Search

Objective: To explore the current state of knowledge and evidence about peer support for various disadvantaged groups; to identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of peer support to critically reflect on peer support within health and social services., Methods: A rapid scoping review was conducted according to Arksey and O'Malley's framework, aiming to identify eligible studies in PubMed, APA PsychInfo, Education Resources Information Center, Cochrane Library, Academic Search Premier, ScienceDirect, Directory of Open Access Journals, ResearchGate, WorldCat, and Google Scholar. According to Rodgers' concept analysis steps and the SWOT model, data was reported using thematic synthesis., Results: Forty-five studies were included, describing a variety of peer support initiatives among groups of young migrants and unsupervised minors, young adults with autism, people with (mental) health problems, foster/shelter families, vulnerable pregnant women, people outside the labour force, older adults, and homeless people. The strength of peer support is its positive effect on the quality of life among vulnerable people. The weakness is represented by peers both being too involved and focused on personal interest or by peers lacking expertise and knowledge. Opportunities for peer support are mutual learning, the anticipated long-term effects, and the potential to facilitate social inclusion. Culture, language barriers, drop-out rates, securing sustainability, and peers' lack of time and commitment are regarded as threats to peer support., Conclusion: Although peer support offers good outcomes for various groups of vulnerable people, the weaknesses and threats need to be considered to provide and proliferate peer support., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest to be reported., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Background: Damage to the perineum is common after vaginal delivery, and it can be caused by laceration, episiotomy, or both. This study investigated the effects of maternal position (lateral vs lithotomy) and other variables on the occurrence of perineal damage., Methods: A retrospective study included the examination of hospital records from 557 women. The effects of demographic characteristics, gravidity, parity, duration of pregnancy, reason for admission, and mode of labor on perineal outcomes were investigated through univariate (independent sample t test, chi-square test) and multivariate analysis (logistic regression analysis)., Results: Considering episiotomy as perineal damage, univariate analysis showed a protective effect of the lateral position (45.9% vs 27.9%, p > 0.001), and fewer episiotomies were performed (6.7% vs 38.2%) with this position. This protective effect for perineal damage disappeared on excluding women undergoing episiotomy from analysis. Multivariate analysis including all participants showed an increase of 47 percent in the likelihood of an intact perineum for the lateral position when compared with the lithotomy position (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.36-0.78). Parity was associated with a reduction of 44 percent in perineal damage (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.47-0.78, p < 0.001). Moreover, the lithotomy position was associated with significantly more episiotomies than the lateral position (7% vs 38%, p < 0.001). The odds of perineal damage increased in deliveries performed by physicians (OR: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.79-4.78)., Conclusions: Childbirth in the lateral position resulted in less perineal trauma when compared with childbirth in the lithotomy position, even after correcting for parity and birth attendant. The probability of an intact perineum increased in deliveries performed by midwives. (BIRTH 39:2 June 2012)., (© 2012, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation © 2012, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)