Skip Navigation

Strengthen the Evidence for Maternal and Child Health Programs

Sign up for MCHalert eNewsletter

Established Evidence Results

Results for Keyword:

Below are articles that support specific interventions to advance MCH National Performance Measures (NPMs) and Standardized Measures (SMs). Most interventions contain multiple components as part of a coordinated strategy/approach.

You can filter by intervention component below and sort to refine your search.

Start a New Search

Displaying records 1 through 2 (2 total).

Bergstrom M, Kieler H, Waldenstrom U. Psychoprophylaxis during labor: associations with labor-related outcomes and experience of childbirth. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89(6):794-800.

Evidence Rating: Moderate Evidence

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Psychoprophylaxis, PATIENT/CONSUMER

Intervention Description: To study whether use of psychoprophylaxis during labor affects course of labor and experience of childbirth in nulliparous women.

Intervention Results: Use of psychoprophylaxis during labor was associated with a lower risk of emergency cesarean section (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37-0.88), but an increased risk of augmentation of labor (adjusted OR 1.68; 95% CI 1.23-2.28). No statistical differences were found in length of labor (adjusted OR 1.32; 95% CI 0.95-1.83), Apgar score < 7 at five minutes (adjusted OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.33-2.01), epidural analgesia (adjusted OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.84-1.53) or fearful childbirth experience (adjusted OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.62-1.74).

Conclusion: Psychoprophylaxis may reduce the rate of emergency cesarean section but may not affect the experience of childbirth.

Study Design: RCT

Setting: 15 antenatal clinics

Population of Focus: Nulliparous women with a planned vaginal delivery who gave birth after recruitment at antenatal clinics between October 2005 and January 2007

Data Source: Not specified

Sample Size: n=857

Age Range: Not Specified

Access Abstract

Shand, A. W., Lewis-Jones, B., Nielsen, T., Svensson, J., Lainchbury, A., Henry, A., & Nassar, N. (2022). Birth outcomes by type of attendance at antenatal education: An observational study. The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 62(6), 859–867. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13541

Evidence Rating: Emerging

Intervention Components (click on component to see a list of all articles that use that intervention): Psychoprophylaxis, Childbirth Education Classes, PATIENT_CONSUMER

Intervention Description: Given the rising rates of caesarean section, we aimed to determine whether there was a difference in mode of birth in women based on the type of antenatal education attended.

Intervention Results: Five hundred and five women with birth data were included. A higher proportion of women who attended psychoprophylaxis education had a vaginal birth (instrumental/spontaneous) (79%) compared with women who attended birth and parenting, other or no education (69%, 67%, 60%, respectively P = 0.045). After adjusting for maternal characteristics, birth and hospital factors, the association was attenuated (odds ratio 2.03; 95% CI 0.93–4.43).

Conclusion: Women who attended psychoprophylaxis couple-based education had a trend toward higher rates of vaginal birth. Randomised trials comparing different types of antenatal education are required to determine whether psychoprophylaxis education can reduce caesarean section rates and improve other birth outcomes.

Access Abstract

The MCH Digital Library is one of six special collections at Geogetown University, the nation's oldest Jesuit institution of higher education. It is supported in part by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under award number U02MC31613, MCH Advanced Education Policy with an award of $700,000/year. The library is also supported through foundation and univerity funding. This information or content and conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by HRSA, HHS or the U.S. Government.