Prisma Health Upstate, University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville, SC, USA.
Georgia Health Policy Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Matern Child Health J. 2019 Oct;23(10):1424-1433. doi: 10.1007/s10995-019-02795-4.
Objectives Perinatal Quality Collaboratives across the United States are initiating projects to improve health and healthcare for women and infants. We compared an evidence-based group prenatal care model to usual individual prenatal care on birth outcomes in a multi-site expansion of group prenatal care supported by a state-wide multidisciplinary Perinatal Quality Collaborative. Methods We analyzed 15,330 pregnant women aged 14-48 across 13 healthcare practices in South Carolina (2013-2017) using a preferential-within cluster matching propensity score method and logistic regression. Outcomes were extracted from birth certificate data. We compared outcomes for (a) women at the intent-to-treat level and (b) for women participating in at least five group prenatal care visits to women with less than five group visits with at least five prenatal visits total. Results In the intent-to-treat analyses, women who received group prenatal care were significantly less likely to have preterm births (absolute risk difference - 3.2%, 95% CI - 5.3 to - 1.0%), low birth weight births (absolute risk difference - 3.7%, 95% CI - 5.5 to - 1.8%) and NICU admissions (absolute risk difference - 4.0%, 95% CI - 5.6 to - 2.3%). In the as-treated analyses, women had greater improvements compared to intent-to-treat analyses in preterm birth and low birth weight outcomes. Conclusions for Practice CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care is effective across a range of real-world clinical practices for decreasing the risk of preterm birth and low birth weight. This is a feasible approach for other Perinatal Quality Collaboratives to attempt in their ongoing efforts at improving maternal and infant health outcomes.
美国各地的围产期质量合作组织正在启动项目,以改善妇女和婴儿的健康和医疗保健。我们比较了一种基于证据的小组产前护理模式与常规的个体产前护理,以改善在全州多学科围产期质量合作支持下的小组产前护理多站点扩展中的母婴结局。
我们使用偏好内聚类匹配倾向评分方法和逻辑回归分析了南卡罗来纳州 13 家医疗保健机构的 15330 名 14-48 岁的孕妇(2013-2017 年)的数据。结局从出生证明数据中提取。我们比较了意向治疗水平的妇女和(b)至少参加五次小组产前护理的妇女与少于五次小组产前护理但总共至少五次产前护理的妇女的结局。
在意向治疗分析中,接受小组产前护理的妇女早产的风险显著降低(绝对风险差异-3.2%,95%CI-5.3 至-1.0%)、低出生体重儿的风险降低(绝对风险差异-3.7%,95%CI-5.5 至-1.8%)和新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)入住率的风险降低(绝对风险差异-4.0%,95%CI-5.6 至-2.3%)。在治疗分析中,与意向治疗分析相比,妇女在早产和低出生体重结局方面有更大的改善。
以妊娠为中心的小组产前护理在一系列现实临床实践中是有效的,可以降低早产和低出生体重的风险。这是其他围产期质量合作组织在努力改善母婴健康结局时可以尝试的一种可行方法。