RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of group prenatal care (Centering Pregnancy) on the rate of Preterm Birth (PTB) and low birth weight. Women were enrolled into Centering Pregnancy (Transformación Prenatal) if they fell in the category of poverty, and had at least one risk for PTB according to known risk factors for low birth weight or PTB. METHODS: Mother's age, parity, risk factors, prenatal/delivery complications, infants' Gestational Age (GA), birth weight, Apgar scores, delivery route, indications for delivery, and use of Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) were abstracted from charts of mothers who received group or traditional care at the University Hospital in San Juan, PR. RESULTS: More infants were born at term if the mothers received Centering Pregnancy. The mean birth weight and gestational age of the infants were higher (6.59 vs. 6.33 lbs. and 37.8 vs. 36.8 weeks) than for those in traditional care. Centering Pregnancy also had lower rates of preterm birth (27.7% vs. 34.1%) and births earlier than 31 weeks (2.8% vs. 9.9%). All were statistically significant (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We successfully implemented group prenatal care (Centering Pregnancy) for the first time in PR in a complex environment: tertiary care hospital with a high-risk prenatal clinic. Despite having known risk factors for preterm birth, the mothers in Centering Pregnancy had better outcomes. In an environment of adverse determinants of health, the program was effective in reducing the odds for adverse infant outcomes early in life and demonstrating that innovative models of health care can improve such outcomes.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Cervical cancer is the fifth most common cancer among women in Puerto Rico (PR). Information about which obstetricians and gynecologists in PR are following current cervical cytology guidelines is not available. Our two objectives were to determine whether current guidelines for abnormal cervical cytology management were being followed adequately by OB-GYN residents and faculty at 3 university hospitals and, in addition, to evaluate the knowledge of the current guidelines that is possessed by these individuals. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review (records from January 2009 through December 2010) of patients with abnormal cervical cytology results (n=166) to evaluate the management they were given and a cross-sectional survey of OB-GYN residents (n=34) and faculty (n=46) to evaluate their knowledge of cervical cytology guidelines were both performed. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-six medical records were reviewed. The level of management for 45% of the patients was found to have been optimal."Thirty-three percent were lost to follow-up. Eleven percent of the patients were managed sub optimally and the management of 12% of the patients was considered to have been poor. The survey showed that the faculty were less updated with regard to current guidelines for the management of cervical cytology than were the residents. Study limitations were the lack of electronic medical records in the hospital--which makes access to patient information more difficult--and the low response rate of the faculty. CONCLUSION: OB-GYN physicians and residents were not consistent with their management, according to current guidelines, of cervical cytological abnormalities. The high-risk nature of the patients and their poor adherence to treatment (loss to follow-up) may have been the cause of this inconsistency. Meetings aimed at addressing the lack of compliance by local OB-GYN physicians with the guidelines for cervical cancer screening have been Better screening strategies are also needed if we are to improve patient compliance in our population.