(324) Perceived barriers and facilitators to implementation of group prenatal care among Michigan prenatal care providers

Thursday, January 30, 2025

10:30 AM – 12:30 PM

Submitting Author and Presenting Author(s)

Rachel A. Clark, BS (she/her/hers)

University of Michigan Medical School
Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States

Coauthor(s)

Harini Pennathur, BSE (she/her/hers)

Texas A&M University School of Engineering Medicine, United States
Kenechukwu Odenigbo, BA

University of Michigan Medical School
Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
SP

Shayla Parthasarathy, BS

University of Michigan Medical School
Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
Lisa Kane Low, CNM, PhD (she/her/hers)

University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
Michelle Moniz, MD, MSc (she/her/hers)

Associate Professor
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
Alex Peahl, MD, MSc (she/her/hers)

Michigan Medicine
Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States

Objective: To characterize the use of group prenatal care across the state of Michigan and describe implementation barriers and facilitators.

Study Design: Stakeholders in prenatal care in Michigan were identified using systemic web searches and snowball sampling. Stakeholders representing 19 clinics completed semi-structured interviews or a survey regarding clinic operations, including basic clinic information, if group prenatal care was offered, and barriers and facilitators of implementation. Open-ended questions regarding barriers and facilitators were summarized using qualitative content analysis.

Results: In total, 19 clinics representing 8/10 regions completed the survey, representing an average of 403 patients per site. One Federally Qualified Health Center of the 19 (5%) clinics interviewed offered group prenatal care. Stakeholders cited social support and efficiency as perceived advantages to a group prenatal care model, and thought that staff and patient buy-in could be important facilitators. Disadvantages included scheduling, space, patient discomfort sharing personal information in a group setting, and issues protecting confidentiality as perceived. Further barriers to implementation included insufficient number of patients, space, and lack of trained providers.

Conclusion: Though many obstetric care stakeholders have identified group prenatal care as an important intervention for improving care experience and outcomes, only one clinic in our sample offered this service. Future work is needed to understand how to overcome the notable barriers to implementing group prenatal care in diverse clinic types and practice settings.