Search

Aim: To identify the barriers associated with inadequate antenatal attendance by disadvantaged women in Australia and to further explore how these barriers are experienced by this population group. Design: A qualitative descriptive study utilizing semi‐structured interviews and thematic analysis. Methods: Interviews were conducted with 11 pregnant women who self‐identified as experiencing disadvantage, purposively sampled from a local government area of Victoria, Australia, characterized by socio‐economic disadvantage. Data were collected from February to July 2019. Results: Study participants reported a range of barriers to receiving timely and adequate antenatal care (ANC). For several women, a combination of personal (e.g., emotions, knowledge), health service provision (e.g., limited access to continuity of care provider and continuity of information, inflexible scheduling, difficulty travelling, staff attitudes), and broader social‐contextual factors (e.g., financial situation, language, cultural norms) were ultimately insurmountable. Whereas some barriers were experienced as hassles or annoyances, others were unacceptable, overwhelming, or humiliating. Conclusion: Women experiencing disadvantage in Australia value ANC but face multiple and complex barriers that undermine timely and regular access. Implications for the Profession and/Patient Care: A wide range of strategies targeting barriers across multiple levels of the social‐ecological environment are required if ANC attendance rates are to improve and ultimately redress existing health disparities. Various continuity of care models are well‐placed to address many of the identified barriers and should be made more accessible to women, and particularly those women experiencing disadvantage. Impact: Antenatal care appointments promote the health of women and their babies during pregnancy, but for many women, particularly those experiencing disadvantage, access is delayed or inadequate. ANC providers play a critical role in facilitating timely and adequate care. Health service practitioners and management, and health services policymakers need to understand the complexity of the barriers women encounter. These stakeholders can utilize the findings reported herein to develop more effective strategies for overcoming multiple and multi‐level barriers. Reporting Method: The study is reported in accordance with the relevant EQUATOR guidelines: the standards for reporting qualitative research (SRQR) and consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ). Patient or Public Contribution: No patient or public contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: Ocular growth and development differs between preterm and term-born infants and may cause long-term negative consequences for visual function, but contemporary data on long-term visual outcomes in representative samples of the highest risk extremely low birth weight (ELBW, <1000 g birth weight) or extremely preterm (EP, <28 weeks' gestation) survivors are lacking. Our objective was to compare visual functioning between ELBW/EP and normal birth weight (NBW, >2499 g birth weight) control adolescents., Methods: Geographically determined cohort study of 228 consecutive ELBW/EP survivors born in the state of Victoria in 1991 and 1992, and 166 randomly selected NBW controls assessed between 14 and 20 years of age. Visual acuity, stereopsis, convergence, color perception, and visual perception were assessed and contrasted between groups., Results: ELBW/EP subjects had significantly worse visual acuity with habitual correction in both the left and right eyes, and for the best eye (P < .001). The ELBW/EP adolescents also exhibited poorer stereopsis, odds ratio (OR) 3.22 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.78 to 5.84), and convergence, OR 2.76 (CI 1.32 to 5.75) than controls, and more problems with visual perception, OR 3.09 (CI 1.67 to 5.71) after habitual correction., Conclusions: Despite advances in medical care improving the survival rate of high-risk ELBW/EP infants, visual morbidity is still relatively high compared with controls in late adolescence.