ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Evaluation of satisfaction on additional postpartum care - a comparative, multicentre study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA growing body of knowledge is questioning the timing of postpartum care (PPC) and suggesting a structural change. The primary aim was to evaluate individuals' satisfaction with additional PPC, and the secondary aim was to identify different needs postpartum.
methodsThis comparative study was conducted in six maternity clinics in Gothenburg, Sweden 2019-2020. A total of 1159 eligible individuals were enrolled. An intervention model of care was evaluated, where the intervention group received two postpartum care compared to standard care, one visit (seven weeks postpartum) to their midwives. The participants answered questionnaires in connection to all postpartum care visits and at one-year postpartum a follow-up questionnaire was sent out.
resultsThe data from a total of 958 of 1159 participants (82.7%) were analysed: 447 of 554 (80.7%) in the intervention group vs 511 of 605 (84.4%) in the standard group. The participants in the intervention group reported satisfaction with the early, additional visit 413/444 (93%); where primiparous individuals reported a higher appreciation compared to parous individuals; 223/233 (95.7%) vs 190/211 (90.0%), P = 0.051. The three-weeks postpartum visit was perceived as timely, 434/441 (98.4%). Participants attending the clinic situated in a low socioeconomic status area were less likely to report a preference for additional visits. Nearly half of the participants in the standard group 201/466 (43%) expressed a preference towards an additional and early visit and this was more common among primiparous, 127/254 (50%) vs parous 74/212 (34.9%) P = 0.001. Those in the standard group who expressed a need for earlier support reported a wish for discussing abdominal/vaginal problems and experience of giving birth. Primiparous 73/127 (57.7%) were more likely than parous individuals 28/74 (37.8%) P = 0.011 to express a need for additional support with breastfeeding.
conclusionsThe results demonstrate an increased need for early and additional visits among primiparous, and important topics were abdominal/vaginal problems, experience of giving birth and breastfeeding. Information for individuals in low socioeconomic status areas needs to be expanded.
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.