Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE--The aim was to compare the social characteristics, the pregnancy outcome, and the antenatal care of women in France who did not receive maternity benefits to women who did. These benefits (860 FF, approx 86 pounds per month) are given to every pregnant woman, starting in the second trimester. Payments are made on the condition that at least three antenatal visits are made, the first being before the end of the first trimester. DESIGN--The study involved a random sample of women who were interviewed after delivery during their stay in hospital. Data on pregnancy outcome were collected from medical records. SETTING--The study was carried out in four public maternity units in different regions of France. PARTICIPANTS--1692 women were included in the analysis (86.8% of the selected sample). Of 257 exclusions, 40 had multiple pregnancies, 189 had missing data, and 28 did not answer the question concerning maternity benefits. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS--4.3% of the women did not receive any maternity benefits. These women lived in poorer social conditions than the women who received the benefits. They had a higher preterm delivery rate, after controlling for risk factors in a logistic regression. Women without maternity benefits were characterised by a lower level of care, yet the majority began their antenatal care during the first trimester or had more than six visits. CONCLUSIONS--Not receiving maternity benefits during pregnancy is an index of an underprivileged situation and a risk factor for pregnancy outcome.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Berkowitz G. S., Kasl S. V. The role of psychosocial factors in spontaneous preterm delivery. J Psychosom Res. 1983;27(4):283–290. doi: 10.1016/0022-3999(83)90050-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Blondel B., Kaminski M., Breart G. Antenatal care and maternal demographic and social characteristics. Evolution in France between 1972 and 1976. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1980 Sep;34(3):157–163. doi: 10.1136/jech.34.3.157. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Blondel B., Saurel-Cubizolles M. J., Kaminski M. Impact of the French system of statutory visits on antenatal care. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1982 Sep;36(3):183–186. doi: 10.1136/jech.36.3.183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Blondel B., Zuber M. C. Marital status and cohabitation during pregnancy: relationship with social conditions, antenatal care and pregnancy outcome in France. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 1988 Apr;2(2):125–137. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.1988.tb00192.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Buekens P. Variations in provision and uptake of antenatal care. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1990 Mar;4(1):187–205. doi: 10.1016/s0950-3552(05)80219-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Eisner V., Brazie J. V., Pratt M. W., Hexter A. C. The risk of low birthweight. Am J Public Health. 1979 Sep;69(9):887–893. doi: 10.2105/ajph.69.9.887. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kramer M. S. Intrauterine growth and gestational duration determinants. Pediatrics. 1987 Oct;80(4):502–511. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Moore T. R., Origel W., Key T. C., Resnik R. The perinatal and economic impact of prenatal care in a low-socioeconomic population. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986 Jan;154(1):29–33. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(86)90387-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Newton R. W., Webster P. A., Binu P. S., Maskrey N., Phillips A. B. Psychosocial stress in pregnancy and its relation to the onset of premature labour. Br Med J. 1979 Aug 18;2(6187):411–413. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.6187.411. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wiener G., Milton T. Demographic correlates of low birth weight. Am J Epidemiol. 1970 Mar;91(3):260–272. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a121135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]