The effectiveness of antenatal education on improving labour and birth outcomes – A systematic review and meta-analysis
Women and Birth, ISSN: 1871-5192, Vol: 38, Issue: 1, Page: 101843
2025
- 4Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures4
- Readers4
Review Description
The World Health Organisation has suggested antenatal education be integrated within standard antenatal care. However, evidence for the impact of antenatal education varies. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated randomised controlled trial evidence regarding the influence of antenatal education on labour and birth outcomes. Electronic databases (CINAHL, PubMed, Embase and Scopus) were searched for randomised controlled trials published between 2011 and 2023. Primary outcomes were mode of birth, epidural analgesia use, and induction of labour. Subgroup analysis by type of education (general education, specific technique, birth plan use) was performed. Three authors reviewed studies and extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan. Seventeen studies (n=7260 participants) were included, most (n=10) had low risk of bias. Antenatal education was associated with decreased rates of planned caesarean sections (Relative Risk (RR) 0.87; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.83–0.92, I 2 =0 %), but not unplanned caesareans (RR 0.99; 95 % CI, 0.88–1.12, I 2 =0 %),as well as increased vaginal births (RR 1.14; 95 % CI 1.07–1.21, I 2 =79 %) and increased spontaneous onset of labour (n=10 studies, RR, 1.07; 95 % CI, 1.01–1.14, I 2 =0 %). Epidural analgesia use (RR, 0.88; 95 % CI, 0.88–1.00, I 2 =78 %) was not significantly affected. General education and birth plan care interventions were found to be more effective than specific technique care. Antenatal education programs studied improve some labour and birth outcomes, although with substantial heterogeneity regarding mode of birth and epidural analgesia use findings. General education appeared more effective than specific technique education.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871519224003032; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2024.101843; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85208597284&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39752771; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1871519224003032
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know