集体产前护理的效果机制是什么?现实主义系统回顾与文献综述。

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1186/s12884-024-06792-6
Anita Mehay, Giordana Da Motta, Louise Hunter, Juliet Rayment, Meg Wiggins, Penny Haora, Christine McCourt, Angela Harden
{"title":"集体产前护理的效果机制是什么?现实主义系统回顾与文献综述。","authors":"Anita Mehay, Giordana Da Motta, Louise Hunter, Juliet Rayment, Meg Wiggins, Penny Haora, Christine McCourt, Angela Harden","doi":"10.1186/s12884-024-06792-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is growing interest in the benefits of group models of antenatal care. Although clinical reviews exist, there have been few reviews that focus on the mechanisms of effect of this model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a realist review using a systematic approach incorporating all data types (including non-research and audiovisual media), with synthesis along Context-Intervention-Mechanism-Outcome (CIMO) configurations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A wide range of sources were identified, yielding 100 relevant sources in total (89 written and 11 audiovisual). Overall, there was no clear pattern of 'what works for whom, in what circumstances' although some studies have identified clinical benefits for those with more vulnerability or who are typically underserved by standard care. Findings revealed six interlinking mechanisms, including: social support, peer learning, active participation in health, health education and satisfaction or engagement with care. A further, relatively under-developed theory related to impact on professional practice. An overarching mechanism of empowerment featured across most studies but there was variation in how this was collectively or individually conceptualised and applied.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mechanisms of effect are amplified in contexts where inequalities in access and delivery of care exist, but poor reporting of populations and contexts limited fuller exploration. We recommend future studies provide detailed descriptions of the population groups involved and that they give full consideration to theoretical underpinnings and contextual factors.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>The protocol for this realist review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42016036768).</p>","PeriodicalId":9033,"journal":{"name":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11446066/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What are the mechanisms of effect of group antenatal care? A systematic realist review and synthesis of the literature.\",\"authors\":\"Anita Mehay, Giordana Da Motta, Louise Hunter, Juliet Rayment, Meg Wiggins, Penny Haora, Christine McCourt, Angela Harden\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12884-024-06792-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is growing interest in the benefits of group models of antenatal care. Although clinical reviews exist, there have been few reviews that focus on the mechanisms of effect of this model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a realist review using a systematic approach incorporating all data types (including non-research and audiovisual media), with synthesis along Context-Intervention-Mechanism-Outcome (CIMO) configurations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A wide range of sources were identified, yielding 100 relevant sources in total (89 written and 11 audiovisual). Overall, there was no clear pattern of 'what works for whom, in what circumstances' although some studies have identified clinical benefits for those with more vulnerability or who are typically underserved by standard care. Findings revealed six interlinking mechanisms, including: social support, peer learning, active participation in health, health education and satisfaction or engagement with care. A further, relatively under-developed theory related to impact on professional practice. An overarching mechanism of empowerment featured across most studies but there was variation in how this was collectively or individually conceptualised and applied.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mechanisms of effect are amplified in contexts where inequalities in access and delivery of care exist, but poor reporting of populations and contexts limited fuller exploration. We recommend future studies provide detailed descriptions of the population groups involved and that they give full consideration to theoretical underpinnings and contextual factors.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>The protocol for this realist review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42016036768).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9033,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11446066/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-024-06792-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-024-06792-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人们越来越关注产前护理小组模式的益处。虽然有临床综述,但很少有综述关注这种模式的作用机制:方法:我们采用系统的方法对所有数据类型(包括非研究和视听媒体)进行了现实主义综述,并按照 "背景-干预-机制-结果"(CIMO)配置进行了综合分析:结果:共确定了 100 个相关来源(89 个书面来源和 11 个视听来源)。总体而言,尽管一些研究发现了对那些更易受伤害的人或通常得不到标准护理服务的人的临床益处,但 "在什么情况下对什么人有效 "并没有明确的模式。研究结果显示了六种相互关联的机制,包括:社会支持、同伴学习、积极参与健康、健康教育以及对护理的满意度或参与度。另一个相对欠发达的理论与对专业实践的影响有关。大多数研究都强调了增强能力的总体机制,但在如何集体或单独地将其概念化和应用方面存在差异:结论:在获取和提供医疗服务方面存在不平等的情况下,影响机制会被放大,但对人群和环境的报告不足限制了更全面的探索。我们建议未来的研究应详细描述所涉及的人群,并充分考虑理论基础和背景因素:本现实主义综述的方案已在国际系统综述前瞻性注册中心注册(PROSPERO CRD42016036768)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
What are the mechanisms of effect of group antenatal care? A systematic realist review and synthesis of the literature.

Background: There is growing interest in the benefits of group models of antenatal care. Although clinical reviews exist, there have been few reviews that focus on the mechanisms of effect of this model.

Methods: We conducted a realist review using a systematic approach incorporating all data types (including non-research and audiovisual media), with synthesis along Context-Intervention-Mechanism-Outcome (CIMO) configurations.

Results: A wide range of sources were identified, yielding 100 relevant sources in total (89 written and 11 audiovisual). Overall, there was no clear pattern of 'what works for whom, in what circumstances' although some studies have identified clinical benefits for those with more vulnerability or who are typically underserved by standard care. Findings revealed six interlinking mechanisms, including: social support, peer learning, active participation in health, health education and satisfaction or engagement with care. A further, relatively under-developed theory related to impact on professional practice. An overarching mechanism of empowerment featured across most studies but there was variation in how this was collectively or individually conceptualised and applied.

Conclusions: Mechanisms of effect are amplified in contexts where inequalities in access and delivery of care exist, but poor reporting of populations and contexts limited fuller exploration. We recommend future studies provide detailed descriptions of the population groups involved and that they give full consideration to theoretical underpinnings and contextual factors.

Registration: The protocol for this realist review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42016036768).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
845
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of pregnancy and childbirth. The journal welcomes submissions on the biomedical aspects of pregnancy, breastfeeding, labor, maternal health, maternity care, trends and sociological aspects of pregnancy and childbirth.
期刊最新文献
Determinants of retroplacental hematoma at the Maradi mother and child health center, Niger: a case‒control study. Providers' perspective on vaginal birth after cesarean birth: a qualitative systematic review. The impact of scaling and root planning combined with mouthwash during pregnancy on preterm birth and low birth weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Outcomes of peripartum cardiomyopathy in North Africa: insights from a single-center observational study in Tunisia. Perspectives of midwives on respectful maternity care.
×
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