RNRCTRevista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P2022

Booklet for knowledge and prevention of HIV mother-to-child transmission: a pilot study of a randomized clinical trial.

Ana Carolina Maria Araújo Chagas Costa Lima, Sadrine Maria Eufrasino de Pinho, Sabrina Alapenha Ferro Chaves Costa Lima and 3 others

PMID 36427269

WHAT IT FOUND

Compared with usual prenatal care, the booklet did not raise HIV transmission prevention knowledge more than usual care.

Women who received it did improve from baseline at 7 to 15 days and 30 days postpartum.

Key findings

01The intergroup comparison found no significant difference in knowledge between the booklet group and usual care over time.

02Within the booklet group, mean knowledge rose from 4.19 to 5.27 at 7 to 15 days (p = 0.002) and from 4.71 to 5.58 at 30 days postpartum (p = 0.033); the control group did not show an increase in average knowledge.

03Of 104 eligible women, 56.7% were lost, leaving 45 analysed (24 intervention, 21 control).

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study was a pilot, and the final analysis included only 45 of 104 eligible women because 56.7% were lost to follow-up. Women and the staff giving the intervention could not be blinded because the intervention was visible. Follow-up partly used telephone calls, and difficulty contacting participants was the main reason for loss. The groups were not homogeneous by race, with a p value of 0.030. The researchers did not ask in later evaluations whether women had read the booklet after the intervention. The researchers were not part of the prenatal service where the women received care, which may have affected participation.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that the booklet is better than usual care. The comparison between groups showed no significant difference, and the within-group gains came from a small pilot with high loss to follow-up.

Read it on PubMed →