Barriers to fertility care for racial/ethnic minority groups: a qualitative systematic review

Abirami Kirubarajan B.H.Sc., M.Sc , Priyanka Patel M.Sc., M.D , Shannon Leung B.H.Sc., M.P.H , Theebhana Prethipan B.H.Sc , Sony Sierra M.Sc., M.D
{"title":"Barriers to fertility care for racial/ethnic minority groups: a qualitative systematic review","authors":"Abirami Kirubarajan B.H.Sc., M.Sc ,&nbsp;Priyanka Patel M.Sc., M.D ,&nbsp;Shannon Leung B.H.Sc., M.P.H ,&nbsp;Theebhana Prethipan B.H.Sc ,&nbsp;Sony Sierra M.Sc., M.D","doi":"10.1016/j.xfnr.2021.01.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To characterize patient-reported barriers to equitable fertility care for racial/ethnic minority groups</p></div><div><h3>Evidence Review</h3><p><span>We conducted a systematic review of the following 6 databases based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines: Ovid Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, </span><span>ClinicalTrials.Gov</span><svg><path></path></svg><span>, and PsycInfo. Citations of full-text articles were also manually searched in the Scopus database. Original research studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported patient-reported outcomes regarding racial/ethnic equity or cultural competence in fertility care. All racial and ethnic groups, including Black, Hispanic, South/East Asian, Pacific Islander, and Indigenous groups, were eligible for inclusion. Screening, extraction, and appraisal were completed in duplicate by 2 independent reviewers. The Risk of Bias Instrument for Cross-Sectional Surveys of Attitudes and Practices and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research were used to assess the risk of bias and methodological quality.</span></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 2,921 original database citations, we included 17 studies, which encompassed 3,743 patients from racial/ethnic minority and immigrant/refugee groups. The key patient-reported barriers included stigmatization of fertility care, lack of infertility knowledge, language barriers, discrimination, and lack of institutional trust. These barriers can create psychological distress for patients as well as prevent help-seeking for infertility. As such, the different approaches for equitable care included provision of multilingual services, involvement of physicians of diverse backgrounds, incorporation of preferred traditional healers, awareness of religious beliefs, and screening for psychosocial services. However, it is important to ensure that fertility providers do not inadvertently stereotype patients or rely on blanket assumptions. An open-ended approach to cultural humility is recommended.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>It is important for healthcare providers to consider the unique barriers for fertility care for racial and ethnic minority groups. This review describes a number of implementable solutions for equitable fertility care.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73011,"journal":{"name":"F&S reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.xfnr.2021.01.001","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F&S reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666571921000037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Objective

To characterize patient-reported barriers to equitable fertility care for racial/ethnic minority groups

Evidence Review

We conducted a systematic review of the following 6 databases based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines: Ovid Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.Gov, and PsycInfo. Citations of full-text articles were also manually searched in the Scopus database. Original research studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported patient-reported outcomes regarding racial/ethnic equity or cultural competence in fertility care. All racial and ethnic groups, including Black, Hispanic, South/East Asian, Pacific Islander, and Indigenous groups, were eligible for inclusion. Screening, extraction, and appraisal were completed in duplicate by 2 independent reviewers. The Risk of Bias Instrument for Cross-Sectional Surveys of Attitudes and Practices and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research were used to assess the risk of bias and methodological quality.

Results

Of 2,921 original database citations, we included 17 studies, which encompassed 3,743 patients from racial/ethnic minority and immigrant/refugee groups. The key patient-reported barriers included stigmatization of fertility care, lack of infertility knowledge, language barriers, discrimination, and lack of institutional trust. These barriers can create psychological distress for patients as well as prevent help-seeking for infertility. As such, the different approaches for equitable care included provision of multilingual services, involvement of physicians of diverse backgrounds, incorporation of preferred traditional healers, awareness of religious beliefs, and screening for psychosocial services. However, it is important to ensure that fertility providers do not inadvertently stereotype patients or rely on blanket assumptions. An open-ended approach to cultural humility is recommended.

Conclusions

It is important for healthcare providers to consider the unique barriers for fertility care for racial and ethnic minority groups. This review describes a number of implementable solutions for equitable fertility care.

种族/少数民族群体生育护理的障碍:定性系统回顾
目的描述患者报告的种族/少数民族群体公平生育护理的障碍。证据回顾我们根据系统回顾和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目对以下6个数据库进行了系统回顾:Ovid Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials。Gov和PsycInfo网站。全文文章的引用也在Scopus数据库中手工搜索。如果原始研究报告了患者报告的关于生育护理中种族/民族平等或文化能力的结果,则有资格纳入。所有种族和民族,包括黑人、西班牙裔、南亚/东亚、太平洋岛民和土著群体,都有资格纳入。筛选、提取和评价由2名独立审稿人完成,一式两份。偏见风险工具用于态度和实践的横断面调查和乔安娜布里格斯研究所定性研究的关键评估清单用于评估偏见风险和方法质量。在2921条原始数据库引用中,我们纳入了17项研究,其中包括3743名来自种族/少数民族和移民/难民群体的患者。患者报告的主要障碍包括对生育护理的污名化、缺乏不孕症知识、语言障碍、歧视和缺乏机构信任。这些障碍会给患者造成心理困扰,也会阻碍不孕患者寻求帮助。因此,公平护理的不同方法包括提供多语言服务、不同背景的医生参与、纳入首选的传统治疗师、宗教信仰意识以及筛查心理社会服务。然而,重要的是要确保生育服务提供者不会无意中对患者产生刻板印象或依赖于笼统的假设。建议采用一种开放式的文化谦逊方法。结论少数民族在生育护理中存在独特的障碍,应考虑到这一点。本综述描述了公平生育护理的一些可实施的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
F&S reviews
F&S reviews Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health, Urology
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
61 days
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信