No abstract

Objective To describe patient differences by prenatal care (PNC) model and identify factors that interact with race to predict more attended prenatal appointments, a key component of PNC adherence. Methods This retrospective cohort study used administrative data targeting prenatal patient utilization from two OB clinics with different care models (resident vs. attending OB) from within one large midwestern healthcare system. All appointment data among patients receiving prenatal care at either clinic between September 2, 2020, and December 31, 2021, were extracted. Multivariable linear regression was performed to identify predictors of attended appointments within the resident clinic, as moderated by race (Black vs. White). Results A total of 1034 prenatal patients were included: 653 (63%) served by the resident clinic (appointments = 7822) and 381 (38%) by the attending clinic (appointments = 4627). Patients were significantly different across insurance, race/ethnicity, partner status, and age between clinics (p < 0.0001). Despite prenatal patients at both clinics being scheduled for approximately the same number of appointments, resident clinic patients attended 1.13 (0.51, 1.74) fewer appointments (p = 0.0004). The number of attended appointments was predicted by insurance in crude analysis (β = 2.14, p < 0.0001), with effect modification by race (Black vs. White) in final fitted analysis. Black patients with public insurance attended 2.04 fewer appointments than White patients with public insurance (7.60 vs. 9.64) and Black non-Hispanic patients with private insurance attended 1.65 more appointments than White non-Hispanic or Latino patients with private insurance (7.21 vs. 5.56). Conclusion Our study highlights the potential reality that the resident care model, with more care delivery challenges, may be underserving patients who are inherently more vulnerable to PNC non-adherence at care onset. Our findings show that patients attend more appointments at the resident clinic if publicly insured, but less so if they are Black than White.

Background Maternal ethnicity, prepregnancy diabetes, and preconception folic acid intake, are all associated with increased risk of neural tube defects in the United States. We assessed the association between prepregnancy diabetes and preconception folic acid use by Hispanic ethnicity. Methods We used population‐based, cross‐sectional survey data from New York City, Georgia and Puerto Rico's 2016–2018 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS). Prepregnancy Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes was self‐reported. Adequate preconception folic acid intake was defined as intake of a multivitamin, a prenatal vitamin, or a folic acid vitamin 4–7 times/week during the month before pregnancy. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted prevalence odds ratio (aPORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), stratified by Hispanic ethnicity. Results Prepregnancy diabetes was reported by 2.9% of Hispanic and 3.6% of non‐Hispanic participants. Adequate preconception folic acid use was reported by 25.9% and 39.9% of Hispanics and non‐Hispanics, respectively. There was an inverse association between prepregnancy diabetes and preconception folic acid use among Hispanics (aPOR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.31, 1.81), while the association was positive among non‐Hispanics (aPOR = 1.26; 95% CI = 0.70, 2.26); however, the 95% confidence intervals for both groups contained the null value. Conclusions The association between prepregnancy diabetes and folic acid intake varied by Hispanic ethnicity. Our hypothesis that reproductive‐aged women with prepregnancy diabetes may receive timely diabetic care, including health counseling to take preconception folic acid, was not supported by our study data. Future studies should examine the association in additional PRAMS sites. Preconception health screening, and folic acid intake among Hispanics, should be strengthened.