|Source||Location and Type of Study||Intervention||Stillbirths/Perinatal Outcomes|
|Intervention/observational studies of facility based ANC in developed countries|
|Homer et al. 2001 ||
Australia (Sydney). Hospital-based study.|
RCT. N = 1089 (N = 550 intervention group, N = 539 controls).
|Compared the impact of a community-based model of continuity of care employing midwives and obstetricians to standard hospital-based care. Women were randomised prior to ANC booking.||SBR: 7.3/1000 (4/550) vs. 3.7/1000 (2/539) in intervention vs. control groups, respectively [No statistical significance data].|
|Ratten 1992 ||
Australia (Melbourne). Tertiary referral hospital.|
Prospective cohort study at The Royal Women's Hospital. N = 780 low-risk pregnant women in shared care (intervention group), N = 15436 hospital patients (control group).
|Compared pregnancy outcomes among participants in a public hospital based shared ANC program to those of hospital patients who received standard care.||
SBR: 5.1/1000 vs 12.5/1000 in intervention group (those who completed the ANC program) vs. controls, respectively. No statistical significance data.|
PMR: 6.4/1000 vs 20.5/1000 in intervention group (those who completed the ANC program) vs. controls, respectively. No statistical significance data.
|Siegel et al. 1985 ||
USA (North Carolina). Rural community.|
Quasi-experimental, controlled, before-after pilot study. Pregnant women (N = 3384 intervention, N = 2996 controls).
|Assessed the impact of a rural regional perinatal care program||
Fetal deaths: [NS]|
Note: Fetal deaths, NMR, and birth-weight specific mortality rates declined in both pilot and control regions, for both races, and especially for 1501–2500 g infants.
|Sokol et al 1980 ||
USA (Cleveland, Ohio). Hospital-based study.|
Case-control study. N = 5416 women.
|Compared pregnancy outcomes among women enrolled in a multidisciplinary maternal and infant care project (cases) with women who received standard ANC/infant care (controls).||
SBR: 57% reduction (P < 0.003)|
[6.29/1000 vs 14.77/1000 in intervention vs. control groups, respectively]
PMR: 60% reduction (P < 0.0001)
[14.97/1000 vs 38.39/1000 in intervention vs. control groups, respectively]