PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9469270

A comparative evaluation of collaborative prenatal care.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an advanced-practice nurse-obstetrician collaborative prenatal practice. METHODS: A group of 194 consecutively enrolled medically low-risk obstetric patients was identified between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 1994 at Neighborhood Pregnancy Care, a collaborative-practice site. An equal number of medically low-risk patients attending the Louisiana State University obstetric clinic at the Medical Center of Louisiana at New Orleans was selected randomly from among those registering the same month. The two groups were compared on the primary outcome variable, low birth weight. Data were analyzed by chi2, Fisher exact test, t test, and regression models. RESULTS: We compared 179 collaborative-care and 181 university patients with retrievable information. By univariate analysis, collaborative-care patients more often were teenagers and black, and less likely to be married or employed. Collaborative-care patients had more prenatal visits and were more likely to participate in Medicaid, but less likely to deliver at the Medical Center of Louisiana at New Orleans. Birth weight and gestational age at delivery were greater. Both delivery before 37 weeks (7.3% versus 17.7%, P < .001) and birth weight less than 2500 g (8.9% versus 19.3%, P < .001) were less common. When differences identified at the initial obstetric visit were considered, multivariate weighted logistic regression confirmed the importance of prenatal care at the collaborative-practice program for low birth weight (odds ratio [OR] 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19, 0.71) and preterm delivery (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.16, 0.78). When all differences were entered, low birth weight remained a significantly less likely occurrence at the collaborative-practice site (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.23, 0.92). CONCLUSION: An advanced-practice nurse-obstetrician collaborative practice may be implemented successfully and lead to acceptable perinatal outcomes, as judged by low birth weight and prematurity.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M M Mvula, J M Miller. 1998. A comparative evaluation of collaborative prenatal care.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00649-2

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Challenges in drug development for muscle disease: a stakeholders' meeting.

Current treatment benefits for patients with muscle disease are limited, but progress in legislative and scientific initiatives have set the stage for the development of new therapies. The MD-CARE Act (Public Law 107-84), which allocates federal resources to muscular dystrophy, was approved by Congress and signed into law by the President of the United States in 2001. This has shifted the emphasis toward translational research. To facilitate a push toward therapy for muscle disorders, the Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA) sponsored a meeting with representatives from industry, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and other government agencies and academia. Each contributed in different ways. The FDA helped define the necessary data to support investigational new drug (IND) applications including the design of proof-of-principle studies, outcome measures for clinical trials, and the pathway for developing surrogate measures for fast-tracking promising new drugs. The NIH, other government agencies, and the MDA described potential funding sources for translational research. Industry delineated a complementary role with academia, and academic investigators elucidated the current strengths and weaknesses of available clinical endpoints. The meeting provided a format for communication for diverse disciplines that usually have no common meeting ground, helping to lay the foundation for bringing products to market in a timely fashion.

Academic Medical Centers↗

Reporting of adverse drug reactions: predictors of under-reporting in Malaysia.

BACKGROUND: Malaysia like many other countries worldwide uses spontaneous reporting systems as a mean of collecting data on suspected adverse drug reaction (ADR). However, compared to other countries, which use the system, the reporting rate in Malaysia is very low. Why some physicians do not report ADRs is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors, which would predict physicians' failure to send ADR reports. DESIGN AND SETTING: Face-to-face interview using a structured questionnaire involving physicians working at the University of Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia. RESULTS: About a third of the physicians in the Centre participated. Sixty-five of the 415 approached refused to participate. A high proportion of the respondents (81.4%) indicated that they had suspected an ADR but did not report it, while about 40% of the respondents were not aware of the existence of the national reporting system in Malaysia. Logistic regression modelling identified the variable 'ADR considered to be too trivial or too well known to report' as the strongest predictor of not reporting, followed by physicians' category and uncertainty that the reaction had been definitely caused by a drug. CONCLUSION: Important predictor variables, which limit physicians from reporting ADR in Malaysia, were related to uncertainty of types of reaction to report, lack of awareness about the existence, function and purpose of national ADR reporting. The findings could be useful for planning strategies to improve the reporting rate.

Academic Medical Centers↗