|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: BMJ article on AN visitsFrom: Malcolm Griffiths (Malcolm@mgriff22.demon.co.uk)Sat May 2 05:07:12 1998
Sorry for delay. Perversely now the BMJ has a complete electronic version on line, they seem to cover less well papers from before their total coveragre cut-off, which previously were selectively available on- line. Here is the Pub.Med. print-out regarding the study. I don't think it is possible to view the complete paper on-line anymore.
-- BMJ 1996 Mar 2;312(7030):546-553 A randomised controlled trial comparing two schedules of antenatal visits: the antenatal care project. Sikorski J, Wilson J, Clement S, Das S, Smeeton N Antenatal Care Project, Department of General Practice, United Medical and Dental Schools, London. OBJECTIVE--To compare the clinical and psychological effectiveness of the traditional British antenatal visit schedule (traditional care) with a reduced schedule of visits (new style care) for low risk women, together with maternal and professional satisfaction with care. DESIGN-- Randomised controlled trial. SETTING--Places in south east London providing antenatal care for women receiving shared care and planning to deliver in one of three hospitals or at home. SUBJECT--2794 women at low risk fulfilling the trial's inclusion criteria between June 1993 and July 1994. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Measures of fetal and maternal morbidity, health service use, psychosocial outcomes, and maternal and professional satisfaction. RESULTS--Pregnant women allocated to new style care had fewer day admissions (0.8 v 1.0; P=0.002) and ultrasound scans (1.6 v 1.7; P=0.003) and were less often suspected of carrying fetuses that were small for gestational age (odds ratio 0.73; 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.99). They also had some poorer psychosocial outcomes; for example, they were more worried about fetal wellbeing antenatally and coping with the baby postnatally, and they had more negative attitudes to their babies, both in pregnancy and postnatally. These women were also more dissatisfied with the number of visits they received (odds ratio 2.50; 2.00 to 3.11). CONCLUSIONS-- Patterns of antenatal care involving fewer routine visits for women at low risk may lead to reduced psychosocial effectiveness and dissatisfaction with frequency of visits. The number of antenatal day admissions and ultrasound scans performed may also be reduced. For the variables reported, the visit schedules studied are similar in their clinical effectiveness. Uncertainty remains as to the clinical effectiveness of reduced visit schedules for rare pregnancy problems. Publication Types: * Clinical trial * Randomized controlled trial Comments: * Comment in: BMJ 1996 Mar 2;312(7030):524-5 * Comment in: BMJ 1996 Jul 20;313(7050):167; discussion 169 * Comment in: BMJ 1996 Jul 20;313(7050):167-8; discussion 169 * Comment in: BMJ 1996 Jul 20;313(7050):168; discussion 169 PMID: 8595286, UI: 96177499
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 05:27:51 2009 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.