By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
GMJ NewsGMJ NewsGMJ News
  • Latest News
    • GMJ Briefs
  • Podcast & Media
    • Podcast Episodes
    • GMJ Audio
    • GMJ Videos
  • Research Digest
    • New Studies
    • Georgian Research
    • Data & Numbers
  • Policy & Systems
    • Health Policy
    • Quality & Safety
    • Migration & Health
    • Global Health
  • Practice
    • Clinical Updates
    • Case Discussions
    • Pharmacy & Prescribing
    • Ingredients A-Z
  • Perspectives
    • Editorial
    • Explainers
    • Voices
    • Letters
  • GMJ Articles
    • Vol. 1 Issue 2 (2026)
    • Vol. 1 Issue 1 (2026)
    • Pre-Launch Articles (2025)
  • Read the Journal →
  • About GMJ News
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
GMJ NewsGMJ News
Font ResizerAa
  • Latest News
    • GMJ Briefs
  • Podcast & Media
    • Podcast Episodes
    • GMJ Audio
    • GMJ Videos
  • Research Digest
    • New Studies
    • Georgian Research
    • Data & Numbers
  • Policy & Systems
    • Health Policy
    • Quality & Safety
    • Migration & Health
    • Global Health
  • Practice
    • Clinical Updates
    • Case Discussions
    • Pharmacy & Prescribing
    • Ingredients A-Z
  • Perspectives
    • Editorial
    • Explainers
    • Voices
    • Letters
  • GMJ Articles
    • Vol. 1 Issue 2 (2026)
    • Vol. 1 Issue 1 (2026)
    • Pre-Launch Articles (2025)
  • Read the Journal →
  • About GMJ News
Follow US
GMJ News > Policy & Systems > Global Health > Data reveal critical gaps in antenatal care quality across low-income countries
Global Health

Data reveal critical gaps in antenatal care quality across low-income countries

GMJ
Last updated: 25/05/2026 17:33
By
GMJ Policy Desk
Share
8 Min Read
Healthcare provider conducting antenatal care consultation with pregnant woman
New WHO guidelines recommend doubling antenatal contacts from 4 to 8, emphasising quality and person-centred care. Data reveal persistent gaps in coverage and care quality across low-income countries. — Photo: MART PRODUCTION / Pexels
SHARE
🎧 Listen to this article6:27 min · 929 words · GMJ Audio

Updated 25/05/2026

Contents
      • WHO antenatal care evolution
  • WHO reframes pregnancy care around positive experience
  • Coverage gaps persist despite proven effectiveness
  • Quality metrics require fundamental reassessment
  • Evidence supports increased contact frequency
    • Key takeaways
  • Frequently asked questions
    • What is the difference between antenatal visits and contacts?
    • Why did WHO increase the recommended frequency from 4 to 8 contacts?
    • How can low-income countries implement these enhanced antenatal care guidelines?
4 min read|704 words

New evidence published in The Lancet Global Health reveals persistent gaps in both coverage and quality of antenatal care across low- and middle-income countries, despite its recognition as one of the most effective platforms for improving maternal and perinatal health outcomes. The analysis highlights the urgent need to shift from quantity-focused metrics to quality-centred care delivery.

8 contacts
minimum antenatal contacts now recommended by WHO, up from four visits

WHO antenatal care evolution

Shift from visit-based to contact-based care model, 2016-2024

4
traditional visits
previous model
8
minimum contacts
current guideline
100%
increase in recommended
care frequency

Source: WHO Antenatal Care Guidelines, based on The Lancet Global Health | Georgian Medical Journal News

Submit Your Paper
GMJ_Submit_Banner

WHO reframes pregnancy care around positive experience

According to The Lancet Global Health, the World Health Organization’s updated antenatal care guideline represents a fundamental shift in approach, moving beyond traditional clinical risk detection to emphasise respectful, person-centred care. This reframing positions antenatal care around the goal of achieving a positive pregnancy experience for all women.

The transition from “visits” to “contacts” reflects evidence that more frequent, high-quality engagements reduce maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality while improving women’s overall care experience, as reported in The Lancet Global Health. This approach recognises that meaningful interaction, rather than routine check-ups, forms the cornerstone of effective antenatal care.

🎙️ Related Podcast Episodes
🎧 #53 | GMJ Podcast | Palliative Care in Georgia — Health System Gaps, Access Barriers, and Policy Implications · 16m
🎧 #54 | GMJ Podcast | The Blueprint of a Medical Journal: Designing an Open-Access Scientific Platform · 19m
🎧 #52 | GMJ Podcast | Health and Migration Knowledge Hub — A Global Resource for Evidence-Based Practice · 17m
🎧 #51 | GMJ Podcast | Global Health, Migration, and Health Systems Resilience · 14m
🎧 #44 | GMJ Podcast | Infant Formula Contamination — Global Food Safety Failure and the Cereulide Outbreak · 21m

Coverage gaps persist despite proven effectiveness

Despite antenatal care being recognised as one of the most effective platforms for improving maternal and perinatal health outcomes, significant coverage and quality gaps persist across low- and middle-income countries, according to The Lancet Global Health analysis. The evidence reveals that many healthcare systems continue to struggle with implementing comprehensive care models.

Quality metrics require fundamental reassessment

The shift from quantity-focused metrics to quality-centred approaches requires healthcare systems to fundamentally reassess their antenatal care delivery models. The Lancet Global Health analysis suggests that traditional visit-based metrics fail to capture the depth of interaction necessary for optimal maternal and perinatal outcomes.

The contact-based care model, emphasising meaningful engagement over routine appointments, represents a significant departure from previous approaches. Implementation challenges remain significant, particularly in resource-constrained settings where healthcare infrastructure limitations can impede the delivery of comprehensive, quality-focused antenatal care services.

Evidence supports increased contact frequency

The recommendation for a minimum of eight antenatal contacts is grounded in robust evidence demonstrating that more frequent, high-quality engagements improve both clinical outcomes and patient experience. According to The Lancet Global Health, increased contact frequency allows for better monitoring of pregnancy progression, earlier detection of complications, and more comprehensive health education delivery.

This approach also facilitates stronger therapeutic relationships between healthcare providers and pregnant women. Successful implementation requires adequate resource allocation and healthcare system strengthening, particularly in low-resource settings where the greatest impact potential exists.

More frequent, high-quality antenatal contacts reduce maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality while improving women’s experience of care globally

— WHO Antenatal Care Guidelines (The Lancet Global Health, 2024)

Key takeaways

  • WHO now recommends minimum 8 antenatal contacts, doubling previous guidance of 4 visits
  • Quality of care and respectful, person-centred approaches are prioritised over routine clinical assessments
  • Evidence from The Lancet Global Health demonstrates that increased contact frequency reduces maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality rates

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between antenatal visits and contacts?

According to WHO guidelines reported in The Lancet Global Health, contacts emphasise meaningful, active interaction between healthcare providers and pregnant women, rather than routine check-ups. This approach focuses on quality engagement and comprehensive care delivery rather than simple appointment attendance.

Why did WHO increase the recommended frequency from 4 to 8 contacts?

The Lancet Global Health reports that evidence demonstrates more frequent, high-quality engagements reduce maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality while improving women’s care experience. Increased contact frequency allows for better monitoring and earlier detection of complications.

How can low-income countries implement these enhanced antenatal care guidelines?

Implementation requires healthcare system strengthening, adequate resource allocation, and provider training in person-centred care approaches. Countries must address both infrastructure limitations and care quality simultaneously to achieve meaningful improvements.

The evolution of antenatal care guidelines represents a critical opportunity to transform maternal health outcomes globally, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where the greatest impact potential exists. Successful implementation of quality-centred, contact-based care models will require sustained commitment to healthcare system strengthening and provider capacity building.

Source: Antenatal care in LMICs: what the data reveal

Was this article helpful?

Disclaimer. This article is health journalism intended for general information and education. It is not medical advice and is not a substitute for professional diagnosis or treatment. Always consult a qualified healthcare provider about your individual circumstances. Full disclaimer →

Related Coverage

Land Use Changes in Southeast Asia Linked to 13,000 Annual Deaths from Air PollutionJul 6, 2026
Ebola Bundibugyo outbreak accelerates in DRC with 24.7% case surge; one case detected in FranceJul 6, 2026
Uganda Confirms First Marburg Case Amid Ongoing Ebola OutbreakJul 6, 2026
WHO Africa Calls for Greater Blood Donation as Critical Shortages Persist Across RegionJul 4, 2026
PG
Written by
Prof. Giorgi Pkhakadze, MD, MPH, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, GMJ News
Full profile →  ·  ORCID 0000-0001-7609-4515
Medical disclaimer. This article is health journalism intended for general information. It is not medical advice and is not a substitute for consultation with a qualified healthcare professional. Always seek your physician's advice regarding any medical condition.
Medically reviewed by Prof. Giorgi Pkhakadze, MD, MPH, PhD. Spotted an error? Contact the editorial team.
Get the GMJ News digest
Evidence-based health journalism in your inbox. No spam; unsubscribe anytime.
TAGGED:antenatal careglobal-healthMaternal Healthpregnancy careWHO guidelines
Share This Article
Facebook LinkedIn Bluesky Copy Link Print
GMJ
ByGMJ Policy Desk
Follow:
GMJ Policy Desk is part of GMJ News, the newsroom of the Georgian Medical Journal (gmj.ge), published by the Public Health Institute of Georgia. Every article is editorially reviewed before publication.
Leave a Comment Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Submit Your Paper →

Georgia's peer-reviewed open-access medical journal. No APC until January 2027.
Submit Manuscript →
UK Primary Care Gets New Framework for Managing Suicidal Ideation

New BMJ clinical update provides evidence-based framework for identifying and managing suicidal…

Popular Joint Pain Supplement Glucosamine Linked to Accelerated Dementia Risk

University of Florida research reveals concerning association between glucosamine supplements and accelerated…

Land Use Changes in Southeast Asia Linked to 13,000 Annual Deaths from Air Pollution

New research reveals land use changes in Southeast Asia cause 13,000 annual…

Submit Your Paper to GMJ

No APC until January 2027.
Submit Manuscript →

You Might Also Like

Global map showing youth mortality rates by region with data visualization
Global HealthNew StudiesPolicy & SystemsResearch Digest

Global Youth Deaths Rise to 2.1 Million Despite Medical Advances

By
GMJ Policy Desk
05/06/2026
World map showing distribution of high consequence infectious disease risk by country
Global Health

UK Health Agency Identifies Countries with High Consequence Infectious Disease Occurrence

By
GMJ Policy Desk
21/05/2026
World Health Assembly meeting hall with Member State representatives discussing budget approval
Health PolicyPolicy & Systems

WHO Assembly Approves $6.83 Billion Budget to Combat Health Emergencies and AMR

By
GMJ Policy Desk
24/05/2026
Infographic showing animal health funding represents tiny fraction of global health spending
Global HealthPolicy & Systems

Animal health receives just 0.6% of global health spending despite mounting disease crises

By
GMJ Policy Desk
27/05/2026
Facebook Twitter Youtube Instagram
Company
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact US
  • GMJ Journal
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Editorial Team
  • Register at GMJ
  • Terms of Use

Subscribe to GMJ News — Click here

Join Community
© 2026 Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ). Published by the Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG). All rights reserved.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?

Not a member? Sign Up