FATE: The Effect of Fetal Antenatal Testing Education on Patient Knowledge and Satisfaction

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a physician-created educational infographic on the knowledge and attitudes of patients undergoing antenatal fetal surveillance.

Study Design This single-center prospective cohort study evaluated the impact of implementing an electronic educational infographic about antenatal fetal surveillance. English-speaking women receiving antenatal surveillance between the ages of 18 to 50 years were approached for inclusion. The preimplementation group enrolled women receiving antenatal surveillance between March 8, 2021, and April 2, 2021, who received usual care. Postimplementation, from April 5 to May 6, 2021, patients at our site received the infographic about antenatal fetal surveillance at their first antenatal testing appointment. Both pre- and postimplementation groups received a 5-question multiple-choice knowledge and 12-question attitude survey between 32^0/7 to 33^6/7 weeks at baseline (prior to receipt of infographic in postimplementation group) and again between 35^0/7 to 36^6/7 weeks. Patients were included in the analysis only if they completed both surveys. Differences from initial to final survey were compared between groups.

Results Of 106 patients who completed the initial survey, 74 (69.8%) participants finished both surveys (preimplementation = 39 and postimplementation = 35). There were no significant differences in demographics between the two groups, including in baseline knowledge (p = 0.58) or attitude tests (p = 0.57). There was no significant difference in knowledge on final surveys between groups (p = 0.79). However, utilization of the infographic was associated with a significant increase in attitude survey score from initial to final survey in the postimplementation group as compared with usual care (median difference: pre = 0, interquartile rang [IQR]: [−1 to +4] vs. post = +3, IQR: [+1 to +6], p = 0.016).

Conclusion A physician-created infographic on antepartum fetal testing was associated with overall improved patient attitude toward fetal testing, showing that small education interventions can increase patient satisfaction with care.

Key Points

• A physician-created, readable, and patient-oriented education resource is feasible.

• Infographic patient-education materials do not change patient knowledge about antenatal testing.

• Infographic patient-education materials can improve patient attitude toward antenatal testing.

Keywords

antenatal testing - patient education - infographic - high risk pregnancy

Note

This study was conducted at Philadelphia, PA.

Publication History

Received: 20 June 2022

Accepted: 30 August 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
12 September 2022

Article published online:
11 November 2022

• References

• 1 Malcus P. Antenatal fetal surveillance. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2004; 16 (02) 123-128
• 2 Künzel W, Misselwitz B. Unexpected fetal death during pregnancy–a problem of unrecognized fetal disorders during antenatal care?. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003; 110 (Suppl. 01) S86-S92
• 3 Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network Writing Group. Association between stillbirth and risk factors known at pregnancy confirmation. JAMA 2011; 306 (22) 2469-2479
• 4 Fretts RC. Etiology and prevention of stillbirth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193 (06) 1923-1935
• 5 Reddy UM, Laughon SK, Sun L, Troendle J, Willinger M, Zhang J. Prepregnancy risk factors for antepartum stillbirth in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116 (05) 1119-1126
• 6 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Committee on Obstetric Practice, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Indications for outpatient antenatal fetal surveillance: ACOG committee opinion, number 828. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 137 (06) e177-e197
• 7 Antepartum Fetal Surveillance. Antepartum fetal surveillance: ACOG practice bulletin summary, number 229. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 137 (06) 1134-1136
• 8 Ferguson S, Davis D, Browne J. Does antenatal education affect labour and birth? A structured review of the literature. Women Birth 2013; 26 (01) e5-e8
• 9 Patel S, Patel S. The effectiveness of lactation consultants and lactation counselors on breastfeeding outcomes. J Hum Lact 2016; 32 (03) 530-541
• 10 Hong K, Hwang H, Han H. et al. Perspectives on antenatal education associated with pregnancy outcomes: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Women Birth 2021; 34 (03) 219-230
• 11 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Special tests for monitoring fetal well-being. Accessed August 9, 2021 at: https://www.acog.org/womens-health/faqs/special-tests-for-monitoring-fetal-well-being
• 12 Freda MC, Damus K, Merkatz IR. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Evaluation of the readability of ACOG patient education pamphlets. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93 (5, pt. 1): 771-774
• 13 Fahimuddin FZ, Sidhu S, Agrawal A. Reading level of online patient education materials from major obstetrics and gynecology societies. Obstet Gynecol 2019; 133 (05) 987-993
• 14 Wen MC, Kau K, Huang SS. et al. Smartphone education improves embarrassment, bowel preparation, and satisfaction with care in patients receiving colonoscopy: A randomized controlled trail. Medicine (Baltimore) 2020; 99 (46) e23102
• 15 Kincaid JP, Fishburn RP, Rogers RL, Chissom BS. Derivation of new readability formulas (automated readability index, fog count, and flesch reading ease formula) for Navy enlisted personnel. 1975 . Research Branch Report 8–75. Chief of Naval Technical training: Naval Air Station Memphis
• 16 Gunning R. The Technique of Clear Writing. Toronto, Canada: McGraw-Hill; 1952. :36–37
• 17 McLaughlin GH. SMOG grading—a new readability formula. Journal of Reading 1969; 12 (08) 639-646
• 18 Smith EA, Senter RJ. Automated readability index. AMRL-TR (6570th Aerosp Med Res Lab) 1967; ;(May): 1-14
• 19 Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, Tusler M. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res 2004; 39 (4, pt. 1): 1005-1026
• 20 Schönmeyr B, Restrepo C, Wendby L, Gillenwater J, Campbell A. Lessons learned from two consecutive cleft lip and palate missions and the impact of patient education. J Craniofac Surg 2014; 25 (05) 1610-1613
• 21 Danielsen AK, Burcharth J, Rosenberg J. Patient education has a positive effect in patients with a stoma: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis 2013; 15 (06) e276-e283
• 22 Świątoniowska-Lonc NA, Sławuta A, Dudek K, Jankowska K, Jankowska-Polańska BK. The impact of health education on treatment outcomes in heart failure patients. Adv Clin Exp Med 2020; 29 (04) 481-492
• 23 Patel P, Malik K, Khachemoune A. Patient education in Mohs surgery: a review and critical evaluation of techniques. Arch Dermatol Res 2021; 313 (04) 217-224
• 24 Section 2: why improve patient experience? Accessed September 26, 2022 at: https://www.ahrq.gov/cahps/quality-improvement/improvement-guide/2-why-improve/index.html
• 25 Greenfield S, Kaplan SH, Ware Jr. JE, Yano EM, Frank HJ. Patients' participation in medical care: effects on blood sugar control and quality of life in diabetes. J Gen Intern Med 1988; 3 (05) 448-457
• 26 DiMatteo MR. Enhancing patient adherence to medical recommendations. JAMA 1994; 271 (01) 79-83 , 83
• 27 Safran DG, Taira DA, Rogers WH, Kosinski M, Ware JE, Tarlov AR. Linking primary care performance to outcomes of care. J Fam Pract 1998; 47 (03) 213-220