Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to measure the effect and the total cost per woman of providing postnatal support at home, based on a Dutch model. The research hypothesis was furnished by some existing evidence that postnatal support could reduce the risk of postnatal depression and encourage breastfeeding. DESIGN: The randomised controlled trial aimed to measure differences in health status in a group of women who were offered postnatal support from a community midwifery support worker (SW) compared with a control group of women who were not offered this support. Women were followed-up by postal questionnaire at 6 weeks and 6 months postnatally. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: All women who delivered a baby at the recruiting hospital were eligible to take part in the trial if they lived within the study area, were aged 17 years or over, and could understand English. INTERVENTION: The intervention consisted of the SW offering practical and emotional support and to help women rest and recover after childbirth. The SW offered ten visits in the first 28 days postnatally, for up to 3 hours per day. The SW's activities included housework, talking with the mother, and care for the baby or other siblings. The service was provided in addition to routine visits by the community midwife. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the general health perception domain of the Short Form-36 at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes were mean Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), Duke Functional Social Support (DUFSS) scores and breastfeeding rates. RESULTS: The 623 randomised women were well-matched by group with a good response to follow-up. At 6 weeks there was no evidence of a significant difference between the two groups for the primary outcome. There was a non-significant trend for the control group to have better mean DUFSS and EPDS scores at 6 weeks. Breastfeeding rates were not significantly different at follow-up. At 6 months, both groups had similar health status. Satisfaction with the service was higher than for all other services received. The incremental cost of introducing the service comprised setting up and running the service. There were no differences between the groups in other resource use (general practitioner contacts, hospital services, prescriptions or medicines bought for mothers and babies) to 6-month follow-up. The total mean NHS cost to 6-month follow-up for the intervention group was pound180 per woman greater than for the control group (confidence interval, pound79.60, pound272.40). CONCLUSIONS: Although women valued the service, there was no evidence of any health benefit at the 6-week or 6-month follow-up, no difference in use of NHS services, and the additional cost of the service provision would be around pound 180 per woman.
Morrell et al. (Sat,) studied this question.