ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2019
Determinants and underlying causes of frequent attendance in midwife-led care: an exploratory cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Perinatal outcomes of frequent attendance in midwifery care in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAn adequate number of prenatal consultations is beneficial to the health of the mother and fetus. Guidelines recommend an average of 5-14 consultations. Daily practice, however, shows that some women attend the midwifery practice more frequently. This study examined factors associated with frequent attendance in midwifery-led care.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study in a large midwifery practice in the Netherlands among low-risk women who started prenatal care in 2015 and 2016. Based on Andersen's behavioral model, we collected data on potential determinants from the digital midwifery's practice database. Prenatal healthcare utilization was measured by a revised version of the Kotelchuck Index, which measures a combination of care entry and numbers of visits. Logistic regression models were fitted to estimate the likelihood of frequent attendance compared to the recommended number of visits, adjusted for all relevant factors. Separate models were fitted on the non-referred and the referred group of obstetric-led care, as referral was found to be an effect modifier.
resultsThe prevalence of frequent attendance was 23% (243/1053), mainly caused by worries and/or vague complaints (44%; 106/243). Among non-referred women, 53% (560/1053), frequent attendance was associated with consultation with an obstetrician (OR = 3.99 (2.35-6.77)) and exposure to sexual violence (OR = 2.17 (1.11-4.24)). Among the referred participants, 47% (493/1053), frequent attendance was associated with a consultation with an obstetrician (OR = 2.75 (1.66-4.57)), psychosocial problems in the past or present (OR = 1.85 (1.02-3.35) or OR = 2.99 (1.43-6.25)), overweight (OR = 1.88 (1.09-3.24)), and deprived area (OR = 0.50 (0.27-0.92)).
conclusionOur exploratory study indicates that the determinants of frequent attendance in midwifery-led care differs between non-referred and referred women. Underlying causes for frequent attendance was mainly because of non-medical reasons. IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE: A trustful midwife-client relationship is known to be needed for clients such as frequent attenders to share more detailed, personal stories in case of vague complaints or worries, which is necessary to identify their implicit needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.