The comparative effects of group prenatal care on psychosocial outcomes

被引:0
作者
Emily C. Heberlein
Amy H. Picklesimer
Deborah L. Billings
Sarah Covington-Kolb
Naomi Farber
Edward A. Frongillo
机构
[1] Clemson University,Department of Public Health Sciences, College of Health, Education, and Human Development
[2] Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,Greenville Health System
[3] University of South Carolina,Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health
[4] University of South Carolina,College of Social Work
来源
Archives of Women's Mental Health | 2016年 / 19卷
关键词
Prenatal care; Group prenatal care; CenteringPregnancy; Pregnancy-related distress; Prenatal coping; Psychosocial outcomes;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
To compare the psychosocial outcomes of the CenteringPregnancy (CP) model of group prenatal care to individual prenatal care, we conducted a prospective cohort study of women who chose CP group (N = 124) or individual prenatal care (N = 124). Study participants completed the first survey at study recruitment (mean gestational age 12.5 weeks), with 89 % completing the second survey (mean gestational age 32.7 weeks) and 84 % completing the third survey (6 weeks’ postpartum). Multiple linear regression models compared changes by prenatal care model in pregnancy-specific distress, prenatal planning-preparation and avoidance coping, perceived stress, affect and depressive symptoms, pregnancy-related empowerment, and postpartum maternal-infant attachment and maternal functioning. Using intention-to-treat models, group prenatal care participants demonstrated a 3.2 point greater increase (p < 0.05) in their use of prenatal planning-preparation coping strategies. While group participants did not demonstrate significantly greater positive outcomes in other measures, women who were at greater psychosocial risk benefitted from participation in group prenatal care. Among women reporting inadequate social support in early pregnancy, group participants demonstrated a 2.9 point greater decrease (p = 0.03) in pregnancy-specific distress in late pregnancy and 5.6 point higher mean maternal functioning scores postpartum (p = 0.03). Among women with high pregnancy-specific distress in early pregnancy, group participants had an 8.3 point greater increase (p < 0.01) in prenatal planning-preparation coping strategies in late pregnancy and a 4.9 point greater decrease (p = 0.02) in postpartum depressive symptom scores. This study provides further evidence that group prenatal care positively impacts the psychosocial well-being of women with greater stress or lower personal coping resources. Large randomized studies are needed to establish conclusively the biological and psychosocial benefits of group prenatal care for all women.
引用
收藏
页码:259 / 269
页数:10
相关论文
共 179 条
[1]  
Alexander GR(2001)Assessing the role and effectiveness of prenatal care: history, challenges, and directions for future research Public Health Rep 116 306-316
[2]  
Kotelchuck M(2006)Comparison of selected outcomes of CenteringPregnancy versus traditional prenatal care J Midwifery Womens Health 51 266-272
[3]  
Baldwin KA(2010)Development of the Barkin index of maternal functioning J Womens Health 19 2239-2246
[4]  
Barkin JL(2010)Assessment of functioning in new mothers J Womens Health 19 1493-1499
[5]  
Wisner KL(2014)The psychometric properties of the Barkin index of maternal functioning J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 43 792-802
[6]  
Bromberger JT(2007)Chronic stress and low birth weight neonates in a low-income population of women Obstet Gynecol 109 331-338
[7]  
Beach SR(2010)Optimism Clin Psychol Rev 30 879-889
[8]  
Terry MA(2012)Who’s stressed? Distributions of psychological stress in the United States in probability samples from 1983, 2006 and 2009 J Appl Soc Psychol 42 1320-1334
[9]  
Wisniewski SR(1998)The assessment of parent-to-infant attachment: development of a self-report questionnaire instrument J Reprod Infant Psychol 16 57-76
[10]  
Barkin JL(2012)Untreated prenatal maternal depression and the potential risks to offspring: a review Arch Womens Ment Health 15 1-14