满足正在使用或正在接受药物治疗的围产期妇女的需要:一项混合方法的系统评价。

Emma Smith, Shirley Lewis, Lynne Gilmour, Louise Honeybul, Helen Cheyne, Narendra Aladangady, Brigid Featherstone, Margaret Maxwell, Joanne Neale, Mariana Gonzalez Utrilla, Polly Radcliffe
{"title":"满足正在使用或正在接受药物治疗的围产期妇女的需要:一项混合方法的系统评价。","authors":"Emma Smith, Shirley Lewis, Lynne Gilmour, Louise Honeybul, Helen Cheyne, Narendra Aladangady, Brigid Featherstone, Margaret Maxwell, Joanne Neale, Mariana Gonzalez Utrilla, Polly Radcliffe","doi":"10.3310/GJPR0321","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Women who use and/or are in treatment for using drugs during the perinatal period have complex health and social care needs. Substance use in the perinatal period is multifaceted, with many confounding factors that may impact the long-term health and well-being of both mothers and children. Evidence is needed to identify which psychosocial interventions are effective for women who use and/or are in treatment for drug use during the perinatal period.</p><p><strong>Objective(s): </strong>(1) Describe the range of psychosocial interventions available for women who use and/or are in treatment for drugs in the perinatal period; (2) to document evidence on the effectiveness of interventions and (3) identify interventions that women feel most meet their needs.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A mixed-methods systematic review was conducted following a predetermined protocol and the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for mixed-methods systematic reviews, adopting a segregated approach.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Eight databases were searched for articles meeting the inclusion criteria on 7 April 2022, and updated searches were run on 5 February 2024. The search was limited to include peer-reviewed articles published after 1990 and available in English. In total, 15,655 articles were identified. Following screening by four reviewers by title and abstract and then full text, 197 articles were included in the review. A data extraction template was used to extract study characteristics and results. Quality was assessed using the mixed-methods Quality Appraisal Tool. Cohen's <i>d</i> was used to measure the effect size for quantitative data to understand if an intervention had a small (> 0.2), medium (> 0.5) or large effect (> 0.8). Effectiveness was measured through three outcomes: (1) improvements and engagement with and retention in substance use treatment services for women in the prenatal and postnatal period; (2) reductions in substance use by women in the perinatal period and (3) improvements in engagement with and retention in prenatal care. For qualitative data, articles were grouped by the intervention type and the authors' analytical themes and conclusions were thematically synthesised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 197 included studies described 217 separate interventions. Most interventions (85.3%) were community-based, delivered in more than one way (49.3%), and delivered in single settings (50.6%), although some were colocated alongside other services (22.1%). No conclusive evidence for effectiveness was established for any type of intervention, although most interventions that improved retention in substance use services included practical support. The qualitative synthesis supported these findings and additionally suggested that women appreciated being able to access multiple services in one place: non-judgemental, trauma-informed services and peer-support models.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>There were wide discrepancies in the types of information reported related to the age of some studies, limiting our ability to evaluate the effectiveness through quantitative analysis. The qualitative analysis was similarly limited as not all the identified qualitative papers included the views of women about treatment received.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Interventions that included practical support were found to be more effective in both the quantitative and qualitative findings. There is also some evidence for the effectiveness and feasibility of integrated, multidisciplinary interventions in both the quantitative and qualitative data.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>There is a need for up-to-date, high-quality research studies into interventions for pregnant women who use and/or are in treatment for drug use. It is additionally important that the voices of women are considered in future research.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme as award number NIHR130619.</p>","PeriodicalId":519880,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":" ","pages":"1-25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meeting the needs of women in the perinatal period, who use or are in treatment for using drugs: A mixed-methods systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Emma Smith, Shirley Lewis, Lynne Gilmour, Louise Honeybul, Helen Cheyne, Narendra Aladangady, Brigid Featherstone, Margaret Maxwell, Joanne Neale, Mariana Gonzalez Utrilla, Polly Radcliffe\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/GJPR0321\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Women who use and/or are in treatment for using drugs during the perinatal period have complex health and social care needs. Substance use in the perinatal period is multifaceted, with many confounding factors that may impact the long-term health and well-being of both mothers and children. Evidence is needed to identify which psychosocial interventions are effective for women who use and/or are in treatment for drug use during the perinatal period.</p><p><strong>Objective(s): </strong>(1) Describe the range of psychosocial interventions available for women who use and/or are in treatment for drugs in the perinatal period; (2) to document evidence on the effectiveness of interventions and (3) identify interventions that women feel most meet their needs.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A mixed-methods systematic review was conducted following a predetermined protocol and the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for mixed-methods systematic reviews, adopting a segregated approach.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Eight databases were searched for articles meeting the inclusion criteria on 7 April 2022, and updated searches were run on 5 February 2024. The search was limited to include peer-reviewed articles published after 1990 and available in English. In total, 15,655 articles were identified. Following screening by four reviewers by title and abstract and then full text, 197 articles were included in the review. A data extraction template was used to extract study characteristics and results. Quality was assessed using the mixed-methods Quality Appraisal Tool. Cohen's <i>d</i> was used to measure the effect size for quantitative data to understand if an intervention had a small (> 0.2), medium (> 0.5) or large effect (> 0.8). Effectiveness was measured through three outcomes: (1) improvements and engagement with and retention in substance use treatment services for women in the prenatal and postnatal period; (2) reductions in substance use by women in the perinatal period and (3) improvements in engagement with and retention in prenatal care. For qualitative data, articles were grouped by the intervention type and the authors' analytical themes and conclusions were thematically synthesised.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 197 included studies described 217 separate interventions. Most interventions (85.3%) were community-based, delivered in more than one way (49.3%), and delivered in single settings (50.6%), although some were colocated alongside other services (22.1%). No conclusive evidence for effectiveness was established for any type of intervention, although most interventions that improved retention in substance use services included practical support. The qualitative synthesis supported these findings and additionally suggested that women appreciated being able to access multiple services in one place: non-judgemental, trauma-informed services and peer-support models.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>There were wide discrepancies in the types of information reported related to the age of some studies, limiting our ability to evaluate the effectiveness through quantitative analysis. The qualitative analysis was similarly limited as not all the identified qualitative papers included the views of women about treatment received.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Interventions that included practical support were found to be more effective in both the quantitative and qualitative findings. There is also some evidence for the effectiveness and feasibility of integrated, multidisciplinary interventions in both the quantitative and qualitative data.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>There is a need for up-to-date, high-quality research studies into interventions for pregnant women who use and/or are in treatment for drug use. It is additionally important that the voices of women are considered in future research.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme as award number NIHR130619.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":519880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-25\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/GJPR0321\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/GJPR0321","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:围产期使用药物和(或)正在接受药物治疗的妇女有复杂的健康和社会护理需求。围产期药物使用是多方面的,有许多混杂因素可能影响母亲和儿童的长期健康和福祉。需要证据来确定哪些社会心理干预措施对围产期使用和/或正在接受药物治疗的妇女有效。目标:(1)描述在围产期使用药物和/或正在接受药物治疗的妇女可获得的社会心理干预措施的范围;(2)记录干预措施有效性的证据;(3)确定妇女认为最能满足其需求的干预措施。设计:采用分离的方法,按照预先确定的方案和Joanna Briggs研究所的混合方法系统评价指南进行混合方法系统评价。综述方法:于2022年4月7日在8个数据库中检索符合纳入标准的文章,并于2024年2月5日进行更新检索。搜索仅限于1990年以后发表的同行评议的英文文章。共鉴定15,655件物品。经4位审稿人按标题、摘要、全文筛选,共纳入197篇论文。数据提取模板用于提取研究特征和结果。使用混合方法质量评价工具评估质量。采用Cohen’s d来衡量定量数据的效应大小,以了解干预是小(> .2)、中(> .5)还是大(> .8)。通过三个结果来衡量有效性:(1)产前和产后妇女药物使用治疗服务的改善、参与和保留;(2)减少围产期妇女的药物使用;(3)改善产前护理的参与和保留。对于定性数据,文章按干预类型分组,作者的分析主题和结论按主题综合。结果:纳入的197项研究描述了217项单独的干预措施。大多数干预措施(85.3%)以社区为基础,以多种方式提供(49.3%),并在单一环境中提供(50.6%),尽管有些干预措施与其他服务同时提供(22.1%)。没有确定任何类型干预措施有效性的确凿证据,尽管大多数改善药物使用服务保留的干预措施包括实际支持。定性综合支持了这些发现,并进一步表明,妇女赞赏能够在一个地方获得多种服务:非评判性的、了解创伤的服务和同伴支持模式。局限性:在一些研究中,与年龄相关的报告信息类型存在很大差异,限制了我们通过定量分析评估有效性的能力。定性分析同样有限,因为并非所有确定的定性文件都包括妇女对所接受治疗的看法。结论:包括实际支持的干预措施在定量和定性研究结果中都更为有效。在定量和定性数据中,也有一些证据表明综合多学科干预措施的有效性和可行性。未来的工作:有必要对使用和/或正在接受药物治疗的孕妇进行最新的、高质量的干预研究。在未来的研究中考虑女性的声音也很重要。资助:本文介绍了由国家卫生和保健研究所(NIHR)卫生和社会保健提供研究计划资助的独立研究,奖励号为NIHR130619。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Meeting the needs of women in the perinatal period, who use or are in treatment for using drugs: A mixed-methods systematic review.

Background: Women who use and/or are in treatment for using drugs during the perinatal period have complex health and social care needs. Substance use in the perinatal period is multifaceted, with many confounding factors that may impact the long-term health and well-being of both mothers and children. Evidence is needed to identify which psychosocial interventions are effective for women who use and/or are in treatment for drug use during the perinatal period.

Objective(s): (1) Describe the range of psychosocial interventions available for women who use and/or are in treatment for drugs in the perinatal period; (2) to document evidence on the effectiveness of interventions and (3) identify interventions that women feel most meet their needs.

Design: A mixed-methods systematic review was conducted following a predetermined protocol and the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for mixed-methods systematic reviews, adopting a segregated approach.

Review methods: Eight databases were searched for articles meeting the inclusion criteria on 7 April 2022, and updated searches were run on 5 February 2024. The search was limited to include peer-reviewed articles published after 1990 and available in English. In total, 15,655 articles were identified. Following screening by four reviewers by title and abstract and then full text, 197 articles were included in the review. A data extraction template was used to extract study characteristics and results. Quality was assessed using the mixed-methods Quality Appraisal Tool. Cohen's d was used to measure the effect size for quantitative data to understand if an intervention had a small (> 0.2), medium (> 0.5) or large effect (> 0.8). Effectiveness was measured through three outcomes: (1) improvements and engagement with and retention in substance use treatment services for women in the prenatal and postnatal period; (2) reductions in substance use by women in the perinatal period and (3) improvements in engagement with and retention in prenatal care. For qualitative data, articles were grouped by the intervention type and the authors' analytical themes and conclusions were thematically synthesised.

Results: The 197 included studies described 217 separate interventions. Most interventions (85.3%) were community-based, delivered in more than one way (49.3%), and delivered in single settings (50.6%), although some were colocated alongside other services (22.1%). No conclusive evidence for effectiveness was established for any type of intervention, although most interventions that improved retention in substance use services included practical support. The qualitative synthesis supported these findings and additionally suggested that women appreciated being able to access multiple services in one place: non-judgemental, trauma-informed services and peer-support models.

Limitations: There were wide discrepancies in the types of information reported related to the age of some studies, limiting our ability to evaluate the effectiveness through quantitative analysis. The qualitative analysis was similarly limited as not all the identified qualitative papers included the views of women about treatment received.

Conclusions: Interventions that included practical support were found to be more effective in both the quantitative and qualitative findings. There is also some evidence for the effectiveness and feasibility of integrated, multidisciplinary interventions in both the quantitative and qualitative data.

Future work: There is a need for up-to-date, high-quality research studies into interventions for pregnant women who use and/or are in treatment for drug use. It is additionally important that the voices of women are considered in future research.

Funding: This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme as award number NIHR130619.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信