Intrapartum care policies in high-income countries with a universal health system: A scoping review.

Evidence-based and sustainable intrapartum care policies are essential for safer, effective, and positive birth experiences. This scoping review aimed to map intrapartum care policies for pregnant women at low-risk of complications, in high-income countries with a universal health system. The study followed Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and PRISMA-ScR. Search was conducted on CINAHL-EBSCO, Scopus, MEDLINE-Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials-EBSCO, and, Academic Search Complete-EBSCO. Grey literature was searched, references screened and experts contacted for additional studies/policies. Data were extracted/analysed by two independent reviewers and results were presented in tabular and narrative format. The concept was governmental intrapartum care policies, the context were OECD high-income countries with a health-financing system founded on the Beveridge Model and the participants were low-risk pregnant women From the 561 records screened, 22 were selected, concerning intrapartum care policies from Australia, Denmark, Spain, Finland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom. All the included records were retrieved in the grey literature. No intrapartum care governmental policies were found for Greece, Iceland, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, and Sweden. Some countries do not refer to all the analysed care aspects and there are differences in detail, depth, range, and scientific. The policies show general similarities but differ in the timing and the content of the recommended intrapartum care. Not all of the analysed countries have intrapartum care policies and those who have shown differences between recommendations. These results can be used to create/revise intrapartum care policies.

Antenatal care policy in high-income countries with a universal health system: A scoping review.

The availability, effectiveness, and access to antenatal care are directly linked with good maternal and neonatal outcomes, making antenatal care an important determinant in health. But to be effective, care must always be appropriate, not excessive, not insufficient. Perinatal outcomes vary within and between countries, raising questions about practices, the use of best evidence in clinical decisions and the existence of clear and updated guidance. Through a scoping review methodology, this study aimed to map the available antenatal care policies for low-risk pregnant women in high-income countries with a universal health system, financed by the government through tax payments. Following searches on the main databases and grey literature, the authors identified and analysed ten antenatal care policies using a previously piloted datachart: Australia, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Some policies were over 10 years old, some recommendations did not present a rationale or context, others were outdated, or were simply different approaches in the absence of strong evidence. Whilst some recommendations were ubiquitous, others differed either in the recommendation provided, the timing, or the frequency. Similarly, we found wide variation in the methods/strategy used to support the recommendations provided. These results confirm that best evidence is not always assimilated into policies and clinical guidance. Further research crossing these differences with perinatal outcomes and evaluation of cost could be valuable to optimise guidance on antenatal care. Similarly, some aspects of care need further rigorous studies to obtain evidence of higher quality to inform recommendations.