Reduced Compared With Traditional Schedules for Routine Antenatal Visits: A Systematic Review
- PMID: 37290105
- DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005193
Reduced Compared With Traditional Schedules for Routine Antenatal Visits: A Systematic Review
Abstract
Objective: To assess differences in maternal and child outcomes in studies comparing reduced routine antenatal visit schedules with traditional schedules.
Data sources: A search was conducted of PubMed, Cochrane databases, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov through February 12, 2022, searching for antenatal (prenatal) care, pregnancy, obstetrics, telemedicine, remote care, smartphones, telemonitoring, and related terms, as well as primary study designs. The search was restricted to high-income countries.
Methods of study selection: Double independent screening was done in Abstrackr for studies comparing televisits and in-person routine antenatal care visits for maternal, child, health care utilization, and harm outcomes. Data were extracted into SRDRplus with review by a second researcher.
Tabulation, integration, and results: Five randomized controlled trials and five nonrandomized comparative studies compared reduced routine antenatal visit schedules with traditional schedules. Studies did not find differences between schedules in gestational age at birth, likelihood of being small for gestational age, likelihood of a low Apgar score, likelihood of neonatal intensive care unit admission, maternal anxiety, likelihood of preterm birth, and likelihood of low birth weight. There was insufficient evidence for numerous prioritized outcomes of interest, including completion of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists-recommended services and patient experience measures.
Conclusion: The evidence base is limited and heterogeneous and allowed few specific conclusions. Reported outcomes included, for the most part, standard birth outcomes that do not have strong plausible biological connection to structural aspects of antenatal care. The evidence did not find negative effects of reduced routine antenatal visit schedules, which may support implementation of fewer routine antenatal visits. However, to enhance confidence in this conclusion, future research is needed, particularly research that includes outcomes of most importance and relevance to changing antenatal care visits.
Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, CRD42021272287.
Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Financial Disclosure Alex Friedman Peahl is a paid consultant for Maven Clinic. The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest.
Similar articles
-
Televisits Compared With In-Person Visits for Routine Antenatal Care: A Systematic Review.Obstet Gynecol. 2023 Jul 1;142(1):19-29. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005194. Epub 2023 Jun 7. Obstet Gynecol. 2023. PMID: 37290109
-
Schedule of Visits and Televisits for Routine Antenatal Care: A Systematic Review [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2022 Jun. Report No.: 22-EHC031. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2022 Jun. Report No.: 22-EHC031. PMID: 35862565 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
Changes to Prenatal Care Visit Frequency and Telehealth: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.Obstet Gynecol. 2023 Feb 1;141(2):299-323. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005046. Epub 2023 Jan 4. Obstet Gynecol. 2023. PMID: 36649343
-
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
-
Group versus conventional antenatal care for women.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Feb 4;2015(2):CD007622. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007622.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015. PMID: 25922865 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Osterman MJK. Births: provisional data for 2020. Vital Statistics Rapid Release no. 12. National Center for Health Statistics; 2021. doi: 10.15620/cdc:104993
-
- American Academy of Pediatrics and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Guidelines for perinatal care, 8th ed. Accessed December 13, 2022. https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/physician-faqs/-/media/3a22e15...
-
- World Health Organization. WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience. Accessed December 13, 2022. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/250796/9789241549912-en...
-
- Prevention of Rh D alloimmunization. Practice Bulletin No. 181. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2017;130:e57–70. doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000002232 - DOI
-
- Gestational diabetes mellitus. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 190. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2018;131:e49–64. doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000002501 - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials
