UCLA

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to investigate the impact of reduced contact prenatal care necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic on meeting standards of care and perinatal outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective case-control study of patients in low-risk obstetrics clinic at a tertiary care county facility serving solely publicly insured patients comparing reduced in-person prenatal care (R) over 12 weeks with a control group (C) receiving traditional prenatal care who delivered prior. RESULTS: Total 90 patients in reduced contact (R) cohort were matched with controls (C). There were similar rates of standard prenatal care metrics between groups. Gestational age (GA) of anatomy ultrasound was later in R (p = 0.017). Triage visits and missed appointments were similar, though total number of visits (in-person and telehealth) was higher in R (p = 0.043). R group had higher GA at delivery (p = 0.001). Composite neonatal morbidity and length of stay were lower in R (p = 0.017, p = 0.048). Maternal and neonatal outcomes did not otherwise differ between groups. Using Kotelchuck Adequacy of Prenatal Care Utilization index, R had higher rates of adequate prenatal care (45.6% R vs. 24.4% C, p = 0.005). DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates the non-inferiority of a hybrid, reduced schedule prenatal schedule to traditional prenatal scheduling. In a reduced contact prenatal care model, more patients met criteria for adequate prenatal care, likely due to higher attendance of telehealth visits. These findings raise the question of revising the prenatal care model to mitigate disparities in disadvantaged populations.