Findings: Three overarching themes were identified. First the BFHI was viewed variously as a 'desirable innovation or an unfriendly imposition'. Participants were passionate about supporting breastfeeding and improving consistency in the information provided. This view was juxtaposed against the belief that BFHI represents an imposition on women's choices, and is a costly exercise for little gain in breastfeeding rates. The second theme highlighted cultural and organisational constraints and obstacles to BFHI implementation including resource issues, entrenched staff practices and staff rationalisation of non-compliance.Theme three captured a level of optimism and enthusiasm amongst participants who could identify a dedicated and credible leader to lead the BFHI change process. Collaborative engagement with all key stakeholders was crucial.Conclusions: Health care staff hold variant beliefs and attitudes towards BFHI, which can help or hinder the implementation process. The introduction of the BFHI at a local level requires detailed planning, extensive collaboration, and an enthusiastic and committed leader to drive the change process. This synthesis has highlighted the importance of thinking more creatively about the translation of this global policy into effective change at the local level.
Although breastfeeding is known to improve health, economic and environmental outcomes, breastfeeding initiation and continuation rates are low in the United Kingdom. The global WHO/UNICEF Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) aims to reverse declining rates of breastfeeding by shifting the culture of infant feeding care provision throughout hospital maternity settings. In the United Kingdom, the global BFHI has been adapted by UNICEF UK reflecting a paradigm shift towards the experiences of women and families using maternity services. This research used a critical ethnographic approach to explore the influence of the national UNICEF UK Baby Friendly Initiative (BFI) standards on the culture of one typical maternity service in England, over a period of 8 weeks, across four phases of data collection between 2011 and 2017. Twenty-one staff and 26 service users were recruited and engaged in moderate-level participant observation and/or guided interviews and conversations. Basic, organising and a final global theme emerged through thematic network analysis, describing the influence of the BFI on providing, receiving and leading infant feeding care in a hospital maternity setting. Using Antonovsky's sense of coherence construct, the findings discussed in this paper highlight how the BFI offers 'informational' (comprehensible), 'practical' (manageable) and 'emotional' (meaningful) support for both staff and service users, strengthened by effective, local leadership and a team approach. This is juxtaposed against the tensions and demands of the busy hospital maternity setting. It is recommended that ongoing infant feeding policy, practice and leadership balance relational and rational approaches for positive infant feeding care and experiences to flourish.
Background: Large discrepancies exist between standards of healthcare provision in high-income (HICs) and low and middle-income countries (LMICs). The root cause is often financial, resulting in poor infrastructure and under-resourced education and healthcare systems. Continuing professional education (CPE) programmes improve staff knowledge, skills, retention, and practice, but remain costly and rare in low-resource settings. One potential solution involves healthcare education collaborations between institutions in HICs and LMICs to provide culturally appropriate CPE in LMICs. To be effective, educational partnerships must address the challenges arising from differences in cultural norms, language, available technology and organisational structures within collaborating countries. Methods: Seven databases and other sources were systematically searched on 7 July 2020 for relevant studies. Citations, abstracts, and studies were screened and consensus was reached on which to include within the review. 54 studies were assessed regarding the type of educational programme involved, the nature of HIC/LMIC collaboration and quality of the study design. Results: Studies varied greatly regarding the types and numbers of healthcare professionals involved, pedagogical and delivery methods, and the ways in which collaboration was undertaken. Barriers and enablers of collaboration were identified and discussed. The key findings were: 1. The methodological quality of reporting in the studies was generally poor. 2. The way in which HIC/ LMIC healthcare education collaboration is undertaken varies according to many factors, including what is to be delivered, the learner group, the context, and the resources available. 3. Western bias was a major barrier. 4. The key to developing successful collaborations was the quality, nature, and duration of the relationships between those involved. Conclusion: This review provides insights into factors that underpin successful HIC/LMIC healthcare CPE collaborations and outlines inequities and quality issues in reporting.
At the University of Central Lancashire, in the North West of England, United Kingdom (UK) the midwifery team introduced a new and innovative case-based learning (CBL) curriculum for the undergraduate midwifery course. CBL is a student-centred approach to teaching and learning and encourages students to learn from each other, develop essential skills when caring for women and families including collaborative working and effective communication. In this article we share our approach and experiences of developing and delivering a CBL curriculum informed by salutogenesis, including how it enabled us to support effective learning and skill development for women and families.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.