Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 106, Issue 6, pp e401–e407 | Cite as

Knowledge change associated with participation in prenatal education programs in Ontario: A cohort study

  • Katelyn M. GodinEmail author
  • Gillian D. Alton
  • Harshani P. Gangodawilage
  • Theresa D. Procter
  • Natalie B. Bourdages
  • Susan E. Blue
  • Sarah A. Edwards
  • Melissa J. Horan
Quantitative Research
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to examine how participation in prenatal programs delivered by Ontario public health units influences pregnant women’s pregnancy-related knowledge. Secondary objectives were to examine the socio-demographic characteristics of women participating in these programs and assess program satisfaction.

METHODS: A cohort study was conducted of 511 adult pregnant women who were registered for a prenatal program within one of seven Ontario public health units. Participants completed a pre-program survey, which examined socio-demographic and pregnancy characteristics, and baseline pregnancy-related knowledge. After finishing the program, participants completed a post-program survey investigating pregnancy-related knowledge and program satisfaction. Pregnancy-related knowledge was assessed using the Healthy Pregnancies Knowledge Survey, which captures knowledge within three subtopic areas: healthy pregnancies, healthy lifestyles and breastfeeding.

RESULTS: Participants demonstrated a significant increase in mean knowledge scores, both overall and across each subtopic area. Most participants reported that their program satisfied their questions either mostly or very well across all content areas examined.

CONCLUSION: This study is the first large-scale effort to examine the ability of prenatal programs offered through Ontario public health units to influence clients’ pregnancy-related knowledge. These findings contribute to the evidence base for prenatal education program planning.

Key Words

Prenatal education health knowledge attitudes practice parents program evaluation nursing evaluation research 

Mots Clés

éducation prénatale connaissances attitudes pratiques en santé parents évaluation de programme recherche en évaluation des soins infirmiers 

Résumé

OBJECTIFS: L’objectif principal était d’examiner comment la participation aux programmes prénatals donnés par les bureaux de santé publique de l’Ontario influence les connaissances des femmes enceintes sur la grossesse. Les objectifs secondaires étaient d’examiner les caractéristiques sociodémographiques des femmes qui participent à ces programmes et d’évaluer leur satisfaction par rapport aux programmes.

MÉTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude de cohorte auprès de 511 femmes adultes enceintes inscrites à un programme prénatal dans l’un de sept bureaux de santé publique en Ontario. Avant le programme, les participantes ont rempli un questionnaire portant sur leurs caractéristiques sociodémographiques, leur grossesse et leurs connaissances préalables sur la grossesse. À la fin du programme, elles ont rempli un questionnaire évaluant leurs connaissances sur la grossesse et leur satisfaction par rapport au programme. Les connaissances sur la grossesse ont été évaluées à l’aide du questionnaire Healthy Pregnancies Knowledge Survey, qui sonde les connaissances dans trois sous-domaines: la grossesse en santé, les modes de vie sains et l’allaitement maternel.

RÉSULTATS: La note moyenne des participantes a augmenté de façon significative, globalement et dans chaque sous-domaine de connaissances. La plupart des participantes ont déclaré que le programme avait très bien ou en grande partie répondu à leurs questions dans tous les domaines abordés.

CONCLUSION: Notre étude est la première intervention à grande échelle qui examine la capacité des programmes prénatals offerts par les bureaux de santé publique de l’Ontario à influencer les connaissances des clientes sur la grossesse. Les constatations de l’étude contribueront aux fondements scientifiques de la planification des programmes d’éducation prénatale.

References

  1. 1.
    Public Health Agency of Canada. What Mothers Say: The Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey. Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada, 2009.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Qureshi N, Schofield G, Papaioannou S, Ramsden G, Fear S. Parentcraft classes: Do they affect outcome in childbirth? J Obstet Gynecol 1996;16(5): 358–61. doi: 10.3109/01443619609030045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chalmers B, Mangiaterra V, Porter R. WHO principles of perinatal care: The essential antenatal, perinatal, and postpartum care course. Birth 2001;28(3): 202–7. PMID: 11552969. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-536x.2001.00202.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Health Canada. Family-centred maternity and newborn care: National guidelines. 2000. Available from: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/dca-dea/prena- tal/fcmc1-eng.php (Accessed July 30, 2014).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ontario public health standards [homepage on the Internet]. Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, 2014. Available at: http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/publichealth/oph_standards/docs/ophs_2008.pdf (Accessed July 30, 2014).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gagnon AJ, Sandall J. Individual or group antenatal education for childbirth or parenthood, or both. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;3:CD002869. PMID: 17636711.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Russell CC. Parenting in the Beginning Years: Priorities for Investment. Toronto, ON: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2003.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ateah CA. Prenatal parent education for first-time expectant parents: “Making it through labor is just the beginning...”. J Pediatr Health Care 2013;27(2):91–97. PMID: 23414974. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2011.06.019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Matusicky C, Russell CC. Best practices for parents: What is happening in Canada? Paediatr Child Health 2009;14(10):664–65. PMID: 21119813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Locally Driven Collaborative Projects: Cycle 2 [homepage on the Internet]. Public Health Ontario, 2012. Available at: http://www.publichealthontario.ca url/en/eRepository/LDCP_%20Cycle_2_Overview_2012.pdf (Accessed July 30, 2014).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Godin K, Blue S, Bourdages N, Edwards S, Horan M, MacDougall R, et al. Assessing Public Health Prenatal Education Knowledge: Findings from the LDCP Healthy Pregnancies Project. Woodstock, ON, 2014. Available at: http:// www.publichealthontario.ca/en/eRepository/LDCP_Healthy_Pregnancies_ Knowledge_Survey_Report_2014.pdf (Accessed December 1, 2014).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Registered Nurses Association of Ontario. Breastfeeding Best Practice Guidelines for Nurses. Toronto, ON: Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, 2003. Available at: http://rnao.ca/sites/rnao-ca/files/Breastfeeding_ Best_Practice_Guidelines_for_Nurses.pdf (Accessed July 30, 2014).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Allen J, Hector D. Benefits of breastfeeding. N S W Public Health Bull 2005; 16(4):42–46. PMID: 16106271. doi: 10.1071/NB05011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wen LM, Baur LA, Rissel C, Alperstein G, Simpson JM. Intention to breastfeed and awareness of health recommendations: Findings from first-time mothers in southwest Sydney, Australia. Int Breastfeed J 2009;4(9):30–38. PMID: 19835586. doi: 10.1186/1746-4358-4-9.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stuebe AM, Bonuck K. What predicts intent to breastfeed exclusively? Breastfeeding knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs in a diverse urban population. Breastfeeding Med 2011;6(6):413–20. PMID: 21342016. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2010.0088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chezem J, Friesen C, Boettcher J. Breastfeeding knowledge, breastfeeding confidence, and infant feeding plans: Effects on actual feeding practices. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nursing 2003;32(1):40–47. PMID: 12570180. doi: 10.1177/0884217502239799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Blyth R, Creedy DK, Dennis CL, Moyle W, Pratt J, De Vries SM. Effect of maternal confidence on breastfeeding duration: An application of breastfeeding self-efficacy theory. Birth 2002;29(4):278–84. PMID: 12484390. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-536X.2002.00202.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bayrampour H, Heaman M. Comparison of demographic and obstetric characteristics of Canadian primiparous women of advanced maternal age and younger age. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2011;33(8):820–29. PMID: 21846437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Statistics Canada. National Household Survey Focus on Geography SeriesOntario. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 99-010-X2011005. Ottawa, 2013. Available at: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/fogs-spg/Pages/ FOG.cfm?lang=E&level=2&GeoCode=35 (Accessed July 30, 2014).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Toronto Public Health & Access Alliance Multicultural Health and Community Services. The global city: Newcomer health in Toronto. Toronto, ON, 2011.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katelyn M. Godin
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gillian D. Alton
    • 1
  • Harshani P. Gangodawilage
    • 1
  • Theresa D. Procter
    • 1
  • Natalie B. Bourdages
    • 2
  • Susan E. Blue
    • 2
  • Sarah A. Edwards
    • 3
  • Melissa J. Horan
    • 4
  1. 1.Health Promotion DivisionOxford County Public Health & Emergency ServicesWoodstockCanada
  2. 2.Maternal-Infant Health Program, Healthy Families DirectorateToronto Public HealthTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Program Planning & Evaluation DepartmentBrant County Health UnitBrantfordCanada
  4. 4.Health Analytics and Health Promotion TeamWellington-Dufferin-Guelph Public Health UnitGuelphCanada

Personalised recommendations