Retrospective Use of Patients' Characteristics to Assess Variation in Prenatal Care Utilization.


Journal

American journal of perinatology
ISSN: 1098-8785
Titre abrégé: Am J Perinatol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8405212

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
14 Aug 2023
Historique:
medline: 15 8 2023
pubmed: 15 8 2023
entrez: 14 8 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

 We used patients' medical and psychosocial risk factors to explore prenatal care utilization and health outcomes to inform prenatal care tailoring.  This retrospective cohort study assessed patients who gave birth at an academic institution from January 1 to December 31, 2018, using electronic health record (EHR) data. Patients were categorized into four phenotypes based on medical/psychosocial risk factors available in the EHR: Completely low risk; High psychosocial risk only; High medical risk only; and Completely high risk. We examined patient characteristics, visit utilization, nonvisit utilization (e.g., phone calls), and outcomes (e.g., preterm birth, preeclampsia) across groups.  Of 4,681 patients, the majority were age 18 to 35 (3,697, 79.0%), White (3,326, 70.9%), multiparous (3,263, 69.7%), and Completely high risk (2,752, 58.8%). More Black and Hispanic patients had psychosocial risk factors than White patients. Patients with psychosocial risk factors had fewer prenatal visits (10, interquartile range [IQR]: 8-12) than those without (11, IQR: 9-12). Patients with psychosocial risk factors experienced less time in prenatal care, more phone calls, and fewer EHR messages across the same medical risk group. Rates of preterm birth and gestational hypertension were incrementally higher with additional medical/psychosocial risk factors.  Data readily available in the EHR can assess the compounding influence of medical/psychosocial risk factor on patients' care utilization and outcomes. · Medical and psychosocial needs in pregnancy can inform patient phenotypes and are associated with prenatal care use and outcomes.. · Patient phenotypes are associated with prenatal care use and outcomes.. · Patients with high psychosocial risk spent less time in prenatal care and had more phone calls in pregnancy.. · Tailored prenatal care models may proactively address differences in patient's needs..

Identifiants

pubmed: 37579763
doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1771505
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Thieme. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

A.F.P. is a consultant for Maven. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest related to the subject matter of this manuscript.

Auteurs

Alex F Peahl (AF)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
University of Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan Program on Women's Healthcare Effectiveness Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Harini Pennathur (H)

Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Nicholas Zacharek (N)

Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Amanda Naccarato (A)

Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Hannah Heberle-Rose (H)

Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Jordan Goodman (J)

Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Roger D Smith (RD)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Amy Cohn (A)

Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Molly J Stout (MJ)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

A Mark Fendrick (AM)

University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Michelle H Moniz (MH)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
University of Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan Program on Women's Healthcare Effectiveness Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Classifications MeSH