Literature DB >> 33124095

The role of midwifery and other international insights for maternity care in the United States: An analysis of four countries.

Holly Powell Kennedy1, Marie-Clare Balaam2, Hannah Dahlen3, Eugene Declercq4, Ank de Jonge5,6, Soo Downe2, David Ellwood7, Caroline S E Homer8, Jane Sandall9, Saraswathi Vedam10, Ingrid Wolfe9,11,12.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The United States (US) spends more on health care than any other high-resource country. Despite this, their maternal and newborn outcomes are worse than all other countries with similar levels of economic development. Our purpose was to describe maternal and newborn outcomes and organization of care in four high-resource countries (Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, and United Kingdom) with consistently better outcomes and lower health care costs, and to identify opportunities for emulation and improvement in the United States.
METHOD: We examined resources that described health care organization and financing, provider types, birth settings, national, clinical guidelines, health care policies, surveillance data, and information for consumers. We conducted interviews with country stakeholders representing the disciplines of obstetrics, midwifery, pediatrics, neonatology, epidemiology, sociology, political science, public health, and health services. The results of the analysis were compared and contrasted with the US maternity system.
RESULTS: The four countries had lower rates of maternal mortality, low birthweight, and newborn and infant death than the United States. Five commonalities were identified as follows: (1) affordable/ accessible health care, (2) a maternity workforce that emphasized midwifery care and interprofessional collaboration, (3) respectful care and maternal autonomy, (4) evidence-based guidelines on place of birth, and (5) national data collections systems.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings reveal marked differences in the other countries compared to the United States. It is critical to consider the evidence for improved maternal and newborn outcomes with different models of care and to examine US cultural and structural failures that are leading to unacceptable and substandard maternal and infant outcomes.
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  international health systems; maternal and newborn outcomes; midwifery

Year:  2020        PMID: 33124095     DOI: 10.1111/birt.12504

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Birth        ISSN: 0730-7659            Impact factor:   3.689


  4 in total

1.  Use of pudendal nerve block among midwives in Norway: A national cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Mirjam Lukasse; Alette B Bratsberg; Katrine Thomassen; Ellen A Nøhr
Journal:  Eur J Midwifery       Date:  2022-06-07

Review 2.  Factors that impact on women's decision-making around prenatal genomic tests: An international discrete choice survey.

Authors:  James Buchanan; Melissa Hill; Caroline M Vass; Jennifer Hammond; Sam Riedijk; Jasmijn E Klapwijk; Eleanor Harding; Stina Lou; Ida Vogel; Lisa Hui; Charlotta Ingvoldstad-Malmgren; Maria Johansson Soller; Kelly E Ormond; Mahesh Choolani; Qian Zheng; Lyn S Chitty; Celine Lewis
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2022-04-30       Impact factor: 3.242

3.  Advancing quality and safety of perinatal services in India: opportunities for effective midwifery integration.

Authors:  Saraswathi Vedam; Reena Titoria; Paulomi Niles; Kathrin Stoll; Vishwajeet Kumar; Dinesh Baswal; Kaveri Mayra; Inderjeet Kaur; Pandora Hardtman
Journal:  Health Policy Plan       Date:  2022-09-13       Impact factor: 3.547

4.  Are perinatal quality collaboratives collaborating enough? How including all birth settings can drive needed improvement in the United States maternity care system.

Authors:  Audrey Levine; Vivienne Souter; Carol Sakala
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2021-10-26       Impact factor: 3.081

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.