Helsing E, Chalmers B E, Dinekina T J, Kondakova N I
Department of International Affairs and Public Health, Board of Health, Oslo, Norway.
Acta Paediatr. 2002;91(5):578-83. doi: 10.1080/080352502753711722.
Women's own views on the quality of the birthing care they received were recorded in a small study in the cities of Archangelsk and Murmansk in February 1999. Six maternity wards took part; one hospital had already been designated as a Baby Friendly Hospital (BFH) according to the strict global criteria of the WHO/UNICEF-recommended Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI). Two of the hospitals had made profound changes in feeding routines and were by their own reckoning close to achieving this distinction, and were included in the BFH group. Three maternity wards were far from being in compliance with the BFHI approach and were grouped as the Non-Baby-Friendly Hospitals (NBFH). A total of 180 newly delivered mothers answered a 60-item questionnaire about their birthing and breastfeeding experiences. The questions were chosen from an existing protocol, the WEB (Women's Experiences of Birth) developed by one of the authors (BC). The study was part of an informal evaluation of five years of BFHI activities in the Barents Region, supported by Norway, and also aimed at recording any positive carry-over effect of the BFHI into obstetric routines as a whole.
It was found that the project definitely had had an impact; feeding practices at the BFH were markedly closer to the international BFHI recommendations than at the NBFH. BFH mothers, however, reported suffering from breastfeeding problems just as often or more so than NBFH mothers. Possible explanations are discussed; it is concluded that this cross-sectional study may depict a transitory situation in the BFH. At the two hospitals not yet assessed, although staff felt that they had made profound changes, they may not yet have grasped the full extent and stringency of the changes required. The study shows that, despite good will, some practical details had not yet been worked out, resulting in a mixed outcome for the mothers. There was no noticeable carry-over of the attitudes and basic ideas of the project into obstetric care, either in the BFH or in the NBFH, so changes in this area may require separate strategies.
1999年2月,在阿尔汉格尔斯克和摩尔曼斯克市进行的一项小型研究记录了女性对她们所接受的分娩护理质量的自身看法。六个产科病房参与其中;一家医院已根据世界卫生组织/联合国儿童基金会推荐的爱婴医院倡议(BFHI)的严格全球标准被指定为爱婴医院(BFH)。另外两家医院在喂养常规方面做出了重大改变,据它们自己估计已接近获得这一称号,因此被纳入BFH组。三个产科病房远未符合BFHI方法,被归为非爱婴医院(NBFH)组。共有180名刚分娩的母亲回答了一份关于她们分娩和母乳喂养经历的60项问卷。这些问题选自一份现有方案,即由作者之一(BC)制定的WEB(女性分娩经历)。该研究是对挪威支持的巴伦支地区五年BFHI活动的非正式评估的一部分,其目的还包括记录BFHI对整个产科常规的任何积极延续效应。
研究发现该项目肯定产生了影响;BFH的喂养做法比NBFH明显更接近国际BFHI建议。然而,BFH的母亲报告遭受母乳喂养问题的频率与NBFH的母亲相同或更高。文中讨论了可能的解释;得出的结论是,这项横断面研究可能描绘了BFH中的一种暂时情况。在另外两家尚未评估的医院,尽管工作人员觉得他们已经做出了重大改变,但他们可能尚未完全理解所需改变的全部范围和严格程度。该研究表明,尽管有良好意愿,但一些实际细节尚未落实,导致母亲们的结果好坏参半。无论是在BFH还是在NBFH,该项目的态度和基本理念都没有明显延续到产科护理中,因此这方面的改变可能需要单独的策略。