No abstract

Children from economically disadvantaged families experience worse cognitive, psychiatric, and medical outcomes compared to more affluent youth. Preclinical models suggest some of the adverse influence of disadvantage could be transmitted during gestation via maternal immune activation, but this hypothesis has not been tested in humans. It also remains unclear whether prenatal interventions can mitigate such effects. To fill these gaps, we conducted two studies. Study 1 characterized the socioeconomic conditions of 79 women during pregnancy. At delivery, placenta biopsies and umbilical blood were collected for transcriptional profiling. Maternal disadvantage was associated with a transcriptional profile indicative of higher immune activation and slower fetal maturation, particularly in pathways related to brain, heart, and immune development. Cord blood cells of disadvantaged newborns also showed indications of immaturity, as reflected in down-regulation of pathways that coordinate myeloid cell development. These associations were independent of fetal sex, and characteristics of mothers (age, race, adiposity, diabetes, pre-eclampsia) and babies (delivery method, gestational age). Study 2 performed the same transcriptional analyses in specimens from 20 women participating in CenteringPregnancy, a group-based psychosocial intervention, and 20 women in traditional prenatal care. In both placenta biopsies and cord blood, women in CenteringPregnancy showed up-regulation of transcripts found in Study 1 to be most down-regulated in conjunction with disadvantage. Collectively, these results suggest socioeconomic disparities in placental biology are evident at birth, and provide clues about the mechanistic origins of health disparities. They also suggest the possibility that psychosocial interventions could have mitigating influences.

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.