Antenatal care policy in high-income countries with a universal health system: a scoping review.

A. Goncalves, I. Ferreira, Márcia Pestana-Santos, C. McCourt, Ana Paula Prata
{"title":"Antenatal care policy in high-income countries with a universal health system: a scoping review.","authors":"A. Goncalves, I. Ferreira, Márcia Pestana-Santos, C. McCourt, Ana Paula Prata","doi":"10.1101/2021.09.03.21263024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The availability, effectiveness, and access to antenatal care are directly linked with good maternal and neonatal outcomes, making antenatal care an important determinant in health. But to be effective, care must always be appropriate, not excessive, not insufficient. Perinatal outcomes vary within and between countries, raising questions about practices, the use of best evidence in clinical decisions and the existence of clear and updated guidance. Through a scoping review methodology, this study aimed to map the available antenatal care policies for low-risk pregnant women in high-income countries with a universal health system founded on the Beveridge Model. Following searches on the main databases and grey literature, the authors identified and analysed ten antenatal care policies: Australia, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Some policies were over 10 years old, some recommendations did not present a rationale or context, others were outdated, or were simply different approaches in the absence of strong evidence. Whilst some recommendations were ubiquitous, others differed either in the recommendation provided, the timing, or the frequency. Similarly, we found wide variation in the methods/strategy used to support the recommendations provided. These results confirms that best evidence is not always assimilated into policies and clinical guidance. Further research crossing these differences with perinatal outcomes and evaluation of cost could be valuable to optimise guidance on antenatal care. Similarly, some aspects of care need further rigorous studies to obtain evidence of higher quality to inform recommendations.","PeriodicalId":74789,"journal":{"name":"Sexual & reproductive healthcare : official journal of the Swedish Association of Midwives","volume":"21 1","pages":"100717"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexual & reproductive healthcare : official journal of the Swedish Association of Midwives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.09.03.21263024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The availability, effectiveness, and access to antenatal care are directly linked with good maternal and neonatal outcomes, making antenatal care an important determinant in health. But to be effective, care must always be appropriate, not excessive, not insufficient. Perinatal outcomes vary within and between countries, raising questions about practices, the use of best evidence in clinical decisions and the existence of clear and updated guidance. Through a scoping review methodology, this study aimed to map the available antenatal care policies for low-risk pregnant women in high-income countries with a universal health system founded on the Beveridge Model. Following searches on the main databases and grey literature, the authors identified and analysed ten antenatal care policies: Australia, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Some policies were over 10 years old, some recommendations did not present a rationale or context, others were outdated, or were simply different approaches in the absence of strong evidence. Whilst some recommendations were ubiquitous, others differed either in the recommendation provided, the timing, or the frequency. Similarly, we found wide variation in the methods/strategy used to support the recommendations provided. These results confirms that best evidence is not always assimilated into policies and clinical guidance. Further research crossing these differences with perinatal outcomes and evaluation of cost could be valuable to optimise guidance on antenatal care. Similarly, some aspects of care need further rigorous studies to obtain evidence of higher quality to inform recommendations.
具有全民卫生系统的高收入国家的产前保健政策:范围审查
产前保健的可得性、有效性和可及性与良好的孕产妇和新生儿结局直接相关,使产前保健成为健康的重要决定因素。但要想有效,护理必须始终是适当的,不能过度,不能不足。围产期结果在国家内部和国家之间各不相同,这对实践、在临床决策中使用最佳证据以及是否存在明确和最新的指导提出了疑问。通过范围审查方法,本研究旨在绘制基于贝弗里奇模型的全民卫生系统的高收入国家中低风险孕妇可用的产前保健政策。通过对主要数据库和灰色文献的搜索,作者确定并分析了十个产前保健政策:澳大利亚、丹麦、芬兰、冰岛、意大利、挪威、葡萄牙、西班牙、瑞典和英国。有些政策已有10多年的历史,有些建议没有提出理由或背景,其他建议已经过时,或者只是在缺乏有力证据的情况下采取不同的方法。虽然有些建议是普遍存在的,但其他建议在提供的建议、时间或频率上有所不同。同样,我们发现用于支持所提供建议的方法/策略存在很大差异。这些结果证实,最佳证据并不总是被纳入政策和临床指导。进一步的研究跨越这些差异与围产期结果和成本评估可能是有价值的优化产前护理指导。同样,护理的某些方面需要进一步严格研究,以获得更高质量的证据,为建议提供依据。
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
×
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