Including ultrasound scans in antenatal care in low-resource settings: Considering the complementarity of obstetric ultrasound screening and maternity waiting homes in strengthening referral systems in low-resource, rural settings.
Adult
Continuity of Patient Care
Delivery of Health Care
Developing Countries
/ statistics & numerical data
Female
Health Care Surveys
Humans
Maternal Health Services
/ organization & administration
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Complications
Prenatal Care
/ organization & administration
Referral and Consultation
Rural Population
Ultrasonography, Prenatal
/ statistics & numerical data
Continuum of care
Maternity waiting home
Midwifery
Pregnancy risk screening
Referral systems
Task shifting
Journal
Seminars in perinatology
ISSN: 1558-075X
Titre abrégé: Semin Perinatol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7801132
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2019
08 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
14
4
2019
medline:
23
5
2020
entrez:
14
4
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Recent World Health Organization (WHO) antenatal care recommendations include an ultrasound scan as a part of routine antenatal care. The First Look Study, referenced in the WHO recommendation, subsequently shows that the routine use of ultrasound during antenatal care in rural, low-income settings did not improve maternal, fetal or neonatal mortality, nor did it increase women's use of antenatal care or the rate of hospital births. This article reviews the First Look Study, reconsidering the assumptions upon which it was built in light of these results, a supplemental descriptive study of interviews with patients and sonographers that participated in the First Look study intervention, and a review of the literature. Two themes surface from this review. The first is that focused emphasis on building the pregnancy risk screening skills of rural primary health care personnel may not lead to adaptations in referral hospital processes that could benefit the patient accordingly. The second is that agency to improve the quality of patient reception at referral hospitals may need to be manufactured for obstetric ultrasound screening, or remote pregnancy risk screening more generally, to have the desired impact. Stemming from the literature, this article goes on to examine the potential for complementarity between obstetric ultrasound screening and another approach encouraged by the WHO, the maternity waiting home. Each approach may address existing shortcomings in how the other is currently understood. This paper concludes by proposing a path toward developing and testing such a hybrid approach.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30979599
pii: S0146-0005(19)30042-4
doi: 10.1053/j.semperi.2019.03.017
pmc: PMC6597951
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
273-281Subventions
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD078438
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD076465
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD076474
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Trop Med Int Health. 2003 Aug;8(8):710-21
pubmed: 12869092
Soc Sci Med. 1994 Apr;38(8):1091-110
pubmed: 8042057
Glob Health Sci Pract. 2017 Jun 27;5(2):315-324
pubmed: 28655805
Ultrasound Q. 2014 Dec;30(4):262-6
pubmed: 25415862
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009 Oct;107 Suppl 1:S65-85, S86-8
pubmed: 19815201
Midwifery. 2013 Oct;29(10):1095-102
pubmed: 24012018
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2016 Oct;36:169-183
pubmed: 27707540
Lancet. 2005 Mar 5-11;365(9462):822-5
pubmed: 15752509
Glob Health Sci Pract. 2016 Dec 28;4(4):675-683
pubmed: 28031304
Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2017 May - Jun;46(3):210-215
pubmed: 28057388
Reprod Health. 2018 Dec 12;15(1):204
pubmed: 30541560
J Ultrasound Med. 2009 Aug;28(8):1067-76
pubmed: 19643790
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Oct 17;10:CD006759
pubmed: 23076927
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014 Feb 17;14:73
pubmed: 24533878
BJOG. 2018 Nov;125(12):1591-1599
pubmed: 29782696