FIGO good practice recommendations on optimizing models of care for the prevention and mitigation of preterm birth.
FIGO guidelines
continuity of care
models of care
preterm birth
prevention
Journal
International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics
ISSN: 1879-3479
Titre abrégé: Int J Gynaecol Obstet
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0210174
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Jul 2024
24 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
14
06
2024
accepted:
19
06
2024
medline:
24
7
2024
pubmed:
24
7
2024
entrez:
24
7
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The global challenge of preterm birth persists with little or no progress being made to reduce its prevalence or mitigate its consequences, especially in low-resource settings where health systems are less well developed. Improved delivery of respectful person-centered care employing effective care models delivered by skilled healthcare professionals is essential for addressing these needs. These FIGO good practice recommendations provide an overview of the evidence regarding the effectiveness of the various care models for preventing and managing preterm birth across global contexts. We also highlight that continuity of care within existing, context-appropriate care models (such as midwifery-led care and group care), in primary as well as secondary care, is pivotal to delivering high quality care across the pregnancy continuum-prior to conception, through pregnancy and birth, and preparation for a subsequent pregnancy-to improve care to prevent and manage preterm birth.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Investigateurs
Catalina M Valencia González
(CM)
Dilly Anumba
(D)
Wondimu Gudu
(W)
Bo Jacobsson
(B)
Nancy Sierra Lozada
(NS)
Leticia Ojeda
(L)
Madhuri Patel
(M)
Andrew Shennan
(A)
Rodrigo Rigoni
(R)
Priya Soma-Pillay
(P)
Sherri Ann Suplido
(SA)
Ana Daneva
(A)
Sikolia Wanyonyi
(S)
Haim Abenhaim
(H)
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Références
PMNCH, World Health Organization, UNICEF, UNFPA. Born Too Soon: Decade of Action on Preterm Birth. WHO; 2023.
United Nations. Sustainable Development Goals. Accessed Januray 25, 2024. https://sdgs.un.org/goals
Medley N, Vogel JP, Care A, Alfirevic Z. Interventions during pregnancy to prevent preterm birth: an overview of cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;11(11):CD012505.
Campbell F, Salam S, Sutton A, et al. Interventions for the prevention of spontaneous preterm birth: a scoping review of systematic reviews. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e052576.
Care A, Nevitt SJ, Medley N, et al. Interventions to prevent spontaneous preterm birth in women with singleton pregnancy who are at high risk: systematic review and network meta‐analysis. BMJ. 2022;376:e064547.
Hall M, Valencia CM, Soma‐Pillay P, Luyt K, Jacobsson B, Shennan A. Effective and simple interventions to improve outcomes for preterm infants worldwide: the FIGO PremPrep‐5 initiative. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2024;165:929‐935.
Hofmeyr GJ, Black RE, Rogozinska E, et al. Evidence‐based antenatal interventions to reduce the incidence of small vulnerable newborns and their associated poor outcomes. Lancet. 2023;401:1733‐1744.
Seidler AL, Aberoumand M, Hunter KE, et al. Deferred cord clamping, cord milking, and immediate cord clamping at preterm birth: a systematic review and individual participant data meta‐analysis. Lancet. 2023;402:2209‐2222.
Marlow N, Bennett C, Draper ES, Hennessy EM, Morgan AS, Costeloe KL. Perinatal outcomes for extremely preterm babies in relation to place of birth in England: the EPICure 2 study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014;99:F181‐F188.
Anumba DOC, Jayasooriya SM, eds. Evidence Based Global Health Manual for Preterm Birth Risk Assessment. Springer; 2022.
Lasswell SM, Barfield WD, Rochat RW, Blackmon L. Perinatal regionalization for very low‐birth‐weight and very preterm infants: a meta‐analysis. JAMA. 2010;304:992‐1000.
Arya S, Naburi H, Kawaza K, et al. Immediate “Kangaroo Mother Care” and survival of infants with low birth weight. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:2028‐2038.
Donnolley N, Butler‐Henderson K, Chapman M, Sullivan E. The development of a classification system for maternity models of care. Health Inf Manag J. 2016;45:64‐70.
Sandall J, Soltani H, Gates S, Shennan A, Devane D. Midwife‐led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;4(4):CD004667.
McCourt C, Stevens T. Continuity of carer: what does it mean and does it matter to midwives and birthing women? Can J Midwifery Res Pract. 2005;4(3):2005‐2006.
D'Haenens F, Van Rompaey B, Swinnen E, Dilles T, Beeckman K. The effects of continuity of care on the health of mother and child in the postnatal period: a systematic review. Eur J Pub Health. 2020;30:749‐760.
Green JM, Renfrew MJ, Curtis PA. Continuity of carer: what matters to women? A review of the evidence. Midwifery. 2000;16:186‐196.
Hollander M, de Miranda E, van Dillen J, de Graaf I, Vandenbussche F, Holten L. Women's motivations for choosing a high risk birth setting against medical advice in the Netherlands: a qualitative analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017;17:423.
Heyeres M, McCalman J, Tsey K, Kinchin I. The complexity of health service integration: a review of reviews. Front Public Health. 2016;4:223.
Panjwani S, Garney WR, Wilson K, Goodson P, Hamie S. Continuity of maternal and infant care through integrated health service delivery networks in Latin America: a scoping review. Health Policy Plan. 2023;38:766‐776.
Western Cape Government. Health Service Integration: What Works. Accessed May 24, 2024. https://www.westerncape.gov.za/assets/departments/health/researchnewsletter2.pdf
Sandall J, Fernandez Turienzo C, Devane D, et al. Midwife continuity of care models versus other models of care for childbearing women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024;4:CD004667.
Lathrop B. A systematic review comparing group prenatal care to traditional prenatal care. Nurs Womens Health. 2013;17:118‐130.
Carter EB, Temming LA, Akin J, et al. Group prenatal care compared with traditional prenatal care: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128:551‐561.
Crockett AH, Chen L, Heberlein EC, et al. Group vs traditional prenatal care for improving racial equity in preterm birth and low birthweight: the Centering and Racial Disparities randomized clinical trial study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;227:893.e891‐893.e815.
Rayment‐Jones H, Dalrymple K, Harris J, et al. Project20: does continuity of care and community‐based antenatal care improve maternal and neonatal birth outcomes for women with social risk factors? A prospective, observational study. PLoS One. 2021;16:e0250947.
Brock E, Charlton KE, Yeatman H. Identification and evaluation of models of antenatal care in Australia—a review of the evidence. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;54:300‐311.
Valencia CM, Mol BW, Jacobsson B, FIGO Working Group for Preterm Birth. FIGO good practice recommendations on modifiable causes of iatrogenic preterm birth. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2021;155:8‐12.
Fernandez Turienzo C, Hull LH, Coxon K, et al. A continuity of care programme for women at risk of preterm birth in the UK: process evaluation of a hybrid randomised controlled pilot trial. PLoS One. 2023;18:e0279695.
Brigante L, Coxon K, Fernandez Turienzo C, Sandall J. “She was there all the time”. A qualitative study exploring how women at higher risk for preterm birth experience midwifery continuity of care. Women Birth. 2023;36:e397‐e404.
Robertson B, Aycock DM, Darnell LA. Comparison of centering pregnancy to traditional care in Hispanic mothers. Matern Child Health J. 2009;13:407‐414.
Grady MA, Bloom KC. Pregnancy outcomes of adolescents enrolled in a CenteringPregnancy program. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2004;49:412‐420.
Fernandez Turienzo C, Silverio SA, Coxon K, et al. Experiences of maternity care among women at increased risk of preterm birth receiving midwifery continuity of care compared to women receiving standard care: results from the POPPIE pilot trial. PLoS One. 2021;16:e0248588.
Forster DA, McLachlan HL, Davey MA, et al. Continuity of care by a primary midwife (caseload midwifery) increases women's satisfaction with antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum care: results from the COSMOS randomised controlled trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016;16:28.
Pace CA, Crowther S, Lau A. Midwife experiences of providing continuity of carer: a qualitative systematic review. Women Birth. 2022;35:e221‐e232.
Homer CS. Models of maternity care: evidence for midwifery continuity of care. Med J Aust. 2016;205:370‐374.
Fernandez Turienzo C, Bick D, Briley AL, et al. Midwifery continuity of care versus standard maternity care for women at increased risk of preterm birth: a hybrid implementation‐effectiveness, randomised controlled pilot trial in the UK. PLoS Med. 2020;17:e1003350.
Ashcroft B, Elstein M, Boreham N, Holm S. Prospective semistructured observational study to identify risk attributable to staff deployment, training, and updating opportunities for midwives. BMJ. 2003;327:584.
Benjamin Y, Walsh D, Taub N. A comparison of partnership caseload midwifery care with conventional team midwifery care: labour and birth outcomes. Midwifery. 2001;17:234‐240.
Donnellan‐Fernandez RE, Creedy DK, Callander EJ. Cost‐effectiveness of continuity of midwifery care for women with complex pregnancy: a structured review of the literature. Heal Econ Rev. 2018;8:32.
Ickovics JR, Kershaw TS, Westdahl C, et al. Group prenatal care and perinatal outcomes: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110(2 Pt 1):330‐339.
Picklesimer A, Heberlein E, Covington‐Kolb S. Group prenatal care: has its time come? Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2015;58:380‐391.