首页> 外文OA文献 >Clinicians’ views of factors influencing decision-making for caesarean section: A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies
【2h】

Clinicians’ views of factors influencing decision-making for caesarean section: A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies

机译:临床医生对影响剖宫产决策的因素的看法:定性,定量和混合方法研究的系统审查和元化

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BACKGROUND:Caesarean section rates are increasing worldwide and are a growing concern with limited explanation of the factors that influence the rising trend. Understanding obstetricians' and midwives' views can give insight to the problem. This systematic review aimed to offer insight and understanding, through aggregation, summary, synthesis and interpretation of findings from studies that report obstetricians' and midwives' views on the factors that influence the decision to perform caesarean section. METHODS:The electronic databases of PubMed (1958-2016), CINAHL (1988-2016), Maternity and Infant Care (1971-2016), PsycINFO (1980-2016) and Web of Science (1991-2016) were searched in September 2016. All quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies, published in English, whose aim was to explore obstetricians' and/or midwives' views of factors influencing decision-making for caesarean section were included. Papers were independently reviewed by two authors for selection by title, abstract and full text. Thomas et al's 12 assessment criteria checklist (2003) was used to assess methodological quality of the included studies. RESULT:The review included 34 studies: 19 quantitative, 14 qualitative, and one using mixed methods, involving 7785 obstetricians and 1197 midwives from 20 countries. Three main themes, each with several subthemes, emerged. Theme 1: "clinicians' personal beliefs"-('Professional philosophies'; 'beliefs in relation to women's request for CS'; 'ambiguous versus clear clinical reasons'); Theme 2: "health care systems"-('litigation'; 'resources'; 'private versus public/insurance/payments'; 'guidelines and management policy'). Theme 3: "clinicians' characteristics" ('personal convenience'; 'clinicians' demographics'; 'confidence and skills'). CONCLUSION:This systematic review and metasynthesis identified clinicians' personal beliefs as a major factor that influenced the decision to perform caesarean section, further contributed by the influence of factors related to the health care system and clinicians' characteristics. Obstetricians and midwives are directly involved in the decision to perform a caesarean section, hence their perspectives are vital in understanding various factors that have influence on decision-making for caesarean section. These results can help clinicians identify and acknowledge their role as crucial members in the decision-making process for caesarean section within their organisation, and to develop intervention studies to reduce caesarean section rates in future.
机译:背景:剖宫产率正在增加世界范围内,并与影响的上升趋势的因素有限解释日益受到关注。了解产科医生和助产士的意见可以深入了解的问题。该系统评价的目的是提供洞察和理解,通过聚集,总结,研究结果从研究合成和解释该报告产科医生和助产士的影响进行剖腹产的决定因素的观点。方法:考研(1958年至2016年),CINAHL(1988至2016年),妇婴保健(1971年至2016年),PsycINFO(1980年至2016年)和科学网(1991-2016)的数据库中搜索,在2016年9月所有的定量,定性和混合方法的研究,以英文出版,其目的是探索产科医生和/或助产士的意见的影响决策剖腹产被列入因素。论文是由两名作者为选择由标题,摘要和全文审查。托马斯等人的12个评估标准清单(2003年)是用来评估纳入研究的方法学质量。结果:审查包括34项研究:19定量,定性14,和一个使用混合方法,涉及7785名产科医生和来自20个国家1197名助产士。三大主题,都与几个分主题,出现了。主题1:“临床医生的个人信念” - (职业理念“;‘关于妇女对CS请求信仰’;‘暧昧与明确的临床原因’);主题2:“医疗系统” - (“诉讼”;“资源”;“私人与公共/保险/支付”;“指导方针和管理政策”)。主题三:“临床医生的特点”(‘个人便利’;‘医生’人口;‘的信心和技能’)。结论:该系统评价和综合集成确定临床医生的个人信仰作为影响进行剖腹产,进一步贡献的有关卫生保健系统和临床因素影响决定的主要因素的特点。产科医生和助产士都直接参与进行剖腹产的决定,因此,他们的观点是理解那些对决策剖宫产影响的各种因素至关重要。这些结果可以帮助医生确定,并承认他们是在为他们的组织内剖腹产的决策过程中的关键成员的作用,并制定干预研究,以减少未来的剖宫产率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号