 |
|
The Changing Pattern of Prenatal Care Utilization in the United States, 1981-1995, Using Different Prenatal Care Indices
Michael D. Kogan, PhD;
Joyce A. Martin, MPH;
Greg R. Alexander, MPH, ScD;
Milton Kotelchuck, PhD;
Stephanie J. Ventura, AM;
Fredric D. Frigoletto, MD
JAMA. 1998;279:1623-1628.
Context.— Two measures traditionally used to examine adequacy of prenatal care indicate that prenatal care utilization remained unchanged through the 1980s and only began to rise slightly in the 1990s. In recent years, new measures have been developed that include a category for women who receive more than the recommended amount of care (intensive utilization).
Objective.— To compare the older and newer indices in the monitoring of prenatal care trends in the United States from 1981 to 1995, for the overall population and for selected subpopulations. Second, to examine factors associated with receiving intensive utilization.
Design.— Cross-sectional and trend analysis of national birth records.
Setting.— The United States.
Subjects.— All live births between 1981 and 1995 (N=54 million).
Main Outcome Measures.— Trends in prenatal care utilization, according to 4 indices (the older indices: the Institute of Medicine Index and the trimester that care began, and the newer indices: the R-GINDEX and the Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index). Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the risk of intensive prenatal care use in 1981 and 1995.
Results.— The newer indices showed a steadily increasing trend toward more prenatal care use throughout the study period (R-GINDEX, intensive or adequate use, 32.7% in 1981 to 47.1% in 1995; the Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization Index, intensive use, 18.4% in 1981 to 28.8% in 1995), especially for intensive utilization. Women having a multiple birth were much more likely to have had intensive utilization in 1995 compared with 1981 (R-GINDEX, 22.8% vs 8.5%). Teenagers were more likely to begin care later than adults, but similar proportions of teens and adults had intensive utilization. Intensive use among low-risk women also increased steadily each year. Factors associated with a greater likelihood of receiving intensive use in 1981 and 1995 were having a multiple birth, primiparity, being married, and maternal age of 35 years or older.
Conclusions.— The proportion of women who began care early and received at least the recommended number of visits increased between 1981 and 1995. This change was undetected by more traditional prenatal care indices. These increases have cost and practice implications and suggest a paradox since previous studies have shown that rates of preterm delivery and low birth weight did not improve during this time.
From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, Md (Dr Kogan and Mss Martin and Ventura); the Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham (Dr Alexander); the Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Dr Kotelchuck); and the Division of Obstetrics, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (Dr Frigoletto).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED LETTER
Benefits and Limitations of Prenatal Care
Michael D. Kogan, Joyce A. Martin, Stephanie J. Ventura, Greg R. Alexander, Milton Kotelchuck, Fredric D. Frigoletto, Kenneth D. Rosenberg, Judith P. Rooks, Dawn P. Misra, Bernard Guyer, Michael D. Kogan, Joyce A. Martin, Stephanie J. Ventura, Greg R. Alexander, Milton Kotelchuck, and Fredric D. Frigoletto
JAMA. 1998;280(24):2071-2073.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED ARTICLE
Benefits and Limitations of Prenatal Care: From Counting Visits to Measuring Content
Dawn P. Misra and Bernard Guyer
JAMA. 1998;279(20):1661-1662.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Factors associated with the utilization and content of prenatal care in a western urban district of Turkey
Ciceklioglu et al.
Int J Qual Health Care 2005;17:533-539.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
An Approach to Studying Social Disparities in Health and Health Care
Braveman et al.
AJPH 2004;94:2139-2148.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Trends in Prenatal Care Use and Low Birthweight in Southeast Brazil
Goldani et al.
AJPH 2004;94:1366-1371.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Differential Risk of Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy among Hispanic Women
Wolf et al.
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2004;15:1330-1338.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Reduction of Preeclampsia in Multiple Pregnancies by a Dedicated Monitoring Protocol
Hirtenlehner et al.
Reproductive Sciences 2003;10:418-422.
ABSTRACT
Ethnicity and Prenatal Health Promotion Content
Vonderheid et al.
West J Nurs Res 2003;25:388-404.
ABSTRACT
Racial Differences in Prenatal Care Use in the United States: Are Disparities Decreasing?
Alexander et al.
AJPH 2002;92:1970-1975.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Perinatal and Infant Health Among Rural and Urban American Indians/Alaska Natives
Baldwin et al.
AJPH 2002;92:1491-1497.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Policy Statements Adopted by the Governing Council of the American Public Health Association, October 24, 2001
AJPH 2002;92:451-483.
FULL TEXT
Defining Early Adolescent Childbearing
Phipps and Sowers
AJPH 2002;92:125-128.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Acculturation Status, Birth Outcomes, and Family Planning Compliance Among Hispanic Teens
Jones et al.
The Journal of School Nursing 2001;17:83-89.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Overutilization of antenatal care in Norway
Backe
Scand J Public Health 2001;29:129-132.
ABSTRACT
Changing Epidemiology of Perinatal HIV-1 Infection in the United States
Shetty and Maldonado
NeoReviews 2001;2:e94-99.
FULL TEXT
Trends in Twin Birth Outcomes and Prenatal Care Utilization in the United States, 1981-1997
Kogan et al.
JAMA 2000;284:335-341.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Entry Into Prenatal Care--United States, 1989-1997
JAMA 2000;283:2924-2925.
FULL TEXT
Can Perinatal HIV Infection Be Eliminated in the United States?
Mofenson
JAMA 1999;282:577-579.
FULL TEXT
Benefits and Limitations of Prenatal Care
Kogan et al.
JAMA 1998;280:2071-2073.
FULL TEXT
Hospital Services in the United States and Canada
Aitken et al.
JAMA 1998;280:599-600.
FULL TEXT
Benefits and Limitations of Prenatal Care: From Counting Visits to Measuring Content
Misra and Guyer
JAMA 1998;279:1661-1662.
FULL TEXT
|
