Cargando…
From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth
Women greatly value and benefit from the presence of someone they trust to support them throughout labour and childbirth (‘labour companion of choice’). Labour companionship improves maternal and perinatal outcomes, including enhancing physiological labour and birth experiences. Despite clear benefi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10021298/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36963069 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0001476 |
_version_ | 1784908451903700992 |
---|---|
author | Bohren, Meghan A. Hazfiarini, Alya Vazquez Corona, Martha Colomar, Mercedes De Mucio, Bremen Tunçalp, Özge Portela, Anayda |
author_facet | Bohren, Meghan A. Hazfiarini, Alya Vazquez Corona, Martha Colomar, Mercedes De Mucio, Bremen Tunçalp, Özge Portela, Anayda |
author_sort | Bohren, Meghan A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Women greatly value and benefit from the presence of someone they trust to support them throughout labour and childbirth (‘labour companion of choice’). Labour companionship improves maternal and perinatal outcomes, including enhancing physiological labour and birth experiences. Despite clear benefits, implementation is slow. We conducted a scoping review to assess coverage and models of labour companionship, including quantitative studies reporting coverage of labour companionship in any level health facility globally. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Global Health from 1 January 2010–14 December 2021. We extracted data on study design, labour companionship coverage, timing and type of companions allowed, and recoded data into categories for comparison across studies. We included data from a maternal health sentinel network of hospitals in Latin America, using descriptive statistics to assess coverage among 120,581 women giving birth in these sites from April 2018-April 2022. In the scoping review, we included 77 studies from 27 countries. There was wide variation in the coverage of labour companionship: almost one-third of studies reported coverage less than 40%, and one-third of studies reported coverage between 40–80%. Husbands or partners were the most frequent companion (37.7%, 29/77), followed by family member or friend (gender not specified) (32.5%, 25/77), family member or friend (female-only) (13.0%, 10/77). Across nine sentinel hospitals in five Latin American countries, there was variation in coverage, with no companion at any time ranging from 14.9%-93.8%. Despite the well-known benefits and factors affecting implementation of labour companionship, more work is needed to improve equitable coverage. Concerted efforts are needed to engage with communities, health workers, health managers, and policy-makers to establish policies, address implementation barriers, and integrate data on coverage into perinatal records and quality processes to ensure that all women have access. Harmonized reporting of labour companionship would greatly enhance understanding at global level. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10021298 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100212982023-03-17 From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth Bohren, Meghan A. Hazfiarini, Alya Vazquez Corona, Martha Colomar, Mercedes De Mucio, Bremen Tunçalp, Özge Portela, Anayda PLOS Glob Public Health Research Article Women greatly value and benefit from the presence of someone they trust to support them throughout labour and childbirth (‘labour companion of choice’). Labour companionship improves maternal and perinatal outcomes, including enhancing physiological labour and birth experiences. Despite clear benefits, implementation is slow. We conducted a scoping review to assess coverage and models of labour companionship, including quantitative studies reporting coverage of labour companionship in any level health facility globally. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Global Health from 1 January 2010–14 December 2021. We extracted data on study design, labour companionship coverage, timing and type of companions allowed, and recoded data into categories for comparison across studies. We included data from a maternal health sentinel network of hospitals in Latin America, using descriptive statistics to assess coverage among 120,581 women giving birth in these sites from April 2018-April 2022. In the scoping review, we included 77 studies from 27 countries. There was wide variation in the coverage of labour companionship: almost one-third of studies reported coverage less than 40%, and one-third of studies reported coverage between 40–80%. Husbands or partners were the most frequent companion (37.7%, 29/77), followed by family member or friend (gender not specified) (32.5%, 25/77), family member or friend (female-only) (13.0%, 10/77). Across nine sentinel hospitals in five Latin American countries, there was variation in coverage, with no companion at any time ranging from 14.9%-93.8%. Despite the well-known benefits and factors affecting implementation of labour companionship, more work is needed to improve equitable coverage. Concerted efforts are needed to engage with communities, health workers, health managers, and policy-makers to establish policies, address implementation barriers, and integrate data on coverage into perinatal records and quality processes to ensure that all women have access. Harmonized reporting of labour companionship would greatly enhance understanding at global level. Public Library of Science 2023-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10021298/ /pubmed/36963069 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0001476 Text en © 2023 Bohren et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Bohren, Meghan A. Hazfiarini, Alya Vazquez Corona, Martha Colomar, Mercedes De Mucio, Bremen Tunçalp, Özge Portela, Anayda From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth |
title | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth |
title_full | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth |
title_fullStr | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth |
title_full_unstemmed | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth |
title_short | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth |
title_sort | from global recommendations to (in)action: a scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10021298/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36963069 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0001476 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bohrenmeghana fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT hazfiarinialya fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT vazquezcoronamartha fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT colomarmercedes fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT demuciobremen fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT tuncalpozge fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT portelaanayda fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth |