scholarly journals Planned use of long acting reversible postpartum contraception in low-risk women in CenteringPregnancy® group versus individual physician prenatal care

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Sarah Bakir ◽  
Tara Hoff ◽  
Petra Hahn ◽  
Colleen K Stockdale ◽  
Abbey Hardy-Fairbanks
2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Smith

ObjectiveTo assess postpartum contraceptive choices of women participating in group versus traditional prenatal care.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study assessing postpartum contraceptive choices of women participating in group versus traditional prenatal care. Patients were derived from a database of all deliveries from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2014 at Christiana Hospital in Newark, Delaware, USA. Within this database, group prenatal care patients were identified and a two-to-one matched set of similar traditional prenatal care patients was created. Contraceptive methods utilised by these women were ascertained via chart review. The proportion of women using each method in each care model was calculated. Multinomial logistic regression was carried out for statistical analysis.ResultsIncluded in the final analysis were 867 patients: 289 group and 587 traditional prenatal care participants. Groups were similar in selection of sterilisation, condoms, injection, and other short-acting hormonal contraceptive methods (a composite of patch, vaginal ring, and pills). Group prenatal care patients were more likely to utilise contraception postpartum (as measured by use of no method with AOR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.78, P=0.002), particularly long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.40, P=0.005). This difference was most pronounced for women aged 20–24 years (AOR 1.98, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.56).ConclusionParticipation in group prenatal care as opposed to traditional prenatal care increases use of postpartum contraception and increases uptake of LARCs. The association of group prenatal care participation with LARC use is particularly apparent for women aged 20–24 years.


2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (7) ◽  
pp. 769-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
E B Carter ◽  
K Barbier ◽  
R Sarabia ◽  
G A Macones ◽  
A G Cahill ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 131 ◽  
pp. 129S
Author(s):  
Nathaniel DeNicola ◽  
Sheetal Sheth ◽  
Kelly Leggett ◽  
Mark B. Woodland ◽  
Nihar Ganju ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 222 (5) ◽  
pp. 505-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Friedman Peahl ◽  
Michele Heisler ◽  
Lydia K. Essenmacher ◽  
Vanessa K. Dalton ◽  
Vineet Chopra ◽  
...  

1996 ◽  
Vol 129 (3) ◽  
pp. 470-471
Author(s):  
RS McDuffie ◽  
A Beck ◽  
K Bischoff ◽  
J Cross ◽  
M Orleans

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Tara Hoff ◽  
Petra Hahn ◽  
Deepti Sharma ◽  
Abbey J Hardy-Fairbanks ◽  
Colleen K Stockdale

2001 ◽  
Vol 185 (6) ◽  
pp. S160
Author(s):  
William Gilbert ◽  
Danielle Duenas ◽  
Beate Danielsen

2017 ◽  
Vol 129 ◽  
pp. 63S
Author(s):  
Tara Hoff ◽  
Petra Hahn ◽  
Jaimie Huntly ◽  
Deepti Sharma ◽  
Colleen Stockdale ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 166-168
Author(s):  
Gemina Doolub ◽  
Matthew J Daniels ◽  
Oliver Ormerod

Home birth is becoming increasingly popular. Labour in the privacy and comfort of a familiar environment has clear appeal. Home birth is usually as safe for low-risk women with appropriate prenatal care. Yet events during delivery can be unpredictable and may be stressful for unprepared family members. Here we report a case of Tako-tsubo cardiomyopathy, also known as broken-heart syndrome, in a relative attending an impromptu home delivery. Thus, while home delivery is generally safe for the mother we ask: is it safe for everyone involved?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document