Perinatal Health Service Use by Women Released from Jail

Bell, Janice F.; Zimmerman, Frederick J.; Huebner, Colleen E.; Cawthon, Mary Lawrence; Schroeder, Carole

doi:10.1353/hpu.2004.0035

Cited by 16 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Except for prenatal care, few special programs exist for jailed pregnant women, due to short jail stays (Beck, Karberg, & Harrison, 2002). Moreover, correctional facilities rarely have systems in place to assure access to community health services (Bell et al, 2004; Mullen, Cummins, Velasquez, Von Sternberg, & Carvajal, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doula Birth Support for Incarcerated Pregnant Women

Schroeder¹,

Bell²

2005

Public Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to provide trained labor support (doulas) to pregnant women in jail. A multiagency intervention project provided doula birth services to pregnant women in urban jails. Program evaluation included interviews with women and written satisfaction surveys of providers and correctional officers. A convenience sample of 18 incarcerated women received doula services. A doula visited each woman in jail antepartum to review expectations for labor and birth; during hospitalization, the doula provided continuous support throughout labor and birth. Doulas visited women postpartum to review birth events. Surveys administered to providers and officers demonstrated high satisfaction with the program. Qualitative interviews with 14 women indicated unanimous support for the services and documented women's major concerns. Findings support offering doula services to all pregnant women in custody and expanding doula services to include early and comprehensive intervention coordinated by nurses.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doula Birth Support for Incarcerated Pregnant Women

Schroeder¹,

Bell²

2005

Public Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When compared with women in the general population, pregnant prisoners are more likely to have risk factors associated with poor perinatal outcomes, including preterm and small-for- gestational-age infants. 11,12 These outcomes are likely a result of exposure to a combination of risk factors, including lack of access or failure to attend prenatal care, substance use, toxic stress, domestic violence, poor nutrition, and sexually transmitted infections. 13 In addition, African American, Native American, and Hispanic women are disproportionally represented in the prison system 2 —three groups that are also at greatest risk for poor birth outcomes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pregnancy and Parenting Support for Incarcerated Women: Lessons Learned

Shlafer¹,

Gerrity²,

Duwe³

2015

cpr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There are more than 200,000 incarcerated women in U.S. prisons and jails, and it is estimated that 6% to 10% are pregnant. Pregnant incarcerated women experience complex risks that can compromise their health and the health of their offspring. Objectives Identify lessons learned from a community–university pilot study of a prison-based pregnancy and parenting support program. Methods A community–university–corrections partnership was formed to provide education and support to pregnant incarcerated women through a prison-based pilot program. Evaluation data assessed women’s physical and mental health concerns and satisfaction with the program. Between October 2011 and December 2012, 48 women participated. Lessons Learned We learned that providing services for pregnant incarcerated women requires an effective partnership with the Department of Corrections, adaptations to traditional community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches, and resources that support both direct service and ongoing evaluation. Conclusions Effective services for pregnant incarcerated women can be provided through a successful community– university–corrections partnership.

show abstract

“…Seventeen studies were written in English and one in German; 15 were conducted in the US [ 16 – 24 , 26 , 28 – 32 ], two in the UK [ 25 , 27 ], and one in Germany [ 33 ]. Of these, nine contained a comparison group which enabled us to compare outcomes in the intervention groups and comparison groups [ 16 , 17 , 19 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 31 – 33 ], which comprised 472 population controls and 377 disadvantaged controls. Summary of the risk of bias by domains is shown in Table 4 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perinatal health care services for imprisoned pregnant women and associated outcomes: a systematic review

Bard

Knight

Plugge

2016

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWomen are an increasing minority of prisoners worldwide, and most are of childbearing age. Prisons offer unique opportunities for improving the pregnancy outcomes of these high-risk women, and no systematic review to date has looked at their care. This systematic review identified studies describing models of perinatal health care for imprisoned women which report maternal and child health and care outcomes.MethodsWe systematically searched for literature published between 1980 and April 2014. Studies were eligible if they included a group of imprisoned pregnant women, a description of perinatal health care and any maternal or infant health or care outcomes. Two authors independently extracted data. We described relevant outcomes in prisons (including jails) under models of care we termed PRISON, PRISON+ and PRISON++, depending on the care provided. Where outcomes were available on a comparison group of women, we calculated odds ratios with 95 % confidence intervals.ResultsEighteen studies were reported, comprising 2001 imprisoned pregnant women. Fifteen were in the US, two in the UK and one in Germany. Nine contained a comparison group of women comprising 849 pregnant women. Study quality was variable and outcome reporting was inconsistent. There was some evidence that women in prisons receiving enhanced prison care, PRISON+, were less likely to have inadequate prenatal care (15.4 % vs 30.7 %, p < 0 · 001), preterm delivery (6.4 % vs 19.0 %, p = 0 · 001) or caesarean delivery (12.9 % vs 26.5 %, p = 0 · 005) compared to women in prisons receiving usual care (PRISON). Women participating in two PRISON++ interventions, that is, interventions which included not only enhanced care in prisons but also coordination of community care on release, demonstrated reductions in long term recidivism rates (summary OR 0 · 37, 95 % CI 0 · 19–0 · 70) compared to pregnant women in the same prisons who did not participate in the intervention.ConclusionsEnhanced perinatal care can improve both short and long-term outcomes but there is a lack of data. Properly designed programmes with rigorous evaluation are needed to address the needs of this vulnerable population. The cost to mothers, children and to society of failing to address these important public health issues are likely to be substantial.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration: CRD42012002384.

show abstract

Perinatal Health Service Use by Women Released from Jail

Cited by 16 publications

References 22 publications

Doula Birth Support for Incarcerated Pregnant Women

Doula Birth Support for Incarcerated Pregnant Women

Pregnancy and Parenting Support for Incarcerated Women: Lessons Learned

Perinatal health care services for imprisoned pregnant women and associated outcomes: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About