the results of a qualitative study of women's experiences with the CenteringPregnancy model of group PNC compared to individual PNC in two military health care settings. This clinical trial enrolled 322 women who were randomized into group or individual PNC at two military treatment facilities. Qualitative interviews were completed with 234 women during the postpartum period. Interpretative narrative and thematic analysis was used to identify three themes: 1) “I wasn't alone”—the experience with group PNC; 2) “I liked it but…”—recommendations to improve group PNC; and 3) “They really need to listen”—general concerns across the sample about PNC. Greatest concerns of women in individual PNC included lack of continuity and time with the provider. Our military families must be assured that their health care system meets their needs through personal and family‐centered care. Group PNC offers the potential for continuity of provider while also offering community with other women. In the process, women gain knowledge and power as a health care consumer.     

CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care: Promoting relationship-centered care

CenteringPregnancy is an innovative model of group prenatal care that has been implemented at more than 100 prenatal care sites since 1995. CenteringPregnancy provides group prenatal care that is relationship centered, nurturing and transforming relationships among women, their families, and health care professionals. Complete prenatal care is provided in a group setting. Prenatal assessment, education, and support occur in a facilitative environment. The model offers effective and efficient care that is sustainable and can enhance the health of women, their families, health care providers, and communities.     

Evaluation of a community intervention for promotion of safe motherhood in Eritrea

Introduction: We evaluated a community‐based intervention to promote safe motherhood, focusing on knowledge and behaviors that may reduce maternal mortality and birth complications. The intervention aimed to increase women's birth preparedness, knowledge of birth danger signs, use of antenatal care services, and birth at a health care facility. Methods: Volunteers from a remote rural community in Northern Eritrea were trained to lead participatory educational sessions on safe motherhood with women and men. The evaluation used a quasiexperimental design (nonequivalent group pretest‐posttest) including cross‐sectional surveys with postpartum women (pretest n = 466, posttest n = 378) in the intervention area and in a similar remote rural comparison area. Results: Women's knowledge of birth danger signs increased significantly in the intervention area but not in the comparison area. There was a significant increase in the proportion of women who had the recommended 4 or more antenatal care visits during pregnancy in the intervention area (from 18% to 80%, P < .001), although this proportion did not change significantly in the comparison area (from 53% to 47%, P= .194). There was a greater increase in birth in a health care facility in the intervention area. Discussion: Participatory sessions led by community volunteers can increase safe motherhood knowledge and encourage use of essential maternity services.     

Factors Associated With Prenatal Care Use Among Peripartum Women in the Mother-Infant Rapid Intervention at Delivery Study

Objective: To evaluate factors associated with receiving prenatal care among women who present in labor without human immunodeficiency virus documentation using the results of a previous study, Mother-Infant Rapid Intervention at Delivery.
Design: Prospective, multicenter study.
Setting: Eighteen hospitals in the United States.
Participants: The present analysis is based on 667 peripartum women who completed a face-to-face interview after delivery. For purposes of this analysis, human immunodeficiency virus-infected and human immunodeficiency virus-uninfected women were considered together as the "study group."
Methods: The original study, Mother-Infant Rapid Intervention at Delivery, offered rapid human immunodeficiency virus testing to women in labor without human immunodeficiency virus testing documentation at 18 hospitals in the United States. This secondary study evaluated factors related to prenatal care, among participants who agreed to an interview after delivery.
Results: Interviews were completed by 667 women. Of these, 26.8% reported no prenatal care before admission to labor and delivery. These women were more likely to have been born in the United States, have other children, used alcohol, and reported being unhappy. Those who reported receiving prenatal care were more likely to have had Medicaid, stronger social support, and reported good health.
Conclusion: Women who are unlikely to receive prenatal care lack social support and are more likely to have additional social stressors. Medicaid may provide an important safety net to enhance access to care, because those with Medicaid were more likely to receive prenatal care. Further research is necessary to identify nontraditional models of care to enhance outreach to women at risk for no prenatal care.     

Time of Pregnancy Recognition and Prenatal Care Use: A Population‐based Study in the United States

Background: A woman who does not recognize her pregnancy early may not initiate prenatal care early. This study examined the relationship between the time of pregnancy recognition and the time of initiation of prenatal care, and the number of prenatal visits among women of childbearing age. Methods: This study analyzed the Pregnancy Risk Assessment and Monitoring System (PRAMS) data for the United States. The analysis sample was representative of resident women of childbearing age in 29 U.S. states who had live births within 2 to 6 months before being contacted. The data were weighed to reflect the complex survey design of the PRAMS, and binary and multinomial logistic regressions were used for the analyses. Results: Most (92.5%) of the 136,373 women in the study had recognized their pregnancy by 12 weeks of gestation, and 80 percent initiated prenatal care within the first trimester. Early pregnancy recognition was associated with significantly increased odds of initiating prenatal care early (OR = 6.05, p < 0.01), after controlling for sociodemographic and prior birth outcome data, and was also associated with lower odds of having fewer than the recommended number of prenatal visits and higher odds of having more than the recommended prenatal visits (OR: <11 visits = 0.71 and >15 visits = 1.17, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Early pregnancy recognition was associated with improved timing and number of prenatal care visits. Promotion of early pregnancy recognition could be a means of improving birth outcomes by encouraging and empowering women to access prenatal care at a critical point in fetal development. (BIRTH 37:1 March 2010)     

Exploring Dental Care Misconceptions and Barriers in Pregnancy

Abstract: Background: Poor oral health is increasingly linked to adverse pregnancy outcomes, including preterm birth and low‐birthweight infants. Little is known about childbearing women’s experiences in obtaining dental care. The objective of this study was to explore Florida women’s experience of barriers in obtaining dental care before and during their pregnancies. Methods: Study data were derived from a larger data set of a study that examined barriers to prenatal care. One month after giving birth face‐to‐face interviews were conducted with 253 African American women, 18 to 35 years old, who were residents of one of three Florida counties. Interview questions about women’s experiences on obtaining oral health care before and during pregnancy, and recall of guidance about oral health care during prenatal visits were transcribed and analyzed qualitatively. Through subject‐level content analysis, key themes were assessed about the participants’ perspectives on obtaining oral health care before and during pregnancy. Results: Most participants did not obtain dental care and did not recall receiving dental information during prenatal visits. Barriers to dental care included lack of insurance, difficulty in finding a dentist, low priority given to dental care, misconceptions about the safety and appropriateness of dental care during pregnancy, and sporadic anticipatory guidance during prenatal care. Conclusions: Misconceptions about the appropriateness of oral health care during pregnancy may affect women’s access to and use of this care. Given the implications of poor oral health on possible adverse birth outcomes and its larger connection with the general health of mothers and babies, attention to oral health misconceptions and barriers is warranted. (BIRTH 37:4 December 2010)     

Exploring the associations between intimate partner violence victimization during pregnancy and delayed entry into prenatal care: Evidence from a population-based study in Bangladesh

ObjectiveIntimate partner violence (IPV) during pregnancy can have serious health consequences for mothers and newborns. The aim of the study is to explore: 1) the influence of experiencing IPV during pregnancy on delayed entry into prenatal care; and 2) whether women's decision-making autonomy and the support for traditional gender roles act to mediate or moderate the relationship between IPV and delayed entry into prenatal care.Designcross-sectional survey. Multivariate logistic regression models were estimated that control for various socio-demographic and pregnancy related factors to assess whether women who experienced IPV during pregnancy were more likely to delay entry into prenatal care compared with women who had not experienced IPV. The influence of traditional gender roles acceptance and decision-making autonomy were examined both as independent variables and in interaction with IPV, to assess their role as potential mediators or moderators.SettingChandpur district, Bangladesh.Participantsthe sample comprised of 426 Bangladeshi women, aged 15–49 years. Postpartum mothers who visited vaccinations centres to receive their children's vaccinations constitute the sampling frame.Resultsalmost 70% of the women surveyed reported patterns consistent with delayed entry into prenatal care. Accounting for the influence of other covariates, women who experienced physical IPV during pregnancy were 2.61 times more likely (95% CI [1.33, 5.09]) to have delayed entry into prenatal care than their counterparts who did not report physical IPV. Neither sexual nor psychological IPV victimization during pregnancy was linked with late entry into prenatal care. Both gender role attitudes and levels of autonomy mediate the effect of IPV on prenatal care.Key conclusionsthe results suggest that the high rates of IPV in Bangladesh have effects that can compromise women's health seeking behaviour during pregnancy, putting them and their developing fetus at risk. Specifically, Bangladeshi women who experience physical IPV during pregnancy are more likely to delay or forgo prenatal care, an effect that is further magnified by cultural ideals that emphasize women's traditional roles and limit their autonomy.Implications for practicethis study reinforces the need to detect and assist women suffering IPV, not only to offer them help and support but also to increase entry into prenatal care. Healthcare professionals involved in obstetrics and midwifery need to be aware of the risk factors of IPV during pregnancy and be able to identify women who are at risk for delayed entry into prenatal care.     

CenteringParenting: An Innovative Dyad Model for Group Mother‐Infant Care

CenteringParenting is a group model that brings a cohort of 6 to 7 mothers and infants together for care during the first year of life. During 9 group sessions the clinician provides well‐baby care and also attends to the health, development, and safety issues of the mother. Ideally, CenteringParenting provides continuity of care for a cohort of women who have received care in CenteringPregnancy, group prenatal care that is 10 sessions throughout the entire pregnancy and that leads to community building, better health outcomes, and increased satisfaction with prenatal care. The postpartum year affects the entire family, but especially the mother, who is redefining herself and her own personal goals. Issues of weight/body image, breastfeeding, depression, contraception, and relationship issues all may surface. In traditional care, health resources for support and intervention are frequently lacking or unavailable. Women's health clinicians also note the loss of contact with women they have followed during the prenatal period, often not seeing a woman again until she returns for another pregnancy. CenteringParenting recognizes that the health of the mother is tied to the health of the infant and that assessment and interventions are more appropriate and efficient when done in a dyad context. Facilitative leadership, rather than didactic education, encourages women to fully engage in their care, to raise issues of importance to them, and to discuss concerns within an atmosphere that allows for the surfacing of culturally appropriate values and beliefs. Implementing the model calls for system changes that are often significant. It also requires the building of a substantial team relationship among care providers. This overview describes the CenteringParenting mother‐infant dyad care model with special focus on the mother and reviews the perspectives and experiences of staff from several practice sites.     

An Update on Current Prenatal Testing Options: First Trimester and Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

Prenatal genetic testing is rapidly evolving and requires that prenatal care providers stay up‐to‐date with accurate, evidence‐based knowledge. Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT), first trimester maternal serum markers, and fetal nuchal translucency are the most recently developed screening tests added to the testing repertoire for detection of chromosomal disorders such as trisomy 21 (Down syndrome). NIPT is a new, highly accurate technique that uses maternal serum and is rapidly being introduced as a first trimester screening tool and increasingly being requested by pregnant women. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends that all pregnant women be offered first and second trimester screening options, regardless of risk status, but does not yet recommend NIPT. It is important for prenatal care providers to be aware of and understand these testing options in order to assist women and their families in making well‐informed decisions during pregnancy. The purpose of this article is to update midwives and other prenatal care providers on the current prenatal genetic testing options available and how to appropriately offer and discuss them with their clients. We discuss how these tests work; what to do with the results; and most importantly, how to support and communicate accurate information to women and families as they navigate through an increasingly complicated array of testing choices.     

Travel distance to prenatal care and high blood pressure during pregnancy

Objective: To assess whether poor geographic accessibility to prenatal care, as indicated by long distance trips to prenatal care, produced high blood pressure (HPB) during pregnancy.

Methods: Using the 2007 Los Angeles Mommy and Baby Study for women without hypertension prior to pregnancy (n = 3405), we compared self-reported HBP by travel distance to prenatal care controlling for age, race/ethnicity, marital status, education, household income, weight status, and physical activity.

Results: Results of the multilevel logistic regression shows traveling more than 50 mi to prenatal care is associated with an increased odds for having HPB during pregnancy (odds ratio [OR] = 2.867, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.079,7.613), as compared with a travel distance shorter than 5 mi. Traveling 5–14 mi (OR = 0.917, 95% CI = 0.715–1.176), 15–29 mi (OR = 0.955, 95% CI = 0.634–1.438), or 30–50 mi (OR = 1.101, 95% CI = 0.485–2.499) were not significantly associated with more risk of HBP during pregnancy.

Conclusion: To our knowledge, no previous studies have examined the association between poor geographic accessibility to care and the possible harms of travel burdens for pregnant women. Future research that replicates these findings can assist in developing recommendations for pregnant women and health-care accessibility.