Suppr超能文献

足月分娩的低风险女性中群组式护理与传统产前护理的比较:一项回顾性队列研究。

Group versus traditional prenatal care in low-risk women delivering at term: a retrospective cohort study.

作者信息

Carter E B, Barbier K, Sarabia R, Macones G A, Cahill A G, Tuuli M G

机构信息

Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA.

Barnes Jewish Hospital, Department of Ambulatory Services, St Louis, MO, USA.

出版信息

J Perinatol. 2017 Jul;37(7):769-771. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.33. Epub 2017 Mar 30.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Group prenatal care (GC) models are receiving increasing attention as a means of preventing preterm birth; yet, there are limited data on whether group care improves perinatal outcomes in women who deliver at term. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our institutional experience with GC over the past decade and test the hypothesis that GC, compared with traditional individual care (TC), improves perinatal outcomes in women who deliver at term.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective cohort study of women delivering at term who participated in GC compared with TC. A group of 207 GC patients who delivered at term from 2004 to 2014 were matched in a 1:2 ratio to 414 patients with term singleton pregnancies who delivered at our institution during the same period by delivery year, maternal age, race and insurance status. The primary outcome was low birth weight (<2500 g). Secondary outcomes included early term birth (37.0 to 38 6/7 weeks), 5 min APGAR score <7, special care nursery admission, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, neonatal demise, cesarean section and number of prenatal visits. Outcomes were compared between the two groups using univariable statistics.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between the two matched groups. GC was associated with a significant reduction in low birth weight infants compared with TC (11.1% vs 19.6%; relative risk (RR) 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.87). Patients in GC were significantly less likely than controls to require cesarean delivery, have low 5 min APGAR scores and need higher-level neonatal care (NICU: 1.5% vs 6.5%; RR 0.22; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.72). There were no significant differences in rates of early term birth and neonatal demise.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-risk women participating in GC and delivering at term had a lower risk of low birth weight and other adverse perinatal outcomes compared with women in TC. This suggests GC is a promising alternative to individual prenatal care to improve perinatal outcomes in addition to preterm birth.

摘要

目的

作为预防早产的一种手段,群体产前护理(GC)模式正受到越来越多的关注;然而,关于群体护理能否改善足月分娩女性的围产期结局的数据有限。本研究的目的是评估我们机构在过去十年中GC的经验,并检验与传统个体护理(TC)相比,GC能改善足月分娩女性围产期结局的假设。

研究设计

我们对参与GC与TC的足月分娩女性进行了一项回顾性队列研究。将2004年至2014年期间足月分娩的207例GC患者按1:2的比例与同期在我们机构足月单胎妊娠分娩的414例患者进行匹配,匹配因素包括分娩年份、产妇年龄、种族和保险状况。主要结局是低出生体重(<2500g)。次要结局包括早期足月分娩(37.0至38 6/7周)、5分钟阿氏评分<7、入住特殊护理病房、入住新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)、新生儿死亡、剖宫产及产前检查次数。使用单变量统计方法比较两组的结局。

结果

两个匹配组的基线特征相似。与TC相比,GC与低出生体重儿显著减少相关(11.1%对19.6%;相对风险(RR)0.57;95%置信区间(CI)0.37至0.87)。GC组患者剖宫产、5分钟阿氏评分低及需要更高水平新生儿护理的可能性显著低于对照组(NICU:1.5%对6.5%;RR 0.22;95%CI 0.07至0.72)。早期足月分娩率和新生儿死亡率无显著差异。

结论

与TC组女性相比,参与GC并足月分娩的低风险女性低出生体重及其他不良围产期结局的风险更低。这表明,除预防早产外,GC是改善围产期结局的一种有前景的个体产前护理替代方案。

相似文献

8
Neonatal outcome and its relationship with maternal age.新生儿结局及其与母亲年龄的关系。
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1991 Aug;31(3):209-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.1991.tb02782.x.

引用本文的文献

9
Experiential Training Workshops for Group Antenatal Care in Malawi.马拉维小组产前护理体验式培训研讨会。
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2022 Nov;67(6):759-769. doi: 10.1111/jmwh.13436. Epub 2022 Nov 25.

本文引用的文献

2
Analysis of matched case-control studies.匹配病例对照研究分析
BMJ. 2016 Feb 25;352:i969. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i969.
3
The comparative effects of group prenatal care on psychosocial outcomes.小组产前护理对心理社会结局的比较效果。
Arch Womens Ment Health. 2016 Apr;19(2):259-69. doi: 10.1007/s00737-015-0564-6. Epub 2015 Aug 11.
10
Introduction of CenteringPregnancy in a public health clinic.在公共卫生诊所引入“聚焦孕期”项目。
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2009 Jan-Feb;54(1):27-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2008.05.008.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验