Explore the vast range of titles available.

Offers advice, insight, and tips for moms and dads, discussing pregnancy and birthing practices, prenatal screenings, postpartum birth control, and nutrition.

Background Continuity of care by a primary midwife during the antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum periods has been recommended in Australia and many hospitals have introduced a caseload midwifery model of care. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the effect of caseload midwifery on women’s satisfaction with care across the maternity continuum. Methods Pregnant women at low risk of complications, booking for care at a tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia, were recruited to a randomised controlled trial between September 2007 and June 2010. Women were randomised to caseload midwifery or standard care. The caseload model included antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum care from a primary midwife with back-up provided by another known midwife when necessary. Women allocated to standard care received midwife-led care with varying levels of continuity, junior obstetric care, or community-based general practitioner care. Data for this paper were collected by background questionnaire prior to randomisation and a follow-up questionnaire sent at two months postpartum. The primary analysis was by intention to treat. A secondary analysis explored the effect of intrapartum continuity of carer on overall satisfaction rating. Results Two thousand, three hundred fourteen women were randomised: 1,156 to caseload care and 1,158 to standard care. The response rate to the two month survey was 88 % in the caseload group and 74 % in the standard care group. Compared with standard care, caseload care was associated with higher overall ratings of satisfaction with antenatal care (OR 3.35; 95 % CI 2.79, 4.03), intrapartum care (OR 2.14; 95 % CI 1.78, 2.57), hospital postpartum care (OR 1.56, 95 % CI 1.32, 1.85) and home-based postpartum care (OR 3.19; 95 % CI 2.64, 3.85). Conclusion For women at low risk of medical complications, caseload midwifery increases women’s satisfaction with antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum care. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012607000073404 (registration complete 23rd January 2007).

Background From 1990 to 2015, the number of maternal deaths globally has dropped by 43%. Despite this, progress in attaining MDG 5 is not remarkable in LMICs. Only 52% of pregnant women in LMICs obtain WHO recommended minimum of four antenatal consultations and the coverage of postnatal care is relatively poor. In recent years, the increased cellphone penetration has brought the potential for mHealth to improve preventive maternal healthcare services. The objective of this review is to assess the effectiveness of mHealth solutions on a range of maternal health outcomes by categorizing the interventions according to the types of mHealth applications. Methods Three international online electronic databases were searched between January 1, 2000 and January 25, 2016 to identify studies exploring the role of mHealth solutions in improving preventive maternal healthcare services. Of 1262 titles screened after duplication, 69 potentially relevant abstracts were obtained. Out of 69 abstracts, 42 abstracts were shortlisted. Full text of 42 articles was reviewed using data extraction sheet. A total of 14 full text studies were included in the final analysis. Results The 14 final studies were categorized in to five mHealth applications defined in the conceptual framework. Based on our analysis, the most reported use of mHealth was for client education and behavior change communication, such as SMS and voice reminders [ n  = 9, 65%]. The categorization provided the understanding that much work have been done on client education and behavior change communication. Most of the studies showed that mHealth interventions have proven to be effective to improve antenatal care and postnatal care services, especially those that are aimed at changing behavior of pregnant women and women in postnatal period. However, little evidence exists on other type of mHealth applications. Conclusion This review suggests that mHealth solutions targeted at pregnant women and women in postnatal period can improve preventive maternal healthcare services. However, there is a need to conduct more controlled-trials and quasi-experimental studies to strengthen the literature in this research area. The review recommends that mHealth researchers, sponsors, and publishers should prioritize the transparent reporting of interventions to allow effective interpretation of extracted data.

BackgroundWe tested the hypothesis that routine MRI would improve the care and well-being of preterm infants and their families.DesignParallel-group randomised trial (1.1 allocation; intention-to-treat) with nested diagnostic and cost evaluations (EudraCT 2009-011602-42).SettingParticipants from 14 London hospitals, imaged at a single centre.Patients511 infants born before 33 weeks gestation underwent both MRI and ultrasound around term. 255 were randomly allocated (siblings together) to receive only MRI results and 255 only ultrasound from a paediatrician unaware of unallocated results; one withdrew before allocation.Main outcome measuresMaternal anxiety, measured by the State-Trait Anxiety inventory (STAI) assessed in 206/214 mothers receiving MRI and 217/220 receiving ultrasound. Secondary outcomes included: prediction of neurodevelopment, health-related costs and quality of life.ResultsAfter MRI, STAI fell from 36.81 (95% CI 35.18 to 38.44) to 32.77 (95% CI 31.54 to 34.01), 31.87 (95% CI 30.63 to 33.12) and 31.82 (95% CI 30.65 to 33.00) at 14 days, 12 and 20 months, respectively. STAI fell less after ultrasound: from 37.59 (95% CI 36.00 to 39.18) to 33.97 (95% CI 32.78 to 35.17), 33.43 (95% CI 32.22 to 34.63) and 33.63 (95% CI 32.49 to 34.77), p=0.02. There were no differences in health-related quality of life. MRI predicted moderate or severe functional motor impairment at 20 months slightly better than ultrasound (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (CI) 0.74; 0.66 to 0.83 vs 0.64; 0.56 to 0.72, p=0.01) but cost £315 (CI £295–£336) more per infant.ConclusionsMRI increased costs and provided only modest benefits.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01049594 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01049594. EudraCT: EudraCT: 2009-011602-42 (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/).

\"Pilates for Pregnancy covers the fundamentals of Pilates and includes a progressive Pilates programme tailored for each trimester - focusing on pelvic floor and abdominal strength, posture and health & fitness. Anya Hayes' insightful exercise guide will help you conquer the physical and mental stresses of pregnancy and improve your pregnancy health, mood and energy. This is a straight talking, woman-to-woman pregnancy fitness guide with a difference. Showing you: how to optimize the position of your baby for a better birth experience; how to avoid succumbing to the 'pregnancy waddle' and protect your back as your bump grows; how to deal with second pregnancy posture while knackered and running after/constantly lifting a toddler; how to minimize the trials of pregnancy on your abdominals, pelvic floor and mind; how to get into the right mindset for a positive labour, and release tension postnatally; exactly what cardio exercise is safe and beneficial to you and your bump, and what you should avoid\"--Publisher description.

Although there are studies showing that mobile phone solutions can improve health service delivery outcomes in the developed world, there is little empirical evidence that demonstrates the impact of mHealth interventions on key maternal health outcomes in low income settings. A non-randomized controlled study was conducted in the Amhara region, Ethiopia in 10 health facilities (5 intervention, 5 control) together serving around 250,000 people. Health workers in the intervention group received an android phone (3 phones per facility) loaded with an application that sends reminders for scheduled visits during antenatal care (ANC), delivery and postnatal care (PNC), and educational messages on dangers signs and common complaints during pregnancy. The intervention was developed at Addis Ababa University in Ethiopia. Primary outcomes were the percentage of women who had at least 4 ANC visits, institutional delivery and PNC visits at the health center after 12 months of implementation of the intervention. Overall 933 and 1037 women were included in the cross-sectional surveys at baseline and at follow-up respectively. In addition, the medical records of 1224 women who had at least one antenatal care visit were followed in the longitudinal study. Women who had their ANC visit in the intervention health centers were significantly more likely to deliver their baby in the same health center compared to the control group (43.1% versus 28.4%; Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 1.98 (95%CI 1.53-2.55)). A significantly higher percentage of women who had ANC in the intervention group had PNC in the same health center compared to the control health centers (41.2% versus 21.1%: AOR: 2.77 (95%CI 2.12-3.61)). Our findings demonstrated that a locally customized mHealth application during ANC can significantly improve delivery and postnatal care service utilization possibly through positively influencing the behavior of health workers and their clients.

Background Postnatal care, crucial for preventing and assessing complications after birth, remains low in India. An interactive mHealth community-based postnatal intervention was implemented to promote healthy maternal behaviors through knowledge and social support in rural Northern India. However, there is limited information on how virtual health interventions in resource-constrained settings are perceived by the users and which elements influence their engagement and sustained participation. Objective We explored the user perceptions of acceptability and impact of a virtual interactive maternal and child health intervention pilot tested in Punjab State, India, including their perspectives on barriers and facilitators to engage with this intervention. Methods This qualitative study was embedded within extensive mixed-method research, and oriented by the Realist Evaluation approach. Sixteen participants were recruited from the parent study. They were identified by purposive sampling to cover diverse levels of attendance and engagement with the intervention. In-depth interviews were conducted by phone. Following translation, a framework analysis was completed to search for the main themes. Feedback was requested from intervention moderators during the process to prioritize local interpretation. Results Study participants reported overall satisfaction with the intervention. The mothers appreciated the educational material provided and the communication with other participants and health professionals. Across context, intervention, and actor domains, the barriers most commented on were network and connectivity challenges, lack of time due to household responsibilities, and feeling uncomfortable sharing personal experiences. Family buy-in and support were fundamental for overcoming the high domestic workload and baby care. Another facilitator mentioned was moderators’ guidance on using the different intervention modalities. Regarding perceived impact, participants shared that MeSSSSage increased their capability and motivation to breastfeed, seek care as needed, and use contraception according to their preferences. Finally, participants suggested adding more topics to the educational content and adjusting the dynamics within the group calls to improve the intervention. Conclusions This study identifies the high acceptability and perceived impact of a novel postnatal care program in a rural setting, including the users’ perceived barriers to engaging with the intervention and possible solutions to overcome them. These findings enable refinement of the ongoing intervention, providing a more robust framing for its scalability and long-term sustainability. On a larger scale, conclusions from this research provide new insights and encouragement to global stakeholders who aspire to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries through mHealth. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04693585 (Registration date: 05/01/21).