Entrar/Registro  
HOME SPANISH
 
Gaceta Médica de México
   
MENU

Contents by Year, Volume and Issue

Table of Contents

General Information

Instructions for Authors

Message to Editor

Editorial Board






>Journals >Gaceta Médica de México >Year 2013, Issue 3


Martínez GJM, Delgado RM
Effect of maternal education program on duration of hospitalization of the newborn and the mother after delivery
Gac Med Mex 2013; 149 (3)

Language: Español
References: 19
Page: 250-253
PDF: 76.71 Kb.


Full text




ABSTRACT

Objectives: To determine the association of maternal education (ME) and the admission of the newborn (NB) and the duration of admission of the NB and the mother after delivery in the hospital. Methods: A multicenter observational study conducted in four hospitals in Andalusia from January 2011 to January 2012. The study population consisted of primiparous women who gave birth in one of these facilities. Sociodemographic variables were studied as was the use of health services. The data were collected through interviews and reviews of medical history. Results: A total of 520 primiparous women were included. No association was found between the performance of ME and the number of days that the woman remains hospitalized after birth (p = 0.691), or in the RN hospital days (p = 0.305). Neither was associated with the need for admission to the neonatal unit RN (OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.47-1.32) or ICU (OR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.09-1.52). Conclusions: The ME does not appear to have an influence on the duration of hospital stay of the mother and the newborn after delivery.


Key words: Prenatal care, Pregnancy, Use of health services, Duration of hospitalization.


REFERENCIAS

  1. Martín Zurro A. Atención primaria de salud. En: Cano Pérez JF, Martín Zurro A. Compendio de Atención Primaria. Atención Primaria. Conceptos, organización y práctica clínica. 3.ª ed. Barcelona: Elsevier; 2010. p. 3-10.

  2. Junta de Andalucía. Consejería de Salud. Proceso Asistencial Integrado Embarazo, Parto y Puerperio. 2.ª ed. Sevilla: Consejería de Salud; 2005.

  3. Gagnon AJ, Sandall J. Educación prenatal grupal o individual para el parto, la maternidad/paternidad o ambos (Revisión Cochrane traducida). En: La Biblioteca Cochrane Plus, 2008 Número 2. Oxford: Update Software Ltd. Disponible en: http://www.update-software.com. (Traducida de The Cochrane Library, 2008 Issue 2.Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.).

  4. Spinelli A, Baglio G, Donati S, Grandolfo ME, Osborn J. Do antenatal classes benefit the mother and her baby? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003;13(2):94-101.

  5. Consonni EB, Calderon IM, Consonni M, De Conti MH, Prevedel TTs, Rudge MV. A multidisciplinary program of preparation for childbirth and motherhood: maternal anxiety and perinatal outcomes. Reprod Health. 2010;7:28.

  6. Albizu L, Goñi J, Mejías A. Antenatal education and recognition of the onset of labour. An Sist Sanit Navar. 2000;23(2):337-42.

  7. Maderuelo JA, Haro AM, Pérez F, Cercas LJ, Valentín AB, Morán E. Satisfacción de las mujeres con el seguimiento del embarazo: Diferencias entre los dispositivos asistenciales. Gac Sanit. 2006;20(1):31-9.

  8. Lumley J, Brown S. Attenders and nonattenders at childbirth education classes in Australia: how do they and their births differ? Birth. 1993;20(3): 123-30.

  9. Artieta-Pinedo I, Paz-Pascual C, Grandes G, et al. The benefits of antenatal education for the childbirth process in Spain. Nurs Res. 2010; 59(3):194-202.

  10. De la Pisa Latorre L, Idígoras Hurtado J, Ruiz Plaza JM. Influencia de la educación maternal en la incidencia de lesiones del suelo pélvico. Estudio en el Área Sanitaria del Hospital Virgen del Rocío. Metas de enfermería. 1999;19:37-42.

  11. Lauzon L, Hodnett E. Antenatal education for self-diagnosis of the onset of active labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD000935.

  12. Márquez García A, Pozo Muñoz F, Sierra Ruiz M, Sierra Huerta R, Aguado Taberné C, Jaramillo Martín I. Perfil de las embarazadas que no acuden a un programa de educación maternal. Medicina de Familia (And). 2001;2(3). Disponible en: http://www.samfyc.es/Revista/PDF/v2n3/original5.pdf. Consultado el 23 de mayo de 2012.

  13. Pina F, Martínez ME, Rojas P, Campos M, Rodríguez MS. La planificación y la educación maternal favorecen el desarrollo del parto. Enferm Clín. 1994;4(5):209-15.

  14. Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad. Motivo de ingreso en el hospital. Disponible en: http://pestadistico.msc.es/PEMSC25/Informe.aspx?IdNodo=6473&ReportPath=%2fBARSAN%2fMotivo+del+ingreso. Consultado el 21 de mayo de 2012.

  15. Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo. Agencia de Calidad del SNS. Instituto de Información Sanitaria. Estudio Piloto, Indicadores Clave, Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo. 2005.

  16. Molina Salmerón M, Martínez García AM, Martínez García FJ, Gutiérrez Luque E, Sáez Blázquez R, Escribano Alfaro PM. Impacto de la educación maternal: vivencia subjetiva materna y evolución del parto. Enferm Univ Albacete. 1996:20-9.

  17. Organización Mundial de la Salud. Having a baby in Europe, reporton a study. Public Health Rev. 1986;14(3-4):255-383.

  18. Handfield B, Bell R. Do childbirth classes influence decision making about labor and postpartum issues? Birth. 1995;22(3):153-60.

  19. Brown S, Small R, Argus B, Davis PG, Krastev A. Early postnatal discharge from hospitalfor healthy mothers and term infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;(3):CD002958.






>Journals >Gaceta Médica de México >Year 2013, Issue 3
 

· Journal Index 
· Links 






       
Copyright 2019