Group antenatal care: new pedagogic method for antenatal care—a pilot study

Wedin, Kathe; Molin, Johan; Svalenius, Elizabeth L. Crang

doi:10.1016/j.midw.2008.10.010

Cited by 36 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…With regards to parenthood preparation, parents thought there was a need for more-including greater discussion regarding changes of relationships and sexuality this finding could be discussed in relation to similar findings from a pilot study of antenatal group-based care, which reported that women wanted more information about the postnatal period (Wedin et al, 2008).…”

Section: Meeting Physical Needs and Preparing For Parenthoodmentioning

confidence: 75%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parents' experiences and perceptions of group-based antenatal care in four clinics in Sweden

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Meeting Physical Needs and Preparing For Parenthoodmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…The Swedish programmes took inspiration from CenteringPregnancy in the USA, but are mainly based on a Danish model (Wedin et al, 2008). The main difference compared to the CenteringPregnancy model is that the physical assessments and check-ups are provided individually.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parents' experiences and perceptions of group-based antenatal care in four clinics in Sweden

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although data are limited, elements considered essential for model fidelity 7,8 are sometimes dropped, 9–11 and such variation in implementation may be associated with variation in intervention efficacy. 10 A small body of existing literature suggests that greater fidelity to a structured intervention is associated with improvements in health and educational outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group prenatal care: model fidelity and outcomes

Novick

Reid

Lewis

et al. 2013

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care has been demonstrated to improve pregnancy outcomes. However, there is likely variation in how the model is implemented in clinical practice, which may be associated with efficacy, and therefore variation, in outcomes. We examined the association of fidelity to process and content of the CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care model with outcomes previously shown to be affected in a clinical trial: preterm birth, adequacy of prenatal care and breastfeeding initiation. Study Design Participants were 519 women who received CenteringPregnancy group prenatal care. Process fidelity reflected how facilitative leaders were and how involved participants were in each session. Content fidelity reflected whether recommended content was discussed in each session. Fidelity was rated at each session by a trained researcher. Preterm birth and adequacy of care were abstracted from medical records. Participants self-reported breastfeeding initiation at 6-months postpartum. Results Controlling for important clinical predictors, greater process fidelity was associated with significantly lower odds of both preterm birth (B=−0.43, Wald χ2=8.65, P=.001) and intensive utilization of care (B=−0.29, Wald χ2=3.91, P=.05). Greater content fidelity was associated with lower odds of intensive utilization of care (B=−0.03, Wald χ2=9.31, P=.001). Conclusion Maintaining fidelity to facilitative group processes in CenteringPregnancy was associated with significant reductions in preterm birth and intensive care utilization of care. Content fidelity also was associated with reductions in intensive utilization of care. Clinicians learning to facilitate group care should receive training in facilitative leadership, emphasizing the critical role that creating a participatory atmosphere can play in improving outcomes.

show abstract

“…We also need to identify “active ingredients” of Centering and to better understand the impact of modifying Centering on outcomes, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, women’s experience of care, clinicians and settings, and long-term sustainability. Furthermore, because sites and clinicians may modify Centering either in response to challenges they confront in implementing Centering or for a variety of other reasons (Wedin et al, 2010, Andersson et al, 2011, Gaudion et al, 2011), some versions of group prenatal care may not meet the criteria for being considered “Centering.” However, these non-Centering versions of group prenatal care may still improve outcomes over individual care, and studying these versions may help us understand which elements of group prenatal care truly improve outcomes. We therefore need to develop approaches for conducting research on both CHI-approved Centering sites and on other versions of group prenatal care.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%