자연주의적 탐구조사(Naturalistic Inquiry)

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(14)60789-3.pdf

Midwifery and quality care: findings from a new evidence-informed framework for maternal and newborn care

A Study of Teams: How It All Began The Apollo Syndrome Teams Containing Similar Personalities Identifying further Team Roles Team Leadership The Missing Team Roles Developing an inventory Unsuccessful teams Winning teams Ideal team size Features of good members of a team Teams in Public Affairs How Belbin reports developed Case Studies in Using Belbin

Management teams: Why they succeed or fail

The aim of this bi-monthly column is to highlight Cochrane Systematic Reviews of relevance to pregnancy and childbirth and to stimulate discussion on the relevance and implications of the review for practice. The Cochrane Collaboration is an international organisation that prepares and maintains high quality systematic reviews to help people make well-informed decisions about healthcare and health policy. A systematic review tries to search for, appraise and bring together existing research to answer a specific research quesiton. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) is published monthly online. Residents in countries with a national licence to the Cochrane Libray, including the U.K. and Ireland, can access the Cochrane Library online, free of charge through www.thecochranelibrary.com.

Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women.

WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience-going beyond survival.

In a synthesis of 21 qualitative studies representing the views of more than 1,230 women from 15 countries, Kenneth Finlayson and Soo Downe examine the reasons why many women in low- and middle-income countries do not receive adequate antenatal care.

http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/6687/7/6687_Downe.pdf

Why do women not use antenatal services in low- and middle-income countries? A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

Introduction Design and provision of good quality maternity care should incorporate what matters to childbearing women. This qualitative systematic review was undertaken to inform WHO intrapartum guidelines. Methods Using a pre-determined search strategy, we searched Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, AMED, EMBASE, LILACS, AJOL, and reference lists of eligible studies published 1996-August 2016 (updated to January 2018), reporting qualitative data on womens’ childbirth beliefs, expectations, and values. Studies including specific interventions or health conditions were excluded. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Data collection and analysis Authors’ findings were extracted, logged on a study-specific data form, and synthesised using meta-ethnographic techniques. Confidence in the quality, coherence, relevance and adequacy of data underpinning the resulting themes was assessed using GRADE-CERQual. A line of argument synthesis was developed. Results 35 studies (19 countries) were included in the primary search, and 2 in the update. Confidence in most results was moderate to high. What mattered to most women was a positive experience that fulfilled or exceeded their prior personal and socio-cultural beliefs and expectations. This included giving birth to a healthy baby in a clinically and psychologically safe environment with practical and emotional support from birth companions, and competent, reassuring, kind clinical staff. Most wanted a physiological labour and birth, while acknowledging that birth can be unpredictable and frightening, and that they may need to ‘go with the flow’. If intervention was needed or wanted, women wanted to retain a sense of personal achievement and control through active decision-making. These values and expectations were mediated through womens’ embodied (physical and psychosocial) experience of pregnancy and birth; local familial and sociocultural norms; and encounters with local maternity services and staff. Conclusions Most healthy childbearing women want a positive birth experience. Safety and psychosocial wellbeing are equally valued. Maternity care should be designed to fulfil or exceed womens’ personal and socio-cultural beliefs and expectations.

/pdf/what-matters-to-women-during-childbirth-a-systematic-4d63bwsme3.pdf

What matters to women during childbirth: A systematic qualitative review.

Creating a Collaborative Culture in Maternity Care

The emerging field of qualitative synthesis is an exciting area of research with the potential to influence policy and practice. It is also saturated with a variety of unresolved philosophical, terminological and methodological discussions which may seem daunting to the novice researcher This article by Kenneth Finlayson and Annie Dixon attempts to clarify some of the more controversial issues and, by providing a set of guidelines, hopes to encourage novices to enter this stimulating environment with confidence and understanding.

Qualitative meta-synthesis: a guide for the novice.

Several studies have identified how mistreatment during labour and childbirth can act as a barrier to the use of health facilities. Despite general agreement that respectful maternity care (RMC) is a fundamental human right, and an important component of quality intrapartum care that every pregnant woman should receive, the effectiveness of proposed policies remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of introducing RMC policies into health facilities providing intrapartum services. We included randomized and non-randomized controlled studies evaluating the effectiveness of introducing RMC policies into health facilities. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS, AJOL, WHO RHL, and Popline, along with ongoing trials registers (ISRCT register, ICTRP register), and the White Ribbon Respectful Maternity Care Repository. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. Five studies were included. All were undertaken in Africa (Kenya, Tanzania, Sudan, South Africa), and involved a range of components. Two were cluster RCTs, and three were before/after studies. In total, over 8000 women were included at baseline and over 7500 at the endpoints. Moderate certainty evidence suggested that RMC interventions increases women’s experiences of respectful care (one cRCT, approx. 3000 participants; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.44, 95% CI 2.45–4.84); two observational studies also reported positive changes. Reports of good quality care increased. Experiences of disrespectful or abusive care, and, specifically, physical abuse, were reduced. Low certainty evidence indicated fewer accounts of non-dignified care, lack of privacy, verbal abuse, neglect and abandonment with RMC interventions, but no difference in satisfaction rates. Other than low certainty evidence of reduced episiotomy rates, there were no data on the pre-specified clinical outcomes. Multi-component RMC policies appear to reduce women’s overall experiences of disrespect and abuse, and some components of this experience. However, the sustainability of the demonstrated effect over time is unclear, and the elements of the programmes that have most effect have not been examined. While the tested RMC policies show promising results, there is a need for rigorous research to refine the optimum approach to deliver and achieve RMC in all settings.

/pdf/effectiveness-of-respectful-care-policies-for-women-using-3rdgbr7jws.pdf

Kenneth William Finlayson

Papers

Why do women not use antenatal services in low- and middle-income countries? A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

What matters to women during childbirth: A systematic qualitative review.

Creating a Collaborative Culture in Maternity Care

Qualitative meta-synthesis: a guide for the novice.

Effectiveness of respectful care policies for women using routine intrapartum services: a systematic review.