Suppr超能文献

产后早期家访时间表。

Schedules for home visits in the early postpartum period.

作者信息

Yonemoto Naohiro, Dowswell Therese, Nagai Shuko, Mori Rintaro

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Translational Medical Center, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Kodaira, Japan.

出版信息

Evid Based Child Health. 2014 Mar;9(1):5-99. doi: 10.1002/ebch.1960.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Maternal complications including psychological and mental health problems and neonatal morbidity have been commonly observed in the postpartum period. Home visits by health professionals or lay supporters in the weeks following the birth may prevent health problems from becoming chronic with long-term effects on women, their babies, and their families.

OBJECTIVES

To assess outcomes for women and babies of different home-visiting schedules during the early postpartum period. The review focuses on the frequency of home visits, the duration (when visits ended) and intensity, and on different types of home-visiting interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (28 January 2013) and reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (including cluster-RCTs) comparing different types of home-visiting interventions enrolling participants in the early postpartum period (up to 42 days after birth). We excluded studies in which women were enrolled and received an intervention during the antenatal period (even if the intervention continued into the postnatal period) and studies recruiting only women from specific high-risk groups. (e.g. women with alcohol or drug problems).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study eligibility was assessed by at least two review authors. Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were carried out independently by at least two review authors. Data were entered into Review Manager software.

MAIN RESULTS

We included data from 12 randomised trials with data for more than 11,000 women. The trials were carried out in countries across the world, and in both high- and low-resource settings. In low-resource settings women receiving usual care may have received no additional postnatal care after early hospital discharge. The interventions and control conditions varied considerably across studies with trials focusing on three broad types of comparisons: schedules involving more versus fewer postnatal home visits (five studies), schedules involving different models of care (three studies), and home versus hospital clinic postnatal check-ups (four studies). In all but two of the included studies, postnatal care at home was delivered by healthcare professionals. The aim of all interventions was broadly to assess the wellbeing of mothers and babies, and to provide education and support, although some interventions had more specific aims such as to encourage breastfeeding, or to provide practical support. For most of our outcomes only one or two studies provided data, and overall results were inconsistent. There was no evidence that home visits were associated with improvements in maternal and neonatal mortality, and no strong evidence that more postnatal visits at home were associated with improvements in maternal health. More intensive schedules of home visits did not appear to improve maternal psychological health and results from two studies suggested that women receiving more visits had higher mean depression scores. The reason for this finding was not clear. There was some evidence that postnatal care at home may reduce infant health service utilisation in the weeks following the birth, and that more home visits may encourage more women to exclusively breastfeed their babies. There was some evidence that home visits are associated with increased maternal satisfaction with postnatal care.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings were inconsistent. Postnatal home visits may promote infant health and maternal satisfaction. However, the frequency, timing, duration and intensity of such postnatal care visits should be based upon local needs. Further well designed RCTs evaluating this complex intervention will be required to formulate the optimal package.

摘要

背景

产后常见产妇并发症,包括心理和精神健康问题以及新生儿发病情况。在分娩后的几周内,由卫生专业人员或非专业支持者进行家访,可能会防止健康问题发展为慢性病,从而对妇女、其婴儿及其家庭产生长期影响。

目的

评估产后早期不同家访计划对妇女和婴儿的效果。本综述重点关注家访频率、持续时间(家访结束时间)和强度,以及不同类型的家访干预措施。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane妊娠与分娩组试验注册库(2013年1月28日)以及检索到的文章的参考文献列表。

选择标准

随机对照试验(RCTs)(包括整群RCTs),比较不同类型的家访干预措施,纳入产后早期(出生后42天内)的参与者。我们排除了妇女在孕期被纳入并接受干预的研究(即使干预持续到产后),以及仅招募特定高危组妇女的研究(例如有酒精或药物问题的妇女)。

数据收集与分析

至少两名综述作者评估研究的纳入资格。至少两名综述作者独立进行数据提取和偏倚风险评估。数据录入Review Manager软件。

主要结果

我们纳入了12项随机试验的数据,涉及超过11000名妇女。这些试验在世界各国进行,涵盖高资源和低资源环境。在低资源环境中,接受常规护理的妇女在早期出院后可能没有得到额外的产后护理。不同研究中的干预措施和对照条件差异很大,试验主要集中在三种广泛的比较类型:产后家访次数较多与较少的计划(五项研究)、涉及不同护理模式的计划(三项研究)以及家庭与医院门诊产后检查(四项研究)。在所纳入的研究中,除两项研究外,其余研究中的产后家庭护理均由医疗保健专业人员提供。所有干预措施的总体目标大致是评估母亲和婴儿的健康状况,并提供教育和支持,尽管有些干预措施有更具体的目标,如鼓励母乳喂养或提供实际支持。对于我们的大多数结果,只有一两项研究提供了数据,总体结果不一致。没有证据表明家访与降低孕产妇和新生儿死亡率有关,也没有有力证据表明更多的产后家访与改善孕产妇健康有关。更密集的家访计划似乎并未改善孕产妇的心理健康,两项研究的结果表明,接受更多家访的妇女平均抑郁得分更高。这一发现的原因尚不清楚。有一些证据表明,产后家庭护理可能会减少婴儿出生后几周内的医疗服务利用率,而且更多的家访可能会鼓励更多妇女纯母乳喂养婴儿。有一些证据表明,家访与产妇对产后护理满意度的提高有关。

作者结论

总体而言,研究结果不一致。产后家访可能会促进婴儿健康和产妇满意度。然而,此类产后护理家访的频率、时间安排、持续时间和强度应根据当地需求而定。需要进一步设计良好的随机对照试验来评估这种复杂的干预措施,以制定最佳方案。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验