Search

Background Evidence relating maternal history of abuse before pregnancy with pregnancy outcomes is controversial. This study aims to examine the association between maternal histories of abuse before pregnancy and the risk of preterm delivery and low birth weight. Methods We searched Subject Headings and keywords for exposure and the outcomes through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Psycinfo, CINAHL, Scopus, PILOTS, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global and Web of Science Core Collection in April 2017. We selected original studies that reported associations between maternal histories of abuse of any type and either preterm delivery or low birth weight. Studies that included interventions during pregnancy to lower maternal stress but reported no control data were excluded. We utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scales for observational studies to assess the risk of bias in the primary studies. Two independent reviewers performed the selection of pertinent studies, assessment of risk of bias, and data extraction. Unadjusted pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) were calculated for the two outcomes of preterm delivery and low birth weight in 16 included studies. Results Maternal history of abuse before pregnancy was significantly associated with preterm delivery (OR 1.28, 95% CI: 1.12–1.47) and low birth weight (OR 1.35, 95% CI: 1.14–1.59). A substantial level of heterogeneity was detected within the two groups of studies reporting preterm birth and low birth weight (I2 = 75% and 69% respectively). Subgroup analysis based on the specific time of abuse before pregnancy indicated that childhood abuse increases the risk of low birth weight by 57% (95% CI: 0.99–2.49). When the included studies were categorized based on study design, cohort studies showed the highest effect estimates on preterm delivery and low birth weight (OR: 1.69, 95%CI: 1.19–2.40, OR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.06–2.3, respectively). Conclusions We recommend that more high quality research studies on this topic are necessary to strengthen the inference. At the practice level, we suggest more attention in detecting maternal history of abuse before pregnancy during antenatal visits and using this information to inform risk assessment for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Trial registration Registration number: PROSPERO (CRD42016033231). Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-018-2030-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Prenatal records are potentially powerful tools for the translation of best-practice evidence into routine prenatal care. Although all jurisdictions in Canada use standardized prenatal records to guide care and provide data for health surveillance, their content related to risk factors such as maternal smoking and alcohol use varies widely. Literature is lacking on how prenatal records are developed or updated to integrate research evidence. This multiphase project aimed to identify key contextual factors influencing decision-making and evidence use among Canadian prenatal record committees (PRCs), and formulate recommendations for the prenatal record review process in Canada. Methods Phase 1 comprised key informant interviews with PRC leaders across 10 Canadian jurisdictions. Phase 2, was a qualitative comparative case study of PRC factors influencing evidence-use and decision-making in five selected jurisdictions. Interview data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Phase 3 involved a dissemination workshop with key stakeholders to review and refine recommendations derived from Phases 1 and 2. Results Prenatal record review processes differed considerably across Canadian jurisdictions. PRC decision-making was complex, revealing the competing functions of the prenatal record as a clinical guide, documentation tool and data source. Internal contextual factors influencing evidence use included PRC resources to conduct evidence reviews; group composition and dynamics; perceived function of the prenatal record; and expert opinions. External contextual factors included concerns about user buy-in; health system capacities; and pressures from public health stakeholders. Our recommendations highlight the need for: broader stakeholder involvement and explicit use of decision-support strategies to support the revision process; a national template of evidence-informed changes that can be used across jurisdictions; consideration of both clinical and surveillance functions of the prenatal record; and dissemination plans to communicate prenatal record modifications. Conclusions Decision-making related to prenatal record content involves a negotiated effort to balance research evidence with the needs and preferences of prenatal care providers, health system capacities as well as population health priorities. The development of a national template for prenatal records would reduce unnecessary duplication of PRC work and enhance the consistency of prenatal care delivery and perinatal surveillance data across Canada.