促进和障碍进入助产士主导的分娩设置为种族化妇女在英国:范围审查。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care Pub Date : 2024-12-09 DOI:10.1111/birt.12897
Anna Melamed, Lucia Rocca-Ihenacho, Anna Horn, Christine McCourt, Frances Rivers, Marina Alice Sylvia Daniele
{"title":"促进和障碍进入助产士主导的分娩设置为种族化妇女在英国:范围审查。","authors":"Anna Melamed, Lucia Rocca-Ihenacho, Anna Horn, Christine McCourt, Frances Rivers, Marina Alice Sylvia Daniele","doi":"10.1111/birt.12897","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In UK maternity care, racialized women have worse experiences and clinical outcomes than White women. Midwife-led birth settings (MLBS), including home births and midwife-led units, both freestanding and alongside hospitals, are all available as choices for low-risk women in the UK. MLBS deliver optimal outcomes for low-risk women with uncomplicated pregnancies, including for racialized women, and can offer culturally specific care, possibly mitigating existing social inequalities. Evidence suggests that racialized women access MLBS less than White women.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To map existing literature on facilitators and barriers to accessing MLBS for racialized women and to identify emerging themes.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A scoping review of UK literature over the last 10 years using OVID, Ebsco Host, and gray literature. Search, selection, and data extraction were performed using PRISMA and JBI guidelines. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen articles met the inclusion criteria, only one addressing the research question directly and others containing some relevant material. Six themes were identified: admission criteria, information giving, the role of antenatal groups, bias and assumptions, beliefs about birth, and MLBS as empowering.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is a lack of research on racialized women's access to MLBS. Community outreach, having midwifery services embedded in the community, defaulting to MLBS for women categorized as low risk, continuity of carer, and interventions achieving a reduction in care-giver bias may improve access and outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":55350,"journal":{"name":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Facilitators and Barriers to Access to Midwife-Led Birth Settings for Racialized Women in the UK: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Anna Melamed, Lucia Rocca-Ihenacho, Anna Horn, Christine McCourt, Frances Rivers, Marina Alice Sylvia Daniele\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/birt.12897\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In UK maternity care, racialized women have worse experiences and clinical outcomes than White women. Midwife-led birth settings (MLBS), including home births and midwife-led units, both freestanding and alongside hospitals, are all available as choices for low-risk women in the UK. MLBS deliver optimal outcomes for low-risk women with uncomplicated pregnancies, including for racialized women, and can offer culturally specific care, possibly mitigating existing social inequalities. Evidence suggests that racialized women access MLBS less than White women.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To map existing literature on facilitators and barriers to accessing MLBS for racialized women and to identify emerging themes.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A scoping review of UK literature over the last 10 years using OVID, Ebsco Host, and gray literature. Search, selection, and data extraction were performed using PRISMA and JBI guidelines. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen articles met the inclusion criteria, only one addressing the research question directly and others containing some relevant material. Six themes were identified: admission criteria, information giving, the role of antenatal groups, bias and assumptions, beliefs about birth, and MLBS as empowering.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is a lack of research on racialized women's access to MLBS. Community outreach, having midwifery services embedded in the community, defaulting to MLBS for women categorized as low risk, continuity of carer, and interventions achieving a reduction in care-giver bias may improve access and outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.12897\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.12897","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在英国的产科护理中,种族化妇女的经历和临床结果比白人妇女更差。助产士主导的分娩环境(MLBS),包括家庭分娩和助产士主导的单位,无论是独立的还是与医院一起,都是英国低风险妇女的选择。MLBS为低风险的无并发症妊娠妇女提供最佳结果,包括种族化妇女,并且可以提供特定文化的护理,可能减轻现有的社会不平等。有证据表明,种族化的女性比白人女性更少进入MLBS。目的:绘制关于种族化妇女获得MLBS的促进因素和障碍的现有文献,并确定新主题。方法:使用OVID, Ebsco Host和灰色文献对过去10年的英国文献进行范围审查。使用PRISMA和JBI指南进行搜索、选择和数据提取。数据分析采用归纳专题分析。结果:14篇文章符合纳入标准,只有1篇文章直接涉及研究问题,其他文章包含一些相关材料。确定了六个主题:入学标准,信息提供,产前团体的作用,偏见和假设,关于出生的信念,以及MLBS的赋权。结论:关于种族化女性获得MLBS的研究较少。社区推广,在社区中嵌入助产服务,默认为低风险妇女提供MLBS,护理人员的连续性,以及减少护理人员偏见的干预措施可能会改善获取和结果。
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
Facilitators and Barriers to Access to Midwife-Led Birth Settings for Racialized Women in the UK: A Scoping Review.

Background: In UK maternity care, racialized women have worse experiences and clinical outcomes than White women. Midwife-led birth settings (MLBS), including home births and midwife-led units, both freestanding and alongside hospitals, are all available as choices for low-risk women in the UK. MLBS deliver optimal outcomes for low-risk women with uncomplicated pregnancies, including for racialized women, and can offer culturally specific care, possibly mitigating existing social inequalities. Evidence suggests that racialized women access MLBS less than White women.

Aim: To map existing literature on facilitators and barriers to accessing MLBS for racialized women and to identify emerging themes.

Method: A scoping review of UK literature over the last 10 years using OVID, Ebsco Host, and gray literature. Search, selection, and data extraction were performed using PRISMA and JBI guidelines. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.

Results: Fourteen articles met the inclusion criteria, only one addressing the research question directly and others containing some relevant material. Six themes were identified: admission criteria, information giving, the role of antenatal groups, bias and assumptions, beliefs about birth, and MLBS as empowering.

Conclusions: There is a lack of research on racialized women's access to MLBS. Community outreach, having midwifery services embedded in the community, defaulting to MLBS for women categorized as low risk, continuity of carer, and interventions achieving a reduction in care-giver bias may improve access and outcomes.

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
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care is a multidisciplinary, refereed journal devoted to issues and practices in the care of childbearing women, infants, and families. It is written by and for professionals in maternal and neonatal health, nurses, midwives, physicians, public health workers, doulas, social scientists, childbirth educators, lactation counselors, epidemiologists, and other health caregivers and policymakers in perinatal care.
期刊最新文献
The Benefits of Licensed Midwifery and Community Birth Among BIPOC Birthing People in New Mexico. Facilitators and Barriers to Access to Midwife-Led Birth Settings for Racialized Women in the UK: A Scoping Review. Men as Midwifery Professionals: A Scoping Review. Issue Information A History of Cesarean Birth as a Risk Factor for Postpartum Hemorrhage Even After Successful Planned Vaginal Birth.
×
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