Evaluation of trained volunteer doula services for disadvantaged women in five areas in England: women's experiences

Darwin, Zoë; Green, Josephine; McLeish, Jenny; Willmot, Helen; Spiby, Helen

doi:10.1111/hsc.12331

Cited by 32 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Five studies specified that the lay companion was anyone who the woman chose (Brüggemann 2014) or did not specify who the lay companion was (Dodou 2014; Maher 2004; Price 2007; Shimpuku 2013). Twenty‐three of the included studies described support provided by doulas (Akhavan 2012a; Akhavan 2012b; Berg 2006; Campero 1998; Coley 2016; Darwin 2016; de Souza 2010; Gentry 2010; Gilliland 2011; Hardeman 2016; Horstman 2017; Hunter 2012; Koumouitzes‐Douvia 2006; Lagendyk 2005; LaMancuso 2016; Lundgren 2010; McGarry 2016; McLeish 2018; Schroeder 2005; Shlafer 2015; Stevens 2011; Torres 2013; Torres 2015). One included study (Thorstensson 2008), described support provided to women by female student midwives whose sole responsibility was to provide continuous support (e.g.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twelve of the included studies described an extended model of companionship with doulas, that included support during the pregnancy and/or postpartum periods (Berg 2006; Coley 2016; Darwin 2016; Gentry 2010; Hunter 2012; Lagendyk 2005; McGarry 2016; McLeish 2018; Schroeder 2005; Stevens 2011; Torres 2013; Torres 2015). One study did not specify the timing of doula support (Koumouitzes‐Douvia 2006).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thirteen studies were conducted in 11 middle‐income countries: Syria (Abushaikha 2012; Abushaikha 2013), Ghana (Alexander 2014), Brazil (Brüggemann 2014; Dodou 2014; de Souza 2010), Mexico (Campero 1998), South Africa (Chadwick 2014), , Jordan (Khresheh 2010), Kenya (Afulani 2018), Iran (Fathi 2017), and China (Qian 2001); and one multi‐country study conducted in Syria, Egypt and Lebanon (Kabakian‐Khasholian 2015). Thirty‐three studies were conducted in six high‐income countries: Sweden (Akhavan 2012a; Akhavan 2012b; Bäckström 2011; Berg 2006; Ledenfors 2016; Lundgren 2010; Premberg 2011; Thorstensson 2008), Finland (Bondas‐Salonen 1998), Canada (Chandler 1997; Lagendyk 2005; Price 2007), USA (Chapman 1990; Coley 2016; Gentry 2010; Hardeman 2016; Horstman 2017; Hunter 2012; Koumouitzes‐Douvia 2006; LaMancuso 2016; Schroeder 2005; Shlafer 2015; Torres 2013; Torres 2015), United Kingdom (Darwin 2016; Longworth 2011; McGarry 2016; McLeish 2018; Somers‐Smith 1999), and Australia (Harte 2016; Maher 2004; Stevens 2011), and one multi‐country study conducted in the USA and Canada (Gilliland 2011). Of the 33 studies conducted in high‐income countries, 21 studies focused on doula models of companionship (Akhavan 2012a; Akhavan 2012b; Berg 2006; Coley 2016; Darwin 2016; Gentry 2010; Gilliland 2011; …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thirteen studies were conducted alongside an intervention or as an evaluation of an intervention or programme (Akhavan 2012a; Akhavan 2012b; Campero 1998; Coley 2016; Darwin 2016; Gentry 2010; Kabakian‐Khasholian 2015; Khresheh 2010; Lagendyk 2005; LaMancuso 2016; McGarry 2016; Schroeder 2005; Shlafer 2015), and 39 studies were stand‐alone qualitative studies (not attached to an intervention, evaluation, or programme).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This usually took the form of acting as an intermediary by relaying, repeating, or explaining information from the healthcare provider to the woman, and from the woman to the healthcare provider.Alexander 2014; Bondas‐Salonen 1998; Khresheh 2010; Price 2007; Qian 2001; Sapkota 2012Moderate confidenceDue to minor concerns regarding methodological limitations, coherence and relevance, and moderate concerns regarding adequacy18Companions played an important role to help facilitate communication between the woman and healthcare providers, including representing the woman's interests and speaking on her behalf when she was unable to do so. They helped to relay information between the woman and healthcare provider, such as asking questions and setting boundaries.Akhavan 2012b; Bondas‐Salonen 1998; Darwin 2016; Gentry 2010; Hardeman 2016; Horstman 2017; Hunter 2012; Khresheh 2010; Koumouitzes‐Douvia 2006; LaMancuso 2016; Lundgren 2010; McGarry 2016; McLeish 2018; Premberg 2011; Price 2007; Stevens 2011; Torres 2015Moderate concernsDue to minor concerns regarding coherence and adequacy, and moderate concerns regarding methodological limitations and relevance Advocacy 19Companions played a role to bear witness to the process of childbirth. They shared the childbirth experience with the woman by being with her, and were viewed as observers who could monitor, reflect, and report on what transpired throughout labour and childbirth, such as witnessing pain, the birth process, and the woman's transformation to motherhood.Afulani 2018; Alexander 2014; Bondas‐Salonen 1998; Dodou 2014; Horstman 2017; Hunter 2012; Longworth 2011; Price 2007; Sapkota 2012High confidenceDue to minor concerns regarding methodological considerations, coherence, relevance and adequacy Practical support 20Companions provided physical support to women throughout labour and childbirth, such as giving them a massage and holding their hand.…”

Section: Summary Of Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Perceptions and experiences of labour companionship: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Bohren

Berger

Munthe‐Kaas

et al. 2019

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

198

197

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLabour companionship refers to support provided to a woman during labour and childbirth, and may be provided by a partner, family member, friend, doula or healthcare professional. A Cochrane systematic review of interventions by Bohren and colleagues, concluded that having a labour companion improves outcomes for women and babies. The presence of a labour companion is therefore regarded as an important aspect of improving quality of care during labour and childbirth; however implementation of the intervention is not universal. Implementation of labour companionship may be hampered by limited understanding of factors affecting successful implementation across contexts.ObjectivesThe objectives of the review were to describe and explore the perceptions and experiences of women, partners, community members, healthcare providers and administrators, and other key stakeholders regarding labour companionship; to identify factors affecting successful implementation and sustainability of labour companionship; and to explore how the findings of this review can enhance understanding of the related Cochrane systematic review of interventions.Search methodsWe searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and POPLINE K4Health databases for eligible studies from inception to 9 September 2018. There were no language, date or geographic restrictions.Selection criteriaWe included studies that used qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on women’s, partners’, family members’, doulas', providers', or other relevant stakeholders' perceptions and experiences of labour companionship; and were from any type of health facility in any setting globally.Data collection and analysisWe used a thematic analysis approach for data extraction and synthesis, and assessed the confidence in the findings using the GRADE‐CERQual approach. We used two approaches to integrate qualitative findings with the intervention review findings. We used a logic model to theorise links between elements of the intervention and health and well‐being outcomes. We also used a matrix model to compare features of labour companionship identified as important in the qualitative evidence synthesis with the interventions included in the intervention review.Main resultsWe found 51 studies (52 papers), mostly from high‐income countries and mostly describing women's perspectives. We assessed our level of confidence in each finding using the GRADE‐CERQual approach. We had high or moderate confidence in many of our findings. Where we only had low or very low confidence in a finding, we have indicated this.Labour companions supported women in four different ways. Companions gave informational support by providing information about childbirth, bridging communication gaps between health workers and women, and facilitating non‐pharmacological pain relief. Companions were advocates, which means they spoke up in support of the woman. Companions provided practical support, including encouraging women to move around, providing massage, and holding her hand. Finally, companions...

show abstract