Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Study protocol

Implementation of a new prenatal care model to reduce office visits and increase connectivity and continuity of care: protocol for a mixed-methods study

Authors: Jennifer L. Ridgeway, Annie LeBlanc, Megan Branda, Roger W. Harms, Megan A. Morris, Kate Nesbitt, Bobbie S. Gostout, Lenae M. Barkey, Susan M. Sobolewski, Ellen Brodrick, Jonathan Inselman, Anne Baron, Angela Sivly, Misty Baker, Dawn Finnie, Rajeev Chaudhry, Abimbola O. Famuyide

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Most low-risk pregnant women receive the standard model of prenatal care with frequent office visits. Research suggests that a reduced schedule of visits among low-risk women could be implemented without increasing adverse maternal or fetal outcomes, but patient satisfaction with these models varies. We aim to determine the effectiveness and feasibility of a new prenatal care model (OB Nest) that enhances a reduced visit model by adding virtual connections that improve continuity of care and patient-directed access to care.

Methods and design

This mixed-methods study uses a hybrid effectiveness-implementation design in a single center randomized controlled trial (RCT). Embedding process evaluation in an experimental design like an RCT allows researchers to answer both “Did it work?” and “How or why did it work (or not work)?” when studying complex interventions, as well as providing knowledge for translation into practice after the study. The RE-AIM framework was used to ensure attention to evaluating program components in terms of sustainable adoption and implementation.
Low-risk patients recruited from the Obstetrics Division at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN) will be randomized to OB Nest or usual care. OB Nest patients will be assigned to a dedicated nursing team, scheduled for 8 pre-planned office visits with a physician or midwife and 6 telephone or online nurse visits (compared to 12 pre-planned physician or midwife office visits in the usual care group), and provided fetal heart rate and blood pressure home monitoring equipment and information on joining an online care community.
Quantitative methods will include patient surveys and medical record abstraction. The primary quantitative outcome is patient-reported satisfaction. Other outcomes include fidelity to items on the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists standards of care list, health care utilization (e.g. numbers of antenatal office visits), and maternal and fetal outcomes (e.g. gestational age at delivery), as well as validated patient-reported measures of pregnancy-related stress and perceived quality of care. Quantitative analysis will be performed according to the intention to treat principle. Qualitative methods will include interviews and focus groups with providers, staff, and patients, and will explore satisfaction, intervention adoption, and implementation feasibility. We will use methods of qualitative thematic analysis at three stages. Mixed methods analysis will involve the use of qualitative data to lend insight to quantitative findings.

Discussion

This study will make important contributions to the literature on reduced visit models by evaluating a novel prenatal care model with components to increase patient connectedness (even with fewer pre-scheduled office visits), as demonstrated on a range of patient-important outcomes. The use of a hybrid effectiveness-implementation approach, as well as attention to patient and provider perspectives on program components and implementation, may uncover important information that can inform long-term feasibility and potentially speed future translation.

Trial registration

Trial registration identifier: NCT02082275
Submitted: March 6, 2014
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kriebs JM. Guidelines for Perinatal Care, Sixth Edition: By the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2010;55(2):e37–7. Kriebs JM. Guidelines for Perinatal Care, Sixth Edition: By the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2010;55(2):e37–7.
2.
go back to reference Hall M, Chng PK, Macgillivray I. Is routine antenatal care worth while? Lancet. 1980;316(8185):78–80.CrossRef Hall M, Chng PK, Macgillivray I. Is routine antenatal care worth while? Lancet. 1980;316(8185):78–80.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Lobo A. Too much of a good thing? The case for a reduced schedule of antenatal visits. Pract Midwife. 1998;1(4):19–21.PubMed Lobo A. Too much of a good thing? The case for a reduced schedule of antenatal visits. Pract Midwife. 1998;1(4):19–21.PubMed
4.
go back to reference Moos MK. Prenatal care: limitations and opportunities. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2006;35(2):278–85.CrossRefPubMed Moos MK. Prenatal care: limitations and opportunities. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2006;35(2):278–85.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Rosen MG. Caring for our future, the content of prenatal care: A report of the Public Health Service Expert Panel on the Content of Prenatal Care. Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1989. Rosen MG. Caring for our future, the content of prenatal care: A report of the Public Health Service Expert Panel on the Content of Prenatal Care. Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1989.
6.
go back to reference McDuffie Jr RS, Beck A, Bischoff K, Cross J, Orleans M. Effect of frequency of prenatal care visits on perinatal outcome among low-risk women. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1996;275(11):847–51.CrossRefPubMed McDuffie Jr RS, Beck A, Bischoff K, Cross J, Orleans M. Effect of frequency of prenatal care visits on perinatal outcome among low-risk women. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1996;275(11):847–51.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Sikorski J, Wilson J, Clement S, Das S, Smeeton N. A randomised controlled trial comparing two schedules of antenatal visits: the antenatal care project. BMJ. 1996;312(7030):546–53.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sikorski J, Wilson J, Clement S, Das S, Smeeton N. A randomised controlled trial comparing two schedules of antenatal visits: the antenatal care project. BMJ. 1996;312(7030):546–53.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Carroli G, Villar J, Piaggio G, Khan-Neelofur D, Gülmezoglu M, Mugford M, et al. WHO systematic review of randomised controlled trials of routine antenatal care. Lancet. 2001;357(9268):1565–70.CrossRefPubMed Carroli G, Villar J, Piaggio G, Khan-Neelofur D, Gülmezoglu M, Mugford M, et al. WHO systematic review of randomised controlled trials of routine antenatal care. Lancet. 2001;357(9268):1565–70.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Binstock MA, Wolde-Tsadik G. Alternative prenatal care. Impact of reduced visit frequency, focused visits and continuity of care. J Reprod Med. 1995;40(7):507–12.PubMed Binstock MA, Wolde-Tsadik G. Alternative prenatal care. Impact of reduced visit frequency, focused visits and continuity of care. J Reprod Med. 1995;40(7):507–12.PubMed
10.
go back to reference Walker DS, Koniak-Griffin D. Evaluation of a reduced-frequency prenatal visit schedule for low-risk women at a free-standing birthing center. J Nurse Midwifery. 1997;42(4):295–303.CrossRefPubMed Walker DS, Koniak-Griffin D. Evaluation of a reduced-frequency prenatal visit schedule for low-risk women at a free-standing birthing center. J Nurse Midwifery. 1997;42(4):295–303.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Dowswell T, Carroli G, Duley L, Gates S, Gulmezoglu AM, Khan-Neelofur D, et al. Alternative versus standard packages of antenatal care for low-risk pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;10, CD000934.PubMed Dowswell T, Carroli G, Duley L, Gates S, Gulmezoglu AM, Khan-Neelofur D, et al. Alternative versus standard packages of antenatal care for low-risk pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;10, CD000934.PubMed
12.
go back to reference Villar J, Carroli G, Khan-Neelofur D, Piaggio G, Gulmezoglu M. Patterns of routine antenatal care for low-risk pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;4, CD000934.PubMed Villar J, Carroli G, Khan-Neelofur D, Piaggio G, Gulmezoglu M. Patterns of routine antenatal care for low-risk pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;4, CD000934.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Vogel JP, Ndema HA, Souza JP, Gulmezoglu MA, Dowswell T, Carroli G, et al. Antenatal care packages with reduced visits and perinatal mortality: a secondary analysis of the WHO Antenatal Care Trial. Reprod Health. 2013;10(1):19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vogel JP, Ndema HA, Souza JP, Gulmezoglu MA, Dowswell T, Carroli G, et al. Antenatal care packages with reduced visits and perinatal mortality: a secondary analysis of the WHO Antenatal Care Trial. Reprod Health. 2013;10(1):19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Jewell D, Sharp D, Sanders J, Peters TJ. A randomised controlled trial of flexibility in routine antenatal care. BJOG. 2000;107(10):1241–7.CrossRefPubMed Jewell D, Sharp D, Sanders J, Peters TJ. A randomised controlled trial of flexibility in routine antenatal care. BJOG. 2000;107(10):1241–7.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Phillippi JC. Women's Perceptions of Access to Prenatal Care in the United States: A Literature Review. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2009;54(3):219–25.CrossRefPubMed Phillippi JC. Women's Perceptions of Access to Prenatal Care in the United States: A Literature Review. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2009;54(3):219–25.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Gregory KD, Johnson CT, Johnson TRB, Entman SS. The content of prenatal care: Update 2005. Womens Health Issues. 2006;16(4):198–215.CrossRefPubMed Gregory KD, Johnson CT, Johnson TRB, Entman SS. The content of prenatal care: Update 2005. Womens Health Issues. 2006;16(4):198–215.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Culpepper L, Jack B. Prenatal visits--it's not the number, it's the content. Birth. 1996;23(4):236–8.CrossRefPubMed Culpepper L, Jack B. Prenatal visits--it's not the number, it's the content. Birth. 1996;23(4):236–8.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference King TL. Prenatal Care for the 21st Century: Outside the 20th Century Box. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2009;54(3):167.CrossRefPubMed King TL. Prenatal Care for the 21st Century: Outside the 20th Century Box. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2009;54(3):167.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Curran GM, Bauer M, Mittman B, Pyne JM, Stetler C. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Med Care. 2012;50(3):217–26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Curran GM, Bauer M, Mittman B, Pyne JM, Stetler C. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Med Care. 2012;50(3):217–26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, Allen E, Stephenson J. Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ. 2006;332(7538):413–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, Allen E, Stephenson J. Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ. 2006;332(7538):413–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Bernet AC, Willens DE, Bauer MS. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: implications for quality improvement science. Implement Sci. 2013;8 Suppl 1:S2.CrossRefPubMedCentral Bernet AC, Willens DE, Bauer MS. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: implications for quality improvement science. Implement Sci. 2013;8 Suppl 1:S2.CrossRefPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Palinkas LA, Aarons GA, Horwitz S, Chamberlain P, Hurlburt M, Landsverk J. Mixed method designs in implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011;38(1):44–53.CrossRefPubMed Palinkas LA, Aarons GA, Horwitz S, Chamberlain P, Hurlburt M, Landsverk J. Mixed method designs in implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011;38(1):44–53.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Teddlie C, Tashakkori A. Foundations of mixed methods research: integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Los Angeles: Sage; 2009. Teddlie C, Tashakkori A. Foundations of mixed methods research: integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Los Angeles: Sage; 2009.
25.
go back to reference Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(9):1322–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(9):1322–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
go back to reference Pocock SJ, Simon R. Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics. 1975;31(1):103–15.CrossRefPubMed Pocock SJ, Simon R. Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics. 1975;31(1):103–15.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Labs SM, Wurtele SK. Fetal health locus of control scale: development and validation. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1986;54(6):814–9.CrossRefPubMed Labs SM, Wurtele SK. Fetal health locus of control scale: development and validation. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1986;54(6):814–9.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Littlefield VM, Adams BN. Patient participation in alternative perinatal care: impact on satisfaction and health locus of control. Res Nurs Health. 1987;10(3):139–48.CrossRefPubMed Littlefield VM, Adams BN. Patient participation in alternative perinatal care: impact on satisfaction and health locus of control. Res Nurs Health. 1987;10(3):139–48.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Wong ST, Korenbrot CC, Stewart AL. Consumer assessment of the quality of interpersonal processes of prenatal care among ethnically diverse low-income women: development of a new measure. Womens Health Issues. 2004;14(4):118–29.CrossRefPubMed Wong ST, Korenbrot CC, Stewart AL. Consumer assessment of the quality of interpersonal processes of prenatal care among ethnically diverse low-income women: development of a new measure. Womens Health Issues. 2004;14(4):118–29.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Lobel M, Cannella DL, Graham JE, DeVincent C, Schneider J, Meyer BA. Pregnancy-specific stress, prenatal health behaviors, and birth outcomes. Health Psychol. 2008;27(5):604–15.CrossRefPubMed Lobel M, Cannella DL, Graham JE, DeVincent C, Schneider J, Meyer BA. Pregnancy-specific stress, prenatal health behaviors, and birth outcomes. Health Psychol. 2008;27(5):604–15.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference May C, Finch T. Implementing, Embedding, and Integrating Practices: An Outline of Normalization Process Theory. Sociology. 2009;43(3):535–54.CrossRef May C, Finch T. Implementing, Embedding, and Integrating Practices: An Outline of Normalization Process Theory. Sociology. 2009;43(3):535–54.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2002. Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2002.
34.
go back to reference O'Cathain A, Thomas K. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods. In: Pope C, Mays N, editors. Qualitative research in health care. 3rd ed. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2006. p. 102–11.CrossRef O'Cathain A, Thomas K. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods. In: Pope C, Mays N, editors. Qualitative research in health care. 3rd ed. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2006. p. 102–11.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P. Methods and processes of the CONSORT Group: example of an extension for trials assessing nonpharmacologic treatments. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(4):W60–66.PubMed Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P. Methods and processes of the CONSORT Group: example of an extension for trials assessing nonpharmacologic treatments. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(4):W60–66.PubMed
36.
go back to reference Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(4):295–309.CrossRefPubMed Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(4):295–309.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.CrossRefPubMed Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Glasgow RE, Green LW, Klesges LM, Abrams DB, Fisher EB, Goldstein MG, et al. External validity: we need to do more. Ann Behav Med. 2006;31(2):105–8.CrossRefPubMed Glasgow RE, Green LW, Klesges LM, Abrams DB, Fisher EB, Goldstein MG, et al. External validity: we need to do more. Ann Behav Med. 2006;31(2):105–8.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Plano Clark VL, Schumacher K, West C, Edrington J, Dunn LB, Harzstark A, et al. Practices for Embedding an Interpretive Qualitative Approach Within a Randomized Clinical Trial. J Mix Methods Res. 2013;7(3):219–42.CrossRef Plano Clark VL, Schumacher K, West C, Edrington J, Dunn LB, Harzstark A, et al. Practices for Embedding an Interpretive Qualitative Approach Within a Randomized Clinical Trial. J Mix Methods Res. 2013;7(3):219–42.CrossRef
40.
go back to reference O'Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Drabble SJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J. What can qualitative research do for randomised controlled trials? A systematic mapping review. BMJ Open. 2013, 3(6); doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002889. O'Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Drabble SJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J. What can qualitative research do for randomised controlled trials? A systematic mapping review. BMJ Open. 2013, 3(6); doi: 10.​1136/​bmjopen-2013-002889.
Metadata
Title
Implementation of a new prenatal care model to reduce office visits and increase connectivity and continuity of care: protocol for a mixed-methods study
Authors
Jennifer L. Ridgeway
Annie LeBlanc
Megan Branda
Roger W. Harms
Megan A. Morris
Kate Nesbitt
Bobbie S. Gostout
Lenae M. Barkey
Susan M. Sobolewski
Ellen Brodrick
Jonathan Inselman
Anne Baron
Angela Sivly
Misty Baker
Dawn Finnie
Rajeev Chaudhry
Abimbola O. Famuyide
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-015-0762-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2015 Go to the issue