While the number of women in developed countries who plan a home birth is low, the number has increased over the past decade in the US, and there is evidence that more women would choose this option if it were readily available. Rates of planned home birth range from 0.1% in Sweden to 20% in the Netherlands, where home birth has always been an integrated part of the maternity system. Benefits of planned home birth include lower rates of maternal morbidity, such as postpartum hemorrhage, and perineal lacerations, and lower rates of interventions such as episiotomy, instrumental vaginal birth, and cesarean birth. Women who have a planned home birth have high rates of satisfaction related to home being a more comfortable environment and feeling more in control of the experience. While maternal outcomes related to planned birth at home have been consistently positive within the literature, reported neonatal outcomes during planned home birth are more variable. While the majority of investigations of planned home birth compared with hospital birth have found no difference in intrapartum fetal deaths, neonatal deaths, low Apgar scores, or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit, there have been reports in the US, as well as a meta-analysis, that indicated more adverse neonatal outcomes associated with home birth. There are multiple challenges associated with research designs focused on planned home birth, in part because conducting randomized controlled trials is not feasible. This report will review current research studies published between 2004 and 2014 related to maternal and neonatal outcomes of planned home birth, and discuss strengths, limitations, and opportunities regarding planned home birth.

Gastrointestinal discomforts are a very common complaint in pregnancy. In fact, most pregnant women will experience at least one discomfort. This article focuses on 5 common conditions that occur in pregnancy: gastroesophageal reflux disease, diarrhea, constipation, hemorrhoids, and pica. While these conditions do occur in men and nonpregnant women, they occur more frequently in pregnancy because of the anatomic and physiologic changes associated with gestation. The type and severity of symptoms can vary from individual to individual, making treatment a challenge for healthcare providers, particularly when caring for pregnant women because the effects of medications and other treatments on the developing fetus are often not extensively studied. While these discomforts are rarely life-threatening, they can cause significant distress and impair quality of life. The goal of this article was to provide a summary of the anatomic and physiological changes during pregnancy that contribute to the increasing incidence of these discomforts and to provide information about each condition including prevalence, symptoms, and treatment modalities.

Background: While group antenatal care (ANC) has been delivered and studied in high-income countries for over a decade, it has only recently been introduced as an alternative to individual care in sub-Saharan Africa. Although the experimental design of the studies from high-resource countries have been scientifically rigorous, findings cannot be generalized to low-resource countries with low literacy rates and high rates of maternal and newborn morbidity and mortality. The Group Antenatal Care Delivery Project (GRAND) is a collaboration between the University of Michigan in the United States and the Dodowa Health Research Centre in Ghana. GRAND is a 5-year, cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT). Our intervention—group ANC—consists of grouping women by similar gestational ages of pregnancy into small groups at the first ANC visit. They then meet with the same group and the same midwife at the recommended intervals for care. Objective: This study aims to improve health literacy, increase birth preparedness and complication readiness, and optimize maternal and newborn outcomes among women attending ANC at seven rural health facilities in the Eastern Region of Ghana. Methods: Quantitative data will be collected at four time points using a secure web application for data collection and a database management tool. Data will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis to test the differences between the two arms: women randomized to group-based ANC and women randomized to routine individual ANC. We will conduct a process evaluation concurrently to identify and document patient, provider, and system barriers and facilitators to program implementation. Results: The study was funded in September 2018. Recruitment and enrollment of participants and data collection started in July 2019. In November 2021, we completed participant enrollment in the study (n=1761), and we completed data collection at the third trimester in May 2022 (n=1284). Data collection at the additional three time points is ongoing: 6 weeks postpartum, 6 months postpartum, and 1 year postpartum. Conclusions: This study is significant and timely because it is among the first RCTs to be conducted to examine the effects of group ANC among low-literacy and nonliterate participants. Our findings have the potential to impact how clinical care is delivered to low-literacy populations, both globally and domestically, to improve maternal and newborn outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04033003; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04033003 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/40828