[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.234.223.162. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    Original Investigation
    Obstetrics and Gynecology
    August 6, 2020

    Quality of Antenatal Care for Women Who Experience Imprisonment in Ontario, Canada

    Author Affiliations
    • 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    • 2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
    • 3Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    • 4Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    • 5ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    • 6Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
    JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(8):e2012576. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.12576
    Key Points español 中文 (chinese)

    Question  Do women who experience imprisonment in Ontario, Canada, have adequate antenatal care?

    Findings  In this cohort study of 626 pregnancies during time in prison and 2327 pregnancies in women with time in prison but not while pregnant, of the women who experienced imprisonment during pregnancy, 30.8% had a first-trimester visit, 48.4% had 8 or more antenatal care visits, and 34.5% received ultrasonography in their first trimester. Of the women who experienced imprisonment but not during pregnancy, 47.5% had a first trimester visit, 59.2% had 8 or more antenatal care visits, and 38.5% received ultrasonography in their first trimester.

    Meaning  The findings suggest that the odds of receiving antenatal care are lower for women who have experienced imprisonment than for the general population and that further research and interventions are needed to improve antenatal care in women who experience imprisonment.

    Abstract

    Importance  Women who experience imprisonment have high morbidity and an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Antenatal care could modify pregnancy-related risks, but there is a lack of evidence regarding antenatal care in this population.

    Objectives  To examine antenatal care quality indicators for women who experience imprisonment and to compare these data with data for the general population.

    Design, Setting, and Participants  This population-based, retrospective cohort study used linked correctional and health administrative data from women released from provincial prison in Ontario, Canada, in 2010 and women in the general population with deliveries at 20 weeks’ gestation or greater from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2015. Data analysis was performed from January 1, 2017, to May 4, 2020.

    Exposures  Pregnancies in women with time in prison during pregnancy (prison pregnancies), pregnancies in women with time in prison but not while pregnant (prison control pregnancies), and pregnancies in women in the general population (general population pregnancies).

    Main Outcomes and Measures  Antenatal care quality indicators: first-trimester visit, first-trimester ultrasonography, and 8 or more antenatal care visits.

    Results  A total of 626 prison pregnancies in 529 women (mean [SD] age, 26.6 [5.4] years), 2327 prison control pregnancies in 1570 women (mean [SD] age, 26.2 [5.4] years), and 1 308 879 general population pregnancies in 884 063 women (mean [SD] age, 30.3 [5.3] years) were studied. Of 626 prison pregnancies, 193 women (30.8%; 95% CI, 27.1%-34.6%) had a first-trimester visit, 272 (48.4%; 95% CI, 44.4%-52.4%) had at least 8 antenatal care visits, and 209 (34.6%; 95% CI, 31.0%-38.4%) received first-trimester ultrasonography. In 2327 prison control pregnancies, 1106 women (47.5%; 95% CI, 45.3%-49.8%) had a first-trimester visit, 1356 (59.2%; 95% CI, 56.9%-61.4%) had 8 or more antenatal care visits, and 893 (38.5%; 95% CI, 36.4%-40.6%) received first-trimester ultrasonography. Compared with 1 308 879 general population pregnancies, the odds of antenatal care were lower for the first-trimester visit (odds ratios [ORs], 0.11 [95% CI, 0.09-0.13] in prison pregnancies and 0.23 [95% CI, 0.21-0.25] in prison control pregnancies), 8 or more antenatal care visits (ORs, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.14-0.19] in prison pregnancies and 0.25 [95% CI, 0.23-0.28] in prison control pregnancies), and first-trimester ultrasonography (ORs, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.36-0.50] in prison pregnancies and 0.51 [95% CI, 0.46-0.55] in prison control pregnancies).

    Conclusions and Relevance  This study found that women who experienced imprisonment were substantially less likely to receive adequate antenatal care than were women in the general population whether or not they were in prison during pregnancy. Efforts are needed to improve antenatal care for this population both in prison and in the community.

    ×