目的:提供与针对黑人围产期人群中患者-提供者关系的干预措施相关的证据图。
方法:对文献进行范围审查。
方法:数据库搜索包括三个数据库中的英语文章:PubMed,护理和相关健康文献的累积指数,和Medline没有日期限制,日期为2022年6月15日和16日。
方法:此范围审查使用了Arksey和O\'Malley首先描述并由JoannaBriggs研究所推荐的六阶段过程:(1)指定研究问题,(2)识别相关文献,(3)选择研究,(4)绘制出数据,(5)合成,并报告结果和(6)咨询专家。如果研究(1)报告了与患者-提供者互动相关的干预研究结果,(2)是用英语写的,(3)是原创性研究。使用内容分析方法对文章进行了审查,以对发现进行分类和解释。
结果:研究包括2001年至2018年发表的随机对照试验(n=5)和定性研究(n=3)。在八项研究中的五项研究中,黑人孕妇占参与者的一半以上(63%)。干预措施分为三类:交付模式(n=4),m健康风险评估工具(n=2)和患者-提供者沟通工具(n=2)。
结论:本研究探讨了患者-提供者关系干预在改善黑人围产期人群接受护理质量方面的未知作用。研究结果表明,结构和人际关系成分可能有可能改善黑人孕妇的结局,但如果文化上有针对性,则可以进一步改善。迫切需要进一步的研究来解决患者与提供者关系中的歧视和污名。这项研究的发现可以为新型干预措施的发展提供信息,并应推动研究。
结论:一项范围审查确定,没有针对黑人孕妇的干预措施针对患者与提供者关系中的歧视和偏见。
未经评估:作者没有包括患者等利益相关者,服务用户,在制定本范围审查时,护理人员或公众成员,因为这是一项为进一步的社区工作奠定基础的工作。但是,结果将在将来计划的咨询委员会上传达给社区成员。
OBJECTIVE: To provide a map of the evidence related to interventions targeting patient-provider relationships among Black perinatal people.
METHODS: A scoping
review of the literature was conducted.
METHODS: The database search included English language articles within three databases: PubMed, the Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Medline without date restriction on June 15 and16 2022.
METHODS: This scoping
review used the six-stage process first described by Arksey and O\'Malley and recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute: (1) specify the research question, (2) identify relevant literature, (3) select studies, (4) map out the data, (5) synthesize, and report the results and (6) consult experts. Studies were included if they (1) reported results of intervention studies related to patient-provider interaction, (2) were written in English and (3) were original research. The articles were reviewed with content analysis methodology to categorize and interpret the findings.
RESULTS: Studies included randomized controlled trials (n = 5) and qualitative studies (n = 3) published between 2001 and 2018. Black pregnant people made up more than half of the participants in five of the eight studies (63%). Interventions were divided into three categories: delivery models (n = 4), mHealth risk assessment tools (n = 2) and patient-provider communication tools (n = 2).
CONCLUSIONS: This study addressed the unknown role of patient-provider relationship interventions in improving the quality of care received by Black perinatal people. Findings suggest that structural and interpersonal components may have the potential to improve outcomes for Black pregnant people but could be further improved if culturally tailored. Further research is urgently needed to address discrimination and stigma in patient-provider relationships. The findings of this study could inform novel intervention development and should drive research.
CONCLUSIONS: A scoping
review determined that there are no interventions with Black pregnant people which targeted discrimination and bias in patient-provider relationships.
UNASSIGNED: The authors did not include stakeholders such as patients, service users, caregivers or members of the public in the development of this scoping
review, as it is a work that serves to set the stage for further community-based work. The results will however be communicated to community members at a planned advisory board in the future.