Maternity care experiences of women with physical disabilities: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Fifteen percent of the world's population has some form of disability, the most common form being a physical disability. Ten percent of women with disabilities are of childbearing age; however, because women with disabilities are often deemed less likely to have children, accessibility to maternity care is limited. Women with disabilities experience problems during pregnancy and childbirth due to physical barriers and barriers to information, problems with communication and the attitude of providers. A recent World Health Organization statement calls for more action, dialogue, research and advocacy on disrespectful treatment during childbirth. To give substance to this, an overview of the experiences of women with a physical disability is essential. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to identify and provide an overview of reported maternity care experiences of women with physical disabilities, including sensory disabilities. DESIGN: This systematic review was conducted using a meta-aggregation approach for synthesis and the steps of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The search strategy focused on qualitative studies in the databases PubMed, Embase and CINAHL. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist was used to evaluate methodological quality, and a best-evidence synthesis was performed. FINDINGS: Of the 4,486 studies screened, ten were included. The methodological quality of the studies ranged from high to moderate. The results indicated that women experience barriers related to accessibility of facilities, adapted equipment, lack of knowledge, and healthcare providers' dismissals of their concerns and unwillingness to assist. In contrast, support has a positive influence on women's experiences. KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: There is evidence that women with physical disabilities continue to encounter barriers in accessing maternity care related to inaccessible care settings, lack of knowledge and the attitude of healthcare providers. Healthcare providers should be trained to be aware of women's special needs and to improve clinical practice.

First-time fathers' experiences and needs during childbirth: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Fathers have been increasingly involved in childbirth since 1990. Attendance at childbirth is considered to benefit fathers' health as well as that of their partner and children. However, childbirth is a life event that parents may experience differently. First-time fathers' experiences have been barely studied and may differ from those of fathers who have already had a child. In order to adapt support and care during childbirth to the needs of first-time fathers, a deeper insight must be gained into their experiences and needs during childbirth. DESIGN: A systematic review of qualitative studies was conducted using PubMed, Embase and CINAHL as well as the snowball method. Quality appraisal was performed and evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. A thematic best evidence synthesis was performed. FINDINGS: Of 821 articles, eight qualitative studies and the qualitative data of one mixed methods study were included. amongst other feelings, fathers experience a lack of knowledge and a need to be better prepared. First-time fathers want to be more involved and need guidance, information and honest answers to help them fulfil a supportive role. Fathers disregard their own needs to focus on the needs of the mother. Meeting the baby for the first time changes the focus from the mother to the child, and fathers need time and privacy for this special moment. KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: To adapt support and care during childbirth to the needs of first-time fathers, professionals must be aware of their needs. Professionals must realise the significant influence of their professional behaviour on first-time fathers' experiences. Care for first-time fathers should be formalised. Follow-up research must be conducted on integrating the preparation of first-time fathers into prenatal care. Education and training of professionals must be improved.

Self-Reporting of Smoking Cessation in Cardiac Patients: How Reliable Is It and Is Reliability Associated With Patient Characteristics?

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the accuracy of smoking cessation self-reports by cardiac patients who participated in a smoking cessation program, and to determine which patient characteristics are associated with an inaccurate self-report during a follow-up interview 12 months after the start of the program. METHODS: Smoking cessation self-reports (point prevalence abstinence) were validated against salivary cotinine levels. Using χ analyses, patients who reported accurately being a nonsmoker were compared with those who reported inaccurately being a nonsmoker (biochemically verified as smokers) on factors the literature has indicated to be associated with inaccurate self-report in smoking. Potential predictors of inaccurate self-report of smoking (P ≤ 0.20 in univariate analyses) were subsequently tested in a multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 95 patients tested, almost 25% inaccurately reported having quit smoking at a cutoff of 10-ng/mL cotinine in saliva. The data show more underreporting of smoking among patients who received a face-to-face counseling intervention and among patients with an intermediate education level. There was significantly less underreporting among patients characterized as having a Type D personality. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that underreporting of smoking status in cardiac patients who participate in a smoking cessation program is high, especially in those who receive intensive face-to-face counseling. Having a Type D personality seems to be a protective factor, whereas having an intermediate level of education is a risk factor for inaccurate reporting. Biochemical validation in high-risk populations is highly needed, ideally accompanied by alternative forms of verification. Optimal validation testing in smoking cessation studies of cardiac patients is difficult because of high refusal rates, no-show, and organizational difficulties.