School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.
School of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2023 Mar 10;13(3):e065720. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065720.
To examine available health engagement tools suitable to, or modifiable for, vulnerable pregnant populations.
Systematic review.
Original studies of tool development and validation related to health engagement, with abstract available in English, published between 2000 and 2022, sampling people receiving outpatient healthcare including pregnant women.
CINAHL Complete, Medline, EMBASE and PubMed were searched in April 2022.
Study quality was independently assessed by two reviewers using an adapted COSMIN risk of bias quality appraisal checklist. Tools were also mapped against the Synergistic Health Engagement model, which centres on women's buy-in to maternity care.
Nineteen studies were included from Canada, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, the UK and the USA. Four tools were used with pregnant populations, two tools with vulnerable non-pregnant populations, six tools measured patient-provider relationship, four measured patient activation, and three tools measured both relationship and activation.
Tools that measured engagement in maternity care assessed some of the following constructs: communication or information sharing, woman-centred care, health guidance, shared decision-making, sufficient time, availability, provider attributes, discriminatory or respectful care. None of the maternity engagement tools assessed the key construct of buy-in. While non-maternity health engagement tools measured some elements of buy-in (self-care, feeling hopeful about treatment), other elements (disclosing risks to healthcare providers and acting on health advice), which are significant for vulnerable populations, were rarely measured.
Health engagement is hypothesised as the mechanism by which midwifery-led care reduces the risk of perinatal morbidity for vulnerable women. To test this hypothesis, a new assessment tool is required that addresses all the relevant constructs of the Synergistic Health Engagement model, developed for and psychometrically assessed in the target group.
CRD42020214102.
研究适用于脆弱孕妇人群或可修改适用于脆弱孕妇人群的现有健康参与工具。
系统评价。
关于健康参与的工具开发和验证的原始研究,有英文摘要,发表时间在 2000 年至 2022 年之间,抽样对象为接受门诊医疗保健的人群,包括孕妇。
2022 年 4 月,在 CINAHL Complete、Medline、EMBASE 和 PubMed 上进行了检索。
两名评审员使用经过改编的 COSMIN 偏倚风险质量评估清单,对研究质量进行了独立评估。工具还根据以妇女对产妇保健的认同为中心的协同健康参与模型进行了映射。
来自加拿大、德国、意大利、荷兰、瑞典、英国和美国的 19 项研究被纳入。有 4 个工具用于孕妇人群,2 个工具用于脆弱的非孕妇人群,6 个工具测量医患关系,4 个工具测量患者激活,3 个工具测量关系和激活。
用于评估产妇保健参与度的工具评估了以下一些结构:沟通或信息共享、以妇女为中心的护理、健康指导、共同决策、足够的时间、可用性、提供者属性、歧视性或尊重性护理。没有一个产妇保健参与工具评估了认同的关键结构。虽然非产妇保健参与工具测量了认同的一些要素(自我护理、对治疗充满希望),但对于脆弱人群来说,其他要素(向医疗保健提供者披露风险并根据健康建议采取行动)很少被测量。
健康参与被假设为导乐式护理降低脆弱妇女围产期发病率的机制。为了验证这一假设,需要开发一种新的评估工具,该工具针对目标人群进行开发,并在目标人群中进行心理测量评估,涵盖协同健康参与模型的所有相关结构。
PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42020214102。