One Hundred Years of Seeking Respectful Maternity Care: History and Evolution.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Ellen L Tilden, Rebecca Jungbauer, Erica L Hart, Amy G Cantor
{"title":"One Hundred Years of Seeking Respectful Maternity Care: History and Evolution.","authors":"Ellen L Tilden, Rebecca Jungbauer, Erica L Hart, Amy G Cantor","doi":"10.1111/birt.12876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Growing awareness of poor maternal health outcomes and maternal health disparities in the United States has heightened urgency around the need to promote Respectful Maternity Care (RMC) as a fundamental tenet of obstetric/midwifery care and standardize efforts to improve safety, eliminate obstetric violence and racism, and optimize health outcomes for all birthing people. The historical context of prior and contemporary perspectives around childbirth influences our understanding of RMC and are shaped by varying scholarly, clinical, and community standards (e.g., religion, human rights, government, public health, midwifery, ethics, activism, and the law), which have changed significantly since the mid-19th century. In this commentary, we share results of a contextual question scoped as part of a larger systematic review of RMC to help inform consensus around a shared definition and development of a metric to standardize delivery and evaluation of RMC. Synthesis of this literature identified landmark historical influences on RMC over the past 100 years, highlighting the multidisciplinary scholarship and historical context influencing the progress toward RMC. Further understanding of this history may also inform policies and guidance for ongoing efforts to center respect and accountability in all aspects of maternity care, with particular attention to populations who are disproportionally impacted by disrespectful care.</p>","PeriodicalId":55350,"journal":{"name":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.12876","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Growing awareness of poor maternal health outcomes and maternal health disparities in the United States has heightened urgency around the need to promote Respectful Maternity Care (RMC) as a fundamental tenet of obstetric/midwifery care and standardize efforts to improve safety, eliminate obstetric violence and racism, and optimize health outcomes for all birthing people. The historical context of prior and contemporary perspectives around childbirth influences our understanding of RMC and are shaped by varying scholarly, clinical, and community standards (e.g., religion, human rights, government, public health, midwifery, ethics, activism, and the law), which have changed significantly since the mid-19th century. In this commentary, we share results of a contextual question scoped as part of a larger systematic review of RMC to help inform consensus around a shared definition and development of a metric to standardize delivery and evaluation of RMC. Synthesis of this literature identified landmark historical influences on RMC over the past 100 years, highlighting the multidisciplinary scholarship and historical context influencing the progress toward RMC. Further understanding of this history may also inform policies and guidance for ongoing efforts to center respect and accountability in all aspects of maternity care, with particular attention to populations who are disproportionally impacted by disrespectful care.

寻求尊重产妇护理的百年历程:历史与演变。
在美国,人们越来越意识到孕产妇健康结果不佳和孕产妇健康不平等的问题,这就更加迫切地需要将 "尊重产妇护理"(RMC)作为产科/助产护理的一项基本原则加以推广,并使其标准化,以提高安全性,消除产科暴力和种族主义,优化所有分娩者的健康结果。自 19 世纪中叶以来,不同的学术、临床和社区标准(如宗教、人权、政府、公共卫生、助产、伦理、激进主义和法律)已发生了显著变化。在这篇评论中,我们分享了一个背景问题的研究结果,该问题是对 RMC 进行更广泛的系统性回顾的一部分,目的是帮助就 RMC 的共同定义和标准制定达成共识,以规范 RMC 的实施和评估。通过对这些文献的综合分析,我们发现了过去 100 年来对 RMC 具有里程碑意义的历史影响,突出了影响 RMC 进展的多学科学术和历史背景。对这一历史的进一步了解也可为政策和指导提供参考,以便在孕产妇护理的各个方面将尊重和问责作为中心工作,并特别关注那些受到不尊重护理过度影响的人群。
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
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care is a multidisciplinary, refereed journal devoted to issues and practices in the care of childbearing women, infants, and families. It is written by and for professionals in maternal and neonatal health, nurses, midwives, physicians, public health workers, doulas, social scientists, childbirth educators, lactation counselors, epidemiologists, and other health caregivers and policymakers in perinatal care.
×
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