Birth Experience Among Black Women in the United States: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis.

Elizabeth J Spurlock, Rita H Pickler
{"title":"Birth Experience Among Black Women in the United States: A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis.","authors":"Elizabeth J Spurlock, Rita H Pickler","doi":"10.1111/jmwh.13628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>There are striking disparities in perinatal health outcomes for Black women in the United States. Although the causes are multifactorial, research findings have increasingly identified social and structural determinants of health as contributors to perinatal disparities. Maltreatment during perinatal care, which is disproportionately experienced by Black women, may be one such contributor. Qualitative researchers have explored Black women's perinatal care experiences, but childbirth experience data has yet to be analyzed in-depth across studies. The aim of this meta-synthesis was to explore the birthing experience of Black women in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were qualitative research studies that included birth experience data shared by self-identified Black or African American women who had given birth in the United States. Exclusion criteria were reports that did not include rich qualitative data or only included experience data that did not specify the race of the participant (eg, data pooled for women of color). The search began February 2022 and ended June 2022. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research was used to appraise the research. Results were synthesized using content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen studies met inclusion criteria. Main themes included (1) trust: being known and seen; (2) how race influences care; (3) preserving autonomy; and (4) birth as trauma.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Fragmented care resulted in reports of poor birth experiences in several studies. Open communication and feeling known by perinatal care providers was influential in improving childbirth experiences among Black women; these themes are consistent with existing research. Further prospective research exploring relationships among these themes and perinatal outcomes is needed. Limitations of this report include the use of content analysis and meta-synthesis which may lose the granularity of the original reports; however, the aggregation of voices may provide valuable, transferable, actionable insight that can inform future supportive care interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":94094,"journal":{"name":"Journal of midwifery & women's health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of midwifery & women's health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.13628","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: There are striking disparities in perinatal health outcomes for Black women in the United States. Although the causes are multifactorial, research findings have increasingly identified social and structural determinants of health as contributors to perinatal disparities. Maltreatment during perinatal care, which is disproportionately experienced by Black women, may be one such contributor. Qualitative researchers have explored Black women's perinatal care experiences, but childbirth experience data has yet to be analyzed in-depth across studies. The aim of this meta-synthesis was to explore the birthing experience of Black women in the United States.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were qualitative research studies that included birth experience data shared by self-identified Black or African American women who had given birth in the United States. Exclusion criteria were reports that did not include rich qualitative data or only included experience data that did not specify the race of the participant (eg, data pooled for women of color). The search began February 2022 and ended June 2022. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research was used to appraise the research. Results were synthesized using content analysis.

Results: Fifteen studies met inclusion criteria. Main themes included (1) trust: being known and seen; (2) how race influences care; (3) preserving autonomy; and (4) birth as trauma.

Discussion: Fragmented care resulted in reports of poor birth experiences in several studies. Open communication and feeling known by perinatal care providers was influential in improving childbirth experiences among Black women; these themes are consistent with existing research. Further prospective research exploring relationships among these themes and perinatal outcomes is needed. Limitations of this report include the use of content analysis and meta-synthesis which may lose the granularity of the original reports; however, the aggregation of voices may provide valuable, transferable, actionable insight that can inform future supportive care interventions.

美国黑人妇女的生育经历:定性元综合。
导言:美国黑人妇女的围产期健康结果存在显著差异。虽然原因是多方面的,但研究结果越来越多地发现,社会和结构性健康决定因素是造成围产期差异的原因。黑人妇女在围产期遭受的虐待尤为严重,这可能就是其中一个因素。定性研究人员对黑人妇女的围产期护理经历进行了探讨,但分娩经历数据尚未在各项研究中进行深入分析。本荟萃综述旨在探讨美国黑人妇女的分娩经历:方法:检索了 PubMed、Embase、PsycINFO 和 CINAHL 数据库。纳入标准是包含在美国分娩的自我认同的黑人或非裔美国妇女分享的分娩经历数据的定性研究。排除标准是未包含丰富定性数据的报告,或仅包含未指明参与者种族的经验数据的报告(例如,有色人种妇女的数据汇总)。搜索从 2022 年 2 月开始,到 2022 年 6 月结束。乔安娜-布里格斯研究所(Joanna Briggs Institute)定性研究批判性评估清单用于评估研究。结果采用内容分析法进行综合:15项研究符合纳入标准。主要主题包括:(1)信任:被了解和被看见;(2)种族如何影响护理;(3)维护自主权;以及(4)作为创伤的分娩:讨论:在多项研究中,零散的护理导致了不良的分娩体验报告。围产期保健提供者的坦诚交流和被了解的感觉对改善黑人妇女的分娩经历很有影响;这些主题与现有研究一致。需要进一步开展前瞻性研究,探讨这些主题与围产期结果之间的关系。本报告的局限性包括内容分析和元综合的使用,这可能会失去原始报告的精细性;但是,声音的汇总可能会提供有价值的、可转移的、可操作的见解,为未来的支持性护理干预措施提供参考。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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