A qualitative study of the dynamics of access to remote antenatal care through the lens of candidacy.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Health Services Research & Policy Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-21 DOI:10.1177/13558196231165361
Lisa Hinton, Karolina Kuberska, Francesca Dakin, Nicola Boydell, Graham Martin, Tim Draycott, Cathy Winter, Richard J McManus, Lucy Chappell, Sanhita Chakrabarti, Elizabeth Howland, Janet Willars, Mary Dixon-Woods
{"title":"A qualitative study of the dynamics of access to remote antenatal care through the lens of candidacy.","authors":"Lisa Hinton,&nbsp;Karolina Kuberska,&nbsp;Francesca Dakin,&nbsp;Nicola Boydell,&nbsp;Graham Martin,&nbsp;Tim Draycott,&nbsp;Cathy Winter,&nbsp;Richard J McManus,&nbsp;Lucy Chappell,&nbsp;Sanhita Chakrabarti,&nbsp;Elizabeth Howland,&nbsp;Janet Willars,&nbsp;Mary Dixon-Woods","doi":"10.1177/13558196231165361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of pregnant women, antenatal healthcare professionals, and system leaders to understand the impact of the implementation of remote provision of antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 93 participants, including 45 individuals who had been pregnant during the study period, 34 health care professionals, and 14 managers and system-level stakeholders. Analysis was based on the constant comparative method and used the theoretical framework of candidacy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found that remote antenatal care had far-reaching effects on access when understood through the lens of candidacy. It altered women's own identification of themselves and their babies as eligible for antenatal care. Navigating services became more challenging, often requiring considerable digital literacy and sociocultural capital. Services became less permeable, meaning that they were more difficult to use and demanding of the personal and social resources of users. Remote consultations were seen as more transactional in character and were limited by lack of face-to-face contact and safe spaces, making it more difficult for women to make their needs - both clinical and social - known, and for professionals to assess them. Operational and institutional challenges, including problems in sharing of antenatal records, were consequential. There were suggestions that a shift to remote provision of antenatal care might increase risks of inequities in access to care in relation to every feature of candidacy we characterised.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It is important to recognise the implications for access to antenatal care of a shift to remote delivery. It is not a simple swap: it restructures many aspects of candidacy for care in ways that pose risks of amplifying existing intersectional inequalities that lead to poorer outcomes. Addressing these challenges through policy and practice action is needed to tackle these risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":15953,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10515462/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196231165361","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of pregnant women, antenatal healthcare professionals, and system leaders to understand the impact of the implementation of remote provision of antenatal care during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Methods: We conducted a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 93 participants, including 45 individuals who had been pregnant during the study period, 34 health care professionals, and 14 managers and system-level stakeholders. Analysis was based on the constant comparative method and used the theoretical framework of candidacy.

Results: We found that remote antenatal care had far-reaching effects on access when understood through the lens of candidacy. It altered women's own identification of themselves and their babies as eligible for antenatal care. Navigating services became more challenging, often requiring considerable digital literacy and sociocultural capital. Services became less permeable, meaning that they were more difficult to use and demanding of the personal and social resources of users. Remote consultations were seen as more transactional in character and were limited by lack of face-to-face contact and safe spaces, making it more difficult for women to make their needs - both clinical and social - known, and for professionals to assess them. Operational and institutional challenges, including problems in sharing of antenatal records, were consequential. There were suggestions that a shift to remote provision of antenatal care might increase risks of inequities in access to care in relation to every feature of candidacy we characterised.

Conclusion: It is important to recognise the implications for access to antenatal care of a shift to remote delivery. It is not a simple swap: it restructures many aspects of candidacy for care in ways that pose risks of amplifying existing intersectional inequalities that lead to poorer outcomes. Addressing these challenges through policy and practice action is needed to tackle these risks.

Abstract Image

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
从候选角度对获得远程产前护理的动态进行的定性研究。
目的:我们旨在探索孕妇、产前保健专业人员和系统领导的经验和观点,以了解在新冠肺炎大流行期间及以后实施远程产前护理的影响。方法:我们进行了一项定性研究,包括对93名参与者的半结构化访谈,其中包括45名在研究期间怀孕的人、34名医疗保健专业人员、14名管理人员和系统级利益相关者。分析是基于恒定比较法,并使用候选的理论框架。结果:我们发现,如果从候选人的角度来理解,远程产前护理对获得服务有着深远的影响。它改变了妇女自己对自己和婴儿有资格接受产前护理的认定。导航服务变得更具挑战性,通常需要大量的数字素养和社会文化资本。服务的渗透性降低,这意味着它们更难使用,对用户的个人和社会资源要求更高。远程会诊被视为更具交易性,并且由于缺乏面对面的接触和安全空间而受到限制,这使得女性更难了解自己的临床和社会需求,也更难让专业人员对其进行评估。业务和体制方面的挑战,包括分享产前记录方面的问题,都是相应的。有人建议,向远程提供产前护理的转变可能会增加我们所描述的每一个候选特征在获得护理方面不平等的风险。结论:重要的是要认识到远程分娩对获得产前护理的影响。这不是一个简单的交换:它重组了护理候选资格的许多方面,从而带来了扩大现有交叉不平等的风险,从而导致较差的结果。需要通过政策和实践行动应对这些挑战,以应对这些风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Journal of Health Services Research & Policy provides a unique opportunity to explore the ideas, policies and decisions shaping health services throughout the world. Edited and peer-reviewed by experts in the field and with a high academic standard and multidisciplinary approach, readers will gain a greater understanding of the current issues in healthcare policy and research. The journal"s strong international editorial advisory board also ensures that readers obtain a truly global and insightful perspective.
期刊最新文献
Rapid evidence assessment of student-assisted assessment and brief intervention clinics: Addressing the gaps in rural and remote health care. University students' access to mental health services: A qualitative study of the experiences of health service professionals through the lens of candidacy in England. Does income matter for the policy effect of public long-term care insurance on informal care use in China? A quasi-experimental study. Health-related inequalities in out-of-pocket expenditure under universal health coverage in Taiwan: A cross-sectional decomposition analysis. Identifying potentially low value surgical care: A national ecological study in England.
×
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