Search

Background: Freedom from discrimination is one of the key principles in a human rights-based approach to maternal and newborn health. Objective: To review the published evidence on discrimination against Romani women in maternity care in Europe, and on interventions to address this. Search strategy: A systematic search of eight electronic databases was undertaken in 2015 using the terms "Roma" and "maternity care". A broad search for grey literature included the websites of relevant agencies. Data extraction and synthesis: Standardised data extraction tables were utilised, quality was formally assessed and a line of argument synthesis was developed and tested against the data from the grey literature. Results: Nine hundred papers were identified; three qualitative studies and seven sources of grey literature met the review criteria. These revealed that many Romani women encounter barriers to accessing maternity care. Even when they are able to access care, they can experience discriminatory mistreatment on the basis of their ethnicity, economic status, place of residence or language. The grey literature revealed some health professionals held underlying negative beliefs about Romani women. There were no published research studies examining the effectiveness of interventions to address discrimination against Romani women and their infants in Europe. The Roma Health Mediation Programme is a promising intervention identified in the grey literature. Conclusions: There is evidence of discrimination against Romani women in maternity care in Europe. Interventions to address discrimination against childbearing Romani women and underlying health provider prejudice are urgently needed, alongside analysis of factors predicting the success or failure of such initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The publication of the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations on antenatal care in 2016 introduced the perspective of women as a necessary component of clinical guidelines in maternity care. WHO highlights the crucial role played by evidence-based recommendations in promoting and supporting normal birth processes and a positive experience of pregnancy. This paper aims to explore and critically appraise recommendations of national antenatal care guidelines across European countries in comparison with the WHO guideline., Methods: We collected guidelines from country partners of the EU COST Action IS1405. Components of the documents structure and main recommendations within and between them were compared and contrasted with the WHO guideline on antenatal care with a particular interest in exploring whether and how women's experience was included in the recommendations., Results: Eight out of eleven countries had a single national guideline on antenatal care while three countries did not. National guidelines mostly focused on care of healthy women with a straightforward pregnancy. The level of concordance between the national and the WHO recommendations varied along a continuum from almost total concordance to almost total dissonance. Women's views and experiences were accounted for in some guidelines, but mostly not placed at the same level of importance as clinical items., Conclusions: Findings outline convergences and divergences with the WHO recommendations. They highlight the need for considering women's views more in the development of evidence-based recommendations and in practice for positive impacts on perinatal health at a global level, and on the experiences of each family.

Background: Assessment of childbirth fear, in advance of pregnancy, and early identification of modifiable factors contributing to fear can inform public health initiatives and/or school-based educational programming for the next generation of maternity care consumers. We developed and evaluated a short fear of birth scale that incorporates the most common dimensions of fear reported by men and women prior to pregnancy, fear of: labour pain, being out of control and unable to cope with labour and birth, complications, and irreversible physical damage., Methods: University students in six countries (Australia, Canada, England, Germany, Iceland, and the United States, n = 2240) participated in an online survey to assess their fears and attitudes about birth. We report internal consistency reliability, corrected-item-to-total correlations, factor loadings and convergent and discriminant validity of the new scale., Results: The Childbirth Fear - Prior to Pregnancy (CFPP) scale showed high internal consistency across samples (α > 0.86). All corrected-item-to total correlations exceeded 0.45, supporting the uni-dimensionality of the scale. Construct validity of the CFPP was supported by a high correlation between the new scale and a two-item visual analogue scale that measures fear of birth (r > 0.6 across samples). Weak correlations of the CFPP with scores on measures that assess related psychological states (anxiety, depression and stress) support the discriminant validity of the scale., Conclusion: The CFPP is a short, reliable and valid measure of childbirth fear among young women and men in six countries who plan to have children., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)