Abstract
A controlled evaluation of health education for pregnant women was implemented from 1983 to 1985 in the French north alpine rural area with a quasi-experimental design. Altogether 116 villages (88,983 inhabitants) constituted the pilot zone where the programme took place. This was matched with a control zone of 114 villages (78,800 inhabitants) where routine antenatal surveillance was not changed. The programme involved a large group of health and social workers and institutions and several educational devices. There was a total of 3143 births to the study women during the programme. In all the 45 maternity clinics of the region the mothers were questioned as to their pregnancy history and delivery outcome. The programme succeeded in increasing, in the pilot zone, the proportion of women who benefited from a monthly antenatal visit, whereas no positive trend was shown in the control zones, even when controlling for some identified potential confounders (age and distance to health care providers). Similarly, women in the pilot zone were more likely to attend delivery preparation sessions than women in the control zone. However, many conditions revealed no differential modification in the two study zones. Perinatal morbidity is lower in the north alpine rural area than in the whole country. These results favour further development of social policies for pregnancy and of prenatal care, complemented by better information and training for health and social workers; they also favour better information as to medical monitoring, hygiene, and social rights related to pregnancy.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Hall M. H., Chng P. K., MacGillivray I. Is routine antenatal care worth while? Lancet. 1980 Jul 12;2(8185):78–80. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(80)92950-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kiely J. L., Paneth N., Susser M. An assessment of the effects of maternal age and parity in different components of perinatal mortality. Am J Epidemiol. 1986 Mar;123(3):444–454. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114259. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kleinman J. C., Kopstein A. Smoking during pregnancy, 1967-80. Am J Public Health. 1987 Jul;77(7):823–825. doi: 10.2105/ajph.77.7.823. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pearce N. E., Cryer P. C. Analysis of the components of a linear trend in proportions. Am J Epidemiol. 1986 Jul;124(1):127–133. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Robine J. M., Maguin P., Nicaud V., Hatton F. Facteurs déterminants des pratiques de santé: exemple de la surveillance de la grossesse en milieu rural et urbain. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. 1985;33(3):203–211. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Salonen J. T., Kottke T. E., Jacobs D. R., Jr, Hannan P. J. Analysis of community-based cardiovascular disease prevention studies--evaluation issues in the North Karelia Project and the Minnesota Heart Health Program. Int J Epidemiol. 1986 Jun;15(2):176–182. doi: 10.1093/ije/15.2.176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Siegel E., Gillings D., Campbell S., Guild P. A controlled evaluation of rural regional perinatal care: impact on mortality and morbidity. Am J Public Health. 1985 Mar;75(3):246–253. doi: 10.2105/ajph.75.3.246. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Strachan D. P. Antenatal booking and perinatal mortality in Scotland 1972-1982. Int J Epidemiol. 1987 Jun;16(2):229–233. doi: 10.1093/ije/16.2.229. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Windsor R. A., Cutter G., Morris J., Reese Y., Manzella B., Bartlett E. E., Samuelson C., Spanos D. The effectiveness of smoking cessation methods for smokers in public health maternity clinics: a randomized trial. Am J Public Health. 1985 Dec;75(12):1389–1392. doi: 10.2105/ajph.75.12.1389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wollast E., Vandenbussche P., Buekens P. Evaluation de la surveillance prénatale en Belgique et comparaison entre les secteurs médicaux publics et privés. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. 1986;34(1):52–58. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]