RESUMEN
Objectives@#This study investigated the relationship between sleep quality during pregnancy and preterm birth. @*Methods@#This longitudinal study was conducted between August 2018 and May 2019. The participants were 150 pregnant women who had been referred to 7 healthcare centers in the city of Qazvin, Iran and met the inclusion criteria. The Petersburg Sleep Quality Index, the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and 2 questions about daytime sleep status and a demographic questionnaire were administered at 14-18 weeks and 28-32 weeks of gestation. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney test, the Fisher exact test, and univariate and multivariable logistic regression. @*Results@#In the present study, poor sleep quality affected 84.7% of the participants at 14-18 weeks and 93.3% at 28-32 weeks of gestation. The final model for preterm birth prediction incorporated age and the Petersburg Sleep Quality Index score in the second and third trimesters. Preterm birth increased by 14% with each unit increase in age. With each unit increase in the Petersburg Sleep Quality Index score in the second and third trimesters, preterm birth increased by 42% and 28%, respectively, but the p-values of these factors were not significant. @*Conclusions@#Although a significant percentage of pregnant women had poor sleep quality, no significant relationship was found between sleep quality during pregnancy and preterm birth.
RESUMEN
Objectives@#This study investigated the relationship between sleep quality during pregnancy and preterm birth. @*Methods@#This longitudinal study was conducted between August 2018 and May 2019. The participants were 150 pregnant women who had been referred to 7 healthcare centers in the city of Qazvin, Iran and met the inclusion criteria. The Petersburg Sleep Quality Index, the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and 2 questions about daytime sleep status and a demographic questionnaire were administered at 14-18 weeks and 28-32 weeks of gestation. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney test, the Fisher exact test, and univariate and multivariable logistic regression. @*Results@#In the present study, poor sleep quality affected 84.7% of the participants at 14-18 weeks and 93.3% at 28-32 weeks of gestation. The final model for preterm birth prediction incorporated age and the Petersburg Sleep Quality Index score in the second and third trimesters. Preterm birth increased by 14% with each unit increase in age. With each unit increase in the Petersburg Sleep Quality Index score in the second and third trimesters, preterm birth increased by 42% and 28%, respectively, but the p-values of these factors were not significant. @*Conclusions@#Although a significant percentage of pregnant women had poor sleep quality, no significant relationship was found between sleep quality during pregnancy and preterm birth.
RESUMEN
The tendency to use portfolios for evaluation has been developed with the aim of optimizing the culture of assessment. The present study was carried out to determine the effect of using portfolios as an evaluation method on midwifery students' learning and satisfaction in prenatal practical training. In this prospective cohort study, all midwifery students in semester four (n=40), were randomly allocated to portfolio and routine evaluation groups. Based on their educational goals, the portfolio groups prepared packages which consisted of a complete report of the history, physical examinations, and methods of patient management (as evaluated by a checklist) for women who visited a prenatal clinic. During the last day of their course, a posttest, clinical exam, and student satisfaction form were completed. The two groups' mean age, mean pretest scores, and their prerequisite course that they should have taken in the previous semester were similar. The mean difference in the pre and post test scores for the two groups' knowledge and comprehension levels did not differ significantly (P>0.05). The average scores on questions in Bloom's taxonomy 2 and 3 of the portfolio group were significantly greater than those of the routine evaluation group (P=0.002, P=0.03, respectively). The mean of the two groups' clinical exam scores was significantly different. The portfolio group's mean scores on generating diagnostic and therapeutic solutions and the ability to apply theory in practice were higher than those of the routine group. Overall, students' satisfaction scores in the two evaluation methods were relatively similar. Portfolio evaluation provides the opportunity for more learning by increasing the student's participation in the learning process and helping them to apply theory in practice.