Implementation of shared decision-making about rooming-in: A before and after an audit of breastfeeding in Taiwan.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Hsiao-Ying Hung, Chun-Che Wen, Pei-Fang Su, Shek-Yip Man, Ying-Ju Chang
{"title":"Implementation of shared decision-making about rooming-in: A before and after an audit of breastfeeding in Taiwan.","authors":"Hsiao-Ying Hung, Chun-Che Wen, Pei-Fang Su, Shek-Yip Man, Ying-Ju Chang","doi":"10.1186/s13006-024-00649-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The 24-h rooming-in policy is crucial to the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) for promoting breastfeeding. However, this policy may restrict maternal autonomy. In 2018, to integrate women's preferences into care decisions, Taiwan's Baby-Friendly certification included prenatal shared decision-making (SDM) for rooming-in. Prior to 2018, maternal knowledge, considerations, and intentions regarding rooming-in and the impact of prenatal SDM were unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective electronic medical record cohort study was conducted in southern Taiwan. Data on healthy postpartum women eligible for rooming-in and breastfeeding for the years 2017 and 2019, reflecting the periods before and after prenatal SDM was introduced, were gathered. Maternal and newborn characteristics, maternal knowledge, considerations, and prenatal intentions for postpartum rooming-in and breastfeeding during hospitalization were collected. Additionally, data on actual postpartum rooming-in practices during hospitalization and exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) practices from birth to hospital discharge, to 1 month, and to 2 months postpartum were collected. Descriptive and non-parametric statistics were applied to analyze the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 621 women in 2017 and 311 women in 2019 were included. After prenatal SDM was introduced, the rooming-in rate during hospitalization fell from 42.2% in 2017 to 25.6% in 2019 (p < 0.001), and the EBF rate declined from 45.9% to 35.7% (p = 0.01). Additionally, the 1-month postpartum EBF rate decreased from 46.4% in 2017 (n = 571) to 44.3% in 2019 (n = 264), and the 2-month postpartum EBF rate dropped from 45.5% in 2017 (n = 591) to 40.2% (n = 308). According to the 2019 Patient Decision Aids responses (n = 236), women demonstrated limited understanding of rooming-in, with only 40.7% expressing an intention toward 24-h rooming-in. Women of older maternal age (p < 0.001), with a graduate degree (p = 0.02), full-time employment (p = 0.04), and concerns about rest disruption (p < 0.001), were more likely to prefer non-24-h rooming-in.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Initiatives must promote prenatal SDM to enable healthcare providers to address misconceptions and tailor education, thereby increasing women's intention toward 24-h rooming-in and EBF. Future research should explore women's experiences and unmet needs at BFHI facilities to inform the construction of a baby- and mother-friendly environment.</p>","PeriodicalId":54266,"journal":{"name":"International Breastfeeding Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11149201/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Breastfeeding Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13006-024-00649-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The 24-h rooming-in policy is crucial to the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) for promoting breastfeeding. However, this policy may restrict maternal autonomy. In 2018, to integrate women's preferences into care decisions, Taiwan's Baby-Friendly certification included prenatal shared decision-making (SDM) for rooming-in. Prior to 2018, maternal knowledge, considerations, and intentions regarding rooming-in and the impact of prenatal SDM were unknown.

Methods: A retrospective electronic medical record cohort study was conducted in southern Taiwan. Data on healthy postpartum women eligible for rooming-in and breastfeeding for the years 2017 and 2019, reflecting the periods before and after prenatal SDM was introduced, were gathered. Maternal and newborn characteristics, maternal knowledge, considerations, and prenatal intentions for postpartum rooming-in and breastfeeding during hospitalization were collected. Additionally, data on actual postpartum rooming-in practices during hospitalization and exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) practices from birth to hospital discharge, to 1 month, and to 2 months postpartum were collected. Descriptive and non-parametric statistics were applied to analyze the data.

Results: A total of 621 women in 2017 and 311 women in 2019 were included. After prenatal SDM was introduced, the rooming-in rate during hospitalization fell from 42.2% in 2017 to 25.6% in 2019 (p < 0.001), and the EBF rate declined from 45.9% to 35.7% (p = 0.01). Additionally, the 1-month postpartum EBF rate decreased from 46.4% in 2017 (n = 571) to 44.3% in 2019 (n = 264), and the 2-month postpartum EBF rate dropped from 45.5% in 2017 (n = 591) to 40.2% (n = 308). According to the 2019 Patient Decision Aids responses (n = 236), women demonstrated limited understanding of rooming-in, with only 40.7% expressing an intention toward 24-h rooming-in. Women of older maternal age (p < 0.001), with a graduate degree (p = 0.02), full-time employment (p = 0.04), and concerns about rest disruption (p < 0.001), were more likely to prefer non-24-h rooming-in.

Conclusions: Initiatives must promote prenatal SDM to enable healthcare providers to address misconceptions and tailor education, thereby increasing women's intention toward 24-h rooming-in and EBF. Future research should explore women's experiences and unmet needs at BFHI facilities to inform the construction of a baby- and mother-friendly environment.

关于同房的共同决策的实施:台湾母乳喂养前后的审计。
背景:24 小时同房政策对于促进母乳喂养的爱婴医院倡议(BFHI)至关重要。然而,这一政策可能会限制产妇的自主权。2018 年,为了将产妇的偏好纳入护理决策,台湾的爱婴认证纳入了产前同房共同决策(SDM)。在 2018 年之前,孕产妇对同房的了解、考虑和意愿以及产前 SDM 的影响尚不清楚:在台湾南部开展了一项回顾性电子病历队列研究。方法:在台湾南部开展了一项回顾性电子病历队列研究,收集了 2017 年和 2019 年符合同房和母乳喂养条件的健康产后妇女的数据,这些数据反映了产前 SDM 推出前后的时期。收集了产妇和新生儿的特征、产妇对产后同房和住院期间母乳喂养的了解、注意事项和产前意向。此外,还收集了住院期间产后同房的实际做法以及从出生到出院、产后 1 个月和产后 2 个月的纯母乳喂养(EBF)做法的数据。采用描述性和非参数统计方法对数据进行分析:共纳入了 2017 年的 621 名产妇和 2019 年的 311 名产妇。在引入产前 SDM 后,住院期间的同房率从 2017 年的 42.2% 降至 2019 年的 25.6%(P 结论:产前 SDM 是产科护理的重要组成部分:必须采取措施促进产前 SDM,使医疗服务提供者能够消除误解并进行有针对性的教育,从而提高妇女对 24 小时同房和 EBF 的意愿。未来的研究应探讨妇女在 BFHI 机构中的经历和未满足的需求,为营造对婴儿和母亲友好的环境提供信息。
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
International Breastfeeding Journal
International Breastfeeding Journal Medicine-Obstetrics and Gynecology
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
11.40%
发文量
76
审稿时长
32 weeks
期刊介绍: Breastfeeding is recognized as an important public health issue with enormous social and economic implications. Infants who do not receive breast milk are likely to experience poorer health outcomes than breastfed infants; mothers who do not breastfeed increase their own health risks. Publications on the topic of breastfeeding are wide ranging. Articles about breastfeeding are currently published journals focused on nursing, midwifery, paediatric, obstetric, family medicine, public health, immunology, physiology, sociology and many other topics. In addition, electronic publishing allows fast publication time for authors and Open Access ensures the journal is easily accessible to readers.
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