From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth.
Women greatly value and benefit from the presence of someone they trust to support them throughout labour and childbirth ('labour companion of choice'). Labour companionship improves maternal and perinatal outcomes, including enhancing physiological labour and birth experiences. Despite cl...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2023-01-01
|
| Series: | PLOS Global Public Health |
| Online Access: | https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001476&type=printable |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832539967885148160 |
|---|---|
| author | Meghan A Bohren Alya Hazfiarini Martha Vazquez Corona Mercedes Colomar Bremen De Mucio Özge Tunçalp Anayda Portela |
| author_facet | Meghan A Bohren Alya Hazfiarini Martha Vazquez Corona Mercedes Colomar Bremen De Mucio Özge Tunçalp Anayda Portela |
| author_sort | Meghan A Bohren |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Women greatly value and benefit from the presence of someone they trust to support them throughout labour and childbirth ('labour companion of choice'). Labour companionship improves maternal and perinatal outcomes, including enhancing physiological labour and birth experiences. Despite clear benefits, implementation is slow. We conducted a scoping review to assess coverage and models of labour companionship, including quantitative studies reporting coverage of labour companionship in any level health facility globally. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Global Health from 1 January 2010-14 December 2021. We extracted data on study design, labour companionship coverage, timing and type of companions allowed, and recoded data into categories for comparison across studies. We included data from a maternal health sentinel network of hospitals in Latin America, using descriptive statistics to assess coverage among 120,581 women giving birth in these sites from April 2018-April 2022. In the scoping review, we included 77 studies from 27 countries. There was wide variation in the coverage of labour companionship: almost one-third of studies reported coverage less than 40%, and one-third of studies reported coverage between 40-80%. Husbands or partners were the most frequent companion (37.7%, 29/77), followed by family member or friend (gender not specified) (32.5%, 25/77), family member or friend (female-only) (13.0%, 10/77). Across nine sentinel hospitals in five Latin American countries, there was variation in coverage, with no companion at any time ranging from 14.9%-93.8%. Despite the well-known benefits and factors affecting implementation of labour companionship, more work is needed to improve equitable coverage. Concerted efforts are needed to engage with communities, health workers, health managers, and policy-makers to establish policies, address implementation barriers, and integrate data on coverage into perinatal records and quality processes to ensure that all women have access. Harmonized reporting of labour companionship would greatly enhance understanding at global level. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-5d02827ddb3a4e5d8ec35030275bb2a0 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2767-3375 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2023-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLOS Global Public Health |
| spelling | doaj-art-5d02827ddb3a4e5d8ec35030275bb2a02025-02-05T05:50:35ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLOS Global Public Health2767-33752023-01-0132e000147610.1371/journal.pgph.0001476From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth.Meghan A BohrenAlya HazfiariniMartha Vazquez CoronaMercedes ColomarBremen De MucioÖzge TunçalpAnayda PortelaWomen greatly value and benefit from the presence of someone they trust to support them throughout labour and childbirth ('labour companion of choice'). Labour companionship improves maternal and perinatal outcomes, including enhancing physiological labour and birth experiences. Despite clear benefits, implementation is slow. We conducted a scoping review to assess coverage and models of labour companionship, including quantitative studies reporting coverage of labour companionship in any level health facility globally. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Global Health from 1 January 2010-14 December 2021. We extracted data on study design, labour companionship coverage, timing and type of companions allowed, and recoded data into categories for comparison across studies. We included data from a maternal health sentinel network of hospitals in Latin America, using descriptive statistics to assess coverage among 120,581 women giving birth in these sites from April 2018-April 2022. In the scoping review, we included 77 studies from 27 countries. There was wide variation in the coverage of labour companionship: almost one-third of studies reported coverage less than 40%, and one-third of studies reported coverage between 40-80%. Husbands or partners were the most frequent companion (37.7%, 29/77), followed by family member or friend (gender not specified) (32.5%, 25/77), family member or friend (female-only) (13.0%, 10/77). Across nine sentinel hospitals in five Latin American countries, there was variation in coverage, with no companion at any time ranging from 14.9%-93.8%. Despite the well-known benefits and factors affecting implementation of labour companionship, more work is needed to improve equitable coverage. Concerted efforts are needed to engage with communities, health workers, health managers, and policy-makers to establish policies, address implementation barriers, and integrate data on coverage into perinatal records and quality processes to ensure that all women have access. Harmonized reporting of labour companionship would greatly enhance understanding at global level.https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001476&type=printable |
| spellingShingle | Meghan A Bohren Alya Hazfiarini Martha Vazquez Corona Mercedes Colomar Bremen De Mucio Özge Tunçalp Anayda Portela From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth. PLOS Global Public Health |
| title | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth. |
| title_full | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth. |
| title_fullStr | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth. |
| title_full_unstemmed | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth. |
| title_short | From global recommendations to (in)action: A scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth. |
| title_sort | from global recommendations to in action a scoping review of the coverage of companion of choice for women during labour and birth |
| url | https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001476&type=printable |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT meghanabohren fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT alyahazfiarini fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT marthavazquezcorona fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT mercedescolomar fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT bremendemucio fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT ozgetuncalp fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth AT anaydaportela fromglobalrecommendationstoinactionascopingreviewofthecoverageofcompanionofchoiceforwomenduringlabourandbirth |