Evaluating Risk-Adjusted Associations between Prenatal Care Utilization and Obstetric Outcomes in a Commercially Insured Patient Population.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Adina R Kern-Goldberger, Natalie E Sheils, Rachell Vinculado, Ana Jane A Paderanga, David A Asch, Sindhu K Srinivas
{"title":"Evaluating Risk-Adjusted Associations between Prenatal Care Utilization and Obstetric Outcomes in a Commercially Insured Patient Population.","authors":"Adina R Kern-Goldberger, Natalie E Sheils, Rachell Vinculado, Ana Jane A Paderanga, David A Asch, Sindhu K Srinivas","doi":"10.1055/a-2559-7261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Office prenatal care has followed a similar structure for the past century. It is largely unknown whether attendance at routine outpatient antenatal visits prevents major adverse maternal outcomes. This study examined associations between prenatal care utilization and adverse obstetric outcomes including severe maternal morbidity (SMM), preterm birth, and stillbirth in a large, commercially insured US patient population.This is a retrospective cohort study using an insurance claims database evaluating associations between prenatal care utilization and obstetric outcomes over 4 years (2017-2020). Prenatal care utilization was characterized based on the adequacy of prenatal care utilization (APNCU) index. The primary outcome was SMM (as per Centers for Disease Control). Secondary outcomes included preterm birth <37 weeks and stillbirth. Associations between exposure and outcome were investigated using logistic regression models in designated \"low\" and \"medium\" maternal risk groups, defined based on obstetric co-morbidity index (OB-CMI) scores modeled at the time of the first trimester and at delivery.A total of 297,453 patients were included: 78,100 in the sub-group who remained low-risk throughout pregnancy and 49,920 in the sub-group who remained medium-risk. The largest number of patients overall (29.9%) received \"adequate plus\" care, as defined by the APNCU index, while a plurality of low- and medium-risk patients received \"intermediate\" care (35.6 and 29.9%, respectively). One point seventy seven percent of patients experienced SMM, 8.63% delivered preterm, and 0.88% had stillbirth. Adjusted analysis comparing volume of prenatal care with these outcomes demonstrated no statistically significant associations, with the exception of preterm birth, which was positively associated with \"adequate\" and \"adequate plus\" care in low- and medium-risk patients. \"Inadequate care\" was not associated with any of the studied outcomes.Overall volume of prenatal care was not associated with a reduction in adverse obstetric outcomes. Clinical quality improvement and health policy efforts to improve prenatal care delivery models may need to bypass adherence to established guidelines in terms of gross visit number as a key metric and instead work to revise practices based on more meaningful clinical outcomes. · It is unknown whether receipt of routine prenatal care is associated with better pregnancy outcomes.. · There were no associations between amount of prenatal care and SMM or stillbirth.. · Preterm birth was associated with \"adequate\" and \"adequate plus\" care in low- and medium-risk patients.. · Likely suggesting higher utilization in the setting of concerning symptoms.. · \"Inadequate\" care was not associated with any of the studied adverse outcomes..</p>","PeriodicalId":7584,"journal":{"name":"American journal of perinatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2559-7261","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Office prenatal care has followed a similar structure for the past century. It is largely unknown whether attendance at routine outpatient antenatal visits prevents major adverse maternal outcomes. This study examined associations between prenatal care utilization and adverse obstetric outcomes including severe maternal morbidity (SMM), preterm birth, and stillbirth in a large, commercially insured US patient population.This is a retrospective cohort study using an insurance claims database evaluating associations between prenatal care utilization and obstetric outcomes over 4 years (2017-2020). Prenatal care utilization was characterized based on the adequacy of prenatal care utilization (APNCU) index. The primary outcome was SMM (as per Centers for Disease Control). Secondary outcomes included preterm birth <37 weeks and stillbirth. Associations between exposure and outcome were investigated using logistic regression models in designated "low" and "medium" maternal risk groups, defined based on obstetric co-morbidity index (OB-CMI) scores modeled at the time of the first trimester and at delivery.A total of 297,453 patients were included: 78,100 in the sub-group who remained low-risk throughout pregnancy and 49,920 in the sub-group who remained medium-risk. The largest number of patients overall (29.9%) received "adequate plus" care, as defined by the APNCU index, while a plurality of low- and medium-risk patients received "intermediate" care (35.6 and 29.9%, respectively). One point seventy seven percent of patients experienced SMM, 8.63% delivered preterm, and 0.88% had stillbirth. Adjusted analysis comparing volume of prenatal care with these outcomes demonstrated no statistically significant associations, with the exception of preterm birth, which was positively associated with "adequate" and "adequate plus" care in low- and medium-risk patients. "Inadequate care" was not associated with any of the studied outcomes.Overall volume of prenatal care was not associated with a reduction in adverse obstetric outcomes. Clinical quality improvement and health policy efforts to improve prenatal care delivery models may need to bypass adherence to established guidelines in terms of gross visit number as a key metric and instead work to revise practices based on more meaningful clinical outcomes. · It is unknown whether receipt of routine prenatal care is associated with better pregnancy outcomes.. · There were no associations between amount of prenatal care and SMM or stillbirth.. · Preterm birth was associated with "adequate" and "adequate plus" care in low- and medium-risk patients.. · Likely suggesting higher utilization in the setting of concerning symptoms.. · "Inadequate" care was not associated with any of the studied adverse outcomes..

评估商业保险患者群体中产前护理利用率与产科结果之间的风险调整关联。
本研究调查了大量商业保险的美国患者群体中产前护理利用与不良产科结局(包括严重产妇发病率(SMM)、早产和死胎)之间的关系。这是一项回顾性队列研究,使用保险索赔数据库评估产前护理利用与四年(2017 - 2020)产科结果之间的关系。产前护理利用充分性(APNCU)指数表征产前护理利用。主要结果是SMM(根据疾病控制中心)。次要结局包括早产< 37周和死产。在指定的“低”和“中”产妇风险组中,使用逻辑回归模型调查暴露与结果之间的关系,这些风险组是根据妊娠早期和分娩时的产科共发病指数(OB-CMI)评分来定义的。297,453例患者被纳入:78,100例在整个妊娠期间保持低风险的亚组和49,920例保持中等风险的亚组。总体而言,接受APNCU指数定义的“适当+”护理的患者最多(29.9%),而接受“中等”护理的低危和中危患者较多(分别为35.6%和29.9%)。1.77%的患者发生过SMM, 8.63%的患者早产,0.88%的患者死产。比较产前护理量与这些结果的调整分析显示,除了早产与中低风险患者的“充分”和“充分+”护理呈正相关外,没有统计学意义上的显著关联。“护理不足”与任何研究结果都无关。产前护理的总体量与不良产科结局的减少无关。临床质量的提高和卫生政策的努力,以改善产前护理提供模式可能需要绕过遵守既定的指导方针,以总访问量为关键指标,而不是根据更有意义的临床结果来修改实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of perinatology
American journal of perinatology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
302
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Perinatology is an international, peer-reviewed, and indexed journal publishing 14 issues a year dealing with original research and topical reviews. It is the definitive forum for specialists in obstetrics, neonatology, perinatology, and maternal/fetal medicine, with emphasis on bridging the different fields. The focus is primarily on clinical and translational research, clinical and technical advances in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment as well as evidence-based reviews. Topics of interest include epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and management of maternal, fetal, and neonatal diseases. Manuscripts on new technology, NICU set-ups, and nursing topics are published to provide a broad survey of important issues in this field. All articles undergo rigorous peer review, with web-based submission, expedited turn-around, and availability of electronic publication. The American Journal of Perinatology is accompanied by AJP Reports - an Open Access journal for case reports in neonatology and maternal/fetal medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信