改善对遭受女性生殖器切割/切割的妇女和女童的护理:定性系统审查

C. Evans, Ritah Tweheyo, J. McGarry, J. Eldridge, Juliet Albert, Valentine Nkoyo, G. Higginbottom
{"title":"改善对遭受女性生殖器切割/切割的妇女和女童的护理:定性系统审查","authors":"C. Evans, Ritah Tweheyo, J. McGarry, J. Eldridge, Juliet Albert, Valentine Nkoyo, G. Higginbottom","doi":"10.3310/hsdr07310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n In a context of high migration, there are growing numbers of women living in the UK who have experienced female genital mutilation/cutting. Evidence is needed to understand how best to meet their health-care needs and to shape culturally appropriate service delivery.\n \n \n \n To undertake two systematic reviews of qualitative evidence to illuminate the experiences, needs, barriers and facilitators around seeking and providing female genital mutilation-/cutting-related health care from the perspectives of (1) women and girls who have experienced female genital mutilation/cutting (review 1) and (2) health professionals (review 2).\n \n \n \n The reviews were undertaken separately using a thematic synthesis approach and then combined into an overarching synthesis. Sixteen electronic databases (including grey literature sources) were searched from inception to 31 December 2017 and supplemented by reference list searching. Papers from any Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development country with any date and in any language were included (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development membership was considered a proxy for comparable high-income migrant destination countries). Standardised tools were used for quality appraisal and data extraction. Findings were coded and thematically analysed using NVivo 11 (QSR International, Warrington, UK) software. Confidence in the review findings was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation – Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. All review steps involved two or more reviewers and a team that included community-based and clinical experts.\n \n \n \n Seventy-eight papers (74 distinct studies) met the inclusion criteria for both reviews: 57 papers in review 1 (n = 18 from the UK), 30 papers in review 2 (n = 5 from the UK) and nine papers common to both. Review 1 comprised 17 descriptive themes synthesised into five analytical themes. Women’s health-care experiences related to female genital mutilation/cutting were shaped by silence and stigma, which hindered care-seeking and access to care, especially for non-pregnant women. Across all countries, women reported emotionally distressing and disempowering care experiences. There was limited awareness of specialist service provision. Good care depended on having a trusting relationship with a culturally sensitive and knowledgeable provider. Review 2 comprised 20 descriptive themes synthesised into six analytical themes. Providers from many settings reported feeling uncomfortable talking about female genital mutilation/cutting, lacking sufficient knowledge and struggling with language barriers. This led to missed opportunities for, and suboptimal management of, female genital mutilation-/cutting-related care. More positive experiences/practices were reported in contexts where there was input from specialists and where there were clear processes to address language barriers and to support timely identification, referral and follow-up.\n \n \n \n Most studies had an implicit focus on type III female genital mutilation/cutting and on maternity settings, but many studies combined groups or female genital mutilation/cutting types, making it hard to draw conclusions specific to different communities, conditions or contexts. There were no evaluations of service models, there was no research specifically on girls and there was limited evidence on psychological needs.\n \n \n \n The evidence suggests that care and communication around female genital mutilation/cutting can pose significant challenges for women and health-care providers. Appropriate models of service delivery include language support, continuity models, clear care pathways (including for mental health and non-pregnant women), specialist provision and community engagement. Routinisation of female genital mutilation/cutting discussions within different health-care settings may be an important strategy to ensure timely entry into, and appropriate receipt of, female genital mutilation-/cutting-related care. Staff training is an ongoing need.\n \n \n \n Future research should evaluate the most-effective models of training and of service delivery.\n \n \n \n This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD420150300012015 (review 1) and PROSPERO CRD420150300042015 (review 2).\n \n \n \n The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.\n","PeriodicalId":12880,"journal":{"name":"Health Services and Delivery Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"23","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving care for women and girls who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting: qualitative systematic reviews\",\"authors\":\"C. Evans, Ritah Tweheyo, J. McGarry, J. Eldridge, Juliet Albert, Valentine Nkoyo, G. Higginbottom\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/hsdr07310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n In a context of high migration, there are growing numbers of women living in the UK who have experienced female genital mutilation/cutting. Evidence is needed to understand how best to meet their health-care needs and to shape culturally appropriate service delivery.\\n \\n \\n \\n To undertake two systematic reviews of qualitative evidence to illuminate the experiences, needs, barriers and facilitators around seeking and providing female genital mutilation-/cutting-related health care from the perspectives of (1) women and girls who have experienced female genital mutilation/cutting (review 1) and (2) health professionals (review 2).\\n \\n \\n \\n The reviews were undertaken separately using a thematic synthesis approach and then combined into an overarching synthesis. Sixteen electronic databases (including grey literature sources) were searched from inception to 31 December 2017 and supplemented by reference list searching. Papers from any Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development country with any date and in any language were included (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development membership was considered a proxy for comparable high-income migrant destination countries). Standardised tools were used for quality appraisal and data extraction. Findings were coded and thematically analysed using NVivo 11 (QSR International, Warrington, UK) software. Confidence in the review findings was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation – Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. All review steps involved two or more reviewers and a team that included community-based and clinical experts.\\n \\n \\n \\n Seventy-eight papers (74 distinct studies) met the inclusion criteria for both reviews: 57 papers in review 1 (n = 18 from the UK), 30 papers in review 2 (n = 5 from the UK) and nine papers common to both. Review 1 comprised 17 descriptive themes synthesised into five analytical themes. Women’s health-care experiences related to female genital mutilation/cutting were shaped by silence and stigma, which hindered care-seeking and access to care, especially for non-pregnant women. Across all countries, women reported emotionally distressing and disempowering care experiences. There was limited awareness of specialist service provision. Good care depended on having a trusting relationship with a culturally sensitive and knowledgeable provider. Review 2 comprised 20 descriptive themes synthesised into six analytical themes. Providers from many settings reported feeling uncomfortable talking about female genital mutilation/cutting, lacking sufficient knowledge and struggling with language barriers. This led to missed opportunities for, and suboptimal management of, female genital mutilation-/cutting-related care. More positive experiences/practices were reported in contexts where there was input from specialists and where there were clear processes to address language barriers and to support timely identification, referral and follow-up.\\n \\n \\n \\n Most studies had an implicit focus on type III female genital mutilation/cutting and on maternity settings, but many studies combined groups or female genital mutilation/cutting types, making it hard to draw conclusions specific to different communities, conditions or contexts. There were no evaluations of service models, there was no research specifically on girls and there was limited evidence on psychological needs.\\n \\n \\n \\n The evidence suggests that care and communication around female genital mutilation/cutting can pose significant challenges for women and health-care providers. Appropriate models of service delivery include language support, continuity models, clear care pathways (including for mental health and non-pregnant women), specialist provision and community engagement. Routinisation of female genital mutilation/cutting discussions within different health-care settings may be an important strategy to ensure timely entry into, and appropriate receipt of, female genital mutilation-/cutting-related care. Staff training is an ongoing need.\\n \\n \\n \\n Future research should evaluate the most-effective models of training and of service delivery.\\n \\n \\n \\n This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD420150300012015 (review 1) and PROSPERO CRD420150300042015 (review 2).\\n \\n \\n \\n The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":12880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Services and Delivery Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"23\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Services and Delivery Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr07310\",\"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 Services and Delivery Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr07310","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

摘要

在高移民率的背景下,生活在英国的女性中有越来越多的人经历过女性生殖器切割。需要证据来了解如何最好地满足他们的医疗保健需求,并形成符合文化的服务提供。对定性证据进行两次系统审查,从(1)经历过切割女性生殖器官的妇女和女孩(审查1)和(2)卫生专业人员(审查2)的角度,阐明寻求和提供切割女性生殖生殖器官/切割相关医疗保健的经验、需要、障碍和促进者。审查采用专题综合方法分别进行,然后合并为总体综合。从成立到2017年12月31日,共检索了16个电子数据库(包括灰色文献来源),并通过参考文献列表检索进行了补充。包括来自任何经济合作与发展组织国家的任何日期和任何语言的文件(经济合作与开发组织成员国被视为可比高收入移民目的地国家的代表)。标准化工具用于质量评估和数据提取。使用NVivo 11(QSR International,英国沃灵顿)软件对研究结果进行编码和主题分析。使用建议分级评估、发展和评估——定性研究评审证据的置信度(GRADE CERQual)方法评估评审结果的置信度。所有审查步骤都涉及两名或两名以上的审查人员和一个包括社区和临床专家的团队。78篇论文(74项不同的研究)符合两项综述的纳入标准:57篇论文在综述1(n = 18篇来自英国),30篇论文在审2(n = 来自英国的5篇)和9篇共同的论文。评论1包括17个描述性主题,综合为5个分析性主题。沉默和污名化影响了妇女在切割女性生殖器官方面的医疗保健经历,阻碍了寻求护理和获得护理,尤其是非孕妇。在所有国家,妇女都报告了情感痛苦和失去权力的护理经历。对提供专业服务的认识有限。良好的护理取决于与文化敏感和知识渊博的提供者建立信任关系。复习2包括20个描述性主题,综合为6个分析性主题。来自许多环境的提供者报告说,在谈论切割女性生殖器时感到不舒服,缺乏足够的知识,并与语言障碍作斗争。这导致错过了女性生殖器切割/切割相关护理的机会,并且管理不善。在有专家投入的情况下,在有明确程序来解决语言障碍和支持及时识别、转诊和后续行动的情况下报告了更积极的经验/做法。大多数研究都隐含地关注第三类切割女性生殖器官和产妇环境,但许多研究将群体或切割女性生殖生殖器官的类型结合在一起,很难得出针对不同社区、条件或背景的结论。没有对服务模式进行评估,没有专门针对女孩的研究,关于心理需求的证据有限。证据表明,围绕切割女性生殖器官的护理和沟通可能会给妇女和医疗保健提供者带来重大挑战。提供服务的适当模式包括语言支持、连续性模式、明确的护理途径(包括心理健康和非孕妇)、专家提供和社区参与。在不同的医疗保健环境中进行切割女性生殖器官/切割的常规化讨论可能是一项重要战略,以确保及时进入并适当接受切割女性生殖生殖器/切割相关的护理。工作人员培训是一项持续的需要。未来的研究应该评估最有效的培训和服务提供模式。本研究注册为PROSPERO CRD420150300012015(综述1)和PROSPERO ORD420150300042015(综述2)。国家卫生研究所卫生服务和交付研究方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Improving care for women and girls who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting: qualitative systematic reviews
In a context of high migration, there are growing numbers of women living in the UK who have experienced female genital mutilation/cutting. Evidence is needed to understand how best to meet their health-care needs and to shape culturally appropriate service delivery. To undertake two systematic reviews of qualitative evidence to illuminate the experiences, needs, barriers and facilitators around seeking and providing female genital mutilation-/cutting-related health care from the perspectives of (1) women and girls who have experienced female genital mutilation/cutting (review 1) and (2) health professionals (review 2). The reviews were undertaken separately using a thematic synthesis approach and then combined into an overarching synthesis. Sixteen electronic databases (including grey literature sources) were searched from inception to 31 December 2017 and supplemented by reference list searching. Papers from any Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development country with any date and in any language were included (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development membership was considered a proxy for comparable high-income migrant destination countries). Standardised tools were used for quality appraisal and data extraction. Findings were coded and thematically analysed using NVivo 11 (QSR International, Warrington, UK) software. Confidence in the review findings was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation – Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. All review steps involved two or more reviewers and a team that included community-based and clinical experts. Seventy-eight papers (74 distinct studies) met the inclusion criteria for both reviews: 57 papers in review 1 (n = 18 from the UK), 30 papers in review 2 (n = 5 from the UK) and nine papers common to both. Review 1 comprised 17 descriptive themes synthesised into five analytical themes. Women’s health-care experiences related to female genital mutilation/cutting were shaped by silence and stigma, which hindered care-seeking and access to care, especially for non-pregnant women. Across all countries, women reported emotionally distressing and disempowering care experiences. There was limited awareness of specialist service provision. Good care depended on having a trusting relationship with a culturally sensitive and knowledgeable provider. Review 2 comprised 20 descriptive themes synthesised into six analytical themes. Providers from many settings reported feeling uncomfortable talking about female genital mutilation/cutting, lacking sufficient knowledge and struggling with language barriers. This led to missed opportunities for, and suboptimal management of, female genital mutilation-/cutting-related care. More positive experiences/practices were reported in contexts where there was input from specialists and where there were clear processes to address language barriers and to support timely identification, referral and follow-up. Most studies had an implicit focus on type III female genital mutilation/cutting and on maternity settings, but many studies combined groups or female genital mutilation/cutting types, making it hard to draw conclusions specific to different communities, conditions or contexts. There were no evaluations of service models, there was no research specifically on girls and there was limited evidence on psychological needs. The evidence suggests that care and communication around female genital mutilation/cutting can pose significant challenges for women and health-care providers. Appropriate models of service delivery include language support, continuity models, clear care pathways (including for mental health and non-pregnant women), specialist provision and community engagement. Routinisation of female genital mutilation/cutting discussions within different health-care settings may be an important strategy to ensure timely entry into, and appropriate receipt of, female genital mutilation-/cutting-related care. Staff training is an ongoing need. Future research should evaluate the most-effective models of training and of service delivery. This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD420150300012015 (review 1) and PROSPERO CRD420150300042015 (review 2). The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
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
1
审稿时长
53 weeks
×
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