The perspectives of healthcare professionals in providing care to women with GDM in high-income nations: A qualitative systematic review.

Mary-Ellen Hooper, Ella Kurz, Cathy Knight-Agarwal, Mary-Jessimine Bushell, Elyse Ladbrook, Deborah Davis
{"title":"The perspectives of healthcare professionals in providing care to women with GDM in high-income nations: A qualitative systematic review.","authors":"Mary-Ellen Hooper, Ella Kurz, Cathy Knight-Agarwal, Mary-Jessimine Bushell, Elyse Ladbrook, Deborah Davis","doi":"10.1016/j.pcd.2024.11.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) represents a growing challenge worldwide, with significant risks to both women and their babies that extend beyond the duration of the pregnancy and immediate post-partum period. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) play important roles in the screening, diagnosis, treatment and management of women with GDM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this qualitative systematic review, a comprehensive search strategy explored the electronic databases Web of Science, CINAHL, Medline, and Scopus, as well as the reference lists of the included papers, for primary studies investigating the experiences, perspectives and practices of HCPs providing care to women with GDM in high-income healthcare settings. Studies were assessed with the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool, and findings were synthesised using the approach described by Thomas and Harden.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This review included 33 articles - 26 qualitative and seven mixed method studies, representing ten high-income nations. The total number of HCP participants represented across the studies is 989. This figure is constituted by medical professionals (n = 226), nurses and midwives (n = 583), allied health (n = 40) and other or not numerically specified HCPs (n = 140). From 149 findings, four major themes and 10 subthemes were constructed. The four major themes are: multidisciplinary collaboration; healthcare practice; organizational factors; and working with women.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>There are barriers to providing optimal care to women with GDM. Including, time and resource constraints, a lack of consensus in practice guidelines, and variable multidisciplinary collaboration. Moving forward, there needs to be a focus on more explicit guidelines, multidisciplinary collaboration, and appropriate resources to support HCPs in providing care to women to manage the short-term and longer-term risks that are associated with a pregnancy affected by GDM.</p>","PeriodicalId":94177,"journal":{"name":"Primary care diabetes","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Primary care diabetes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcd.2024.11.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) represents a growing challenge worldwide, with significant risks to both women and their babies that extend beyond the duration of the pregnancy and immediate post-partum period. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) play important roles in the screening, diagnosis, treatment and management of women with GDM.

Methods: For this qualitative systematic review, a comprehensive search strategy explored the electronic databases Web of Science, CINAHL, Medline, and Scopus, as well as the reference lists of the included papers, for primary studies investigating the experiences, perspectives and practices of HCPs providing care to women with GDM in high-income healthcare settings. Studies were assessed with the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool, and findings were synthesised using the approach described by Thomas and Harden.

Results: This review included 33 articles - 26 qualitative and seven mixed method studies, representing ten high-income nations. The total number of HCP participants represented across the studies is 989. This figure is constituted by medical professionals (n = 226), nurses and midwives (n = 583), allied health (n = 40) and other or not numerically specified HCPs (n = 140). From 149 findings, four major themes and 10 subthemes were constructed. The four major themes are: multidisciplinary collaboration; healthcare practice; organizational factors; and working with women.

Discussion and conclusion: There are barriers to providing optimal care to women with GDM. Including, time and resource constraints, a lack of consensus in practice guidelines, and variable multidisciplinary collaboration. Moving forward, there needs to be a focus on more explicit guidelines, multidisciplinary collaboration, and appropriate resources to support HCPs in providing care to women to manage the short-term and longer-term risks that are associated with a pregnancy affected by GDM.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Intermittent fasting versus continuous caloric restriction for glycemic control and weight loss in type 2 diabetes: A traditional review. The perspectives of healthcare professionals in providing care to women with GDM in high-income nations: A qualitative systematic review. Td2Ast project: A pragmatic intervention on diet and physical activity for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Comparing quality of diabetes care between immigrants and non-immigrants within dimensions of marginalization: A population-based cohort study. Risk of onset of chronic kidney disease in type 2 diabetes mellitus (ROCK-DM): Development and validation of a 4-variable prediction model.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1