Reproductive health decision‐making among <scp>US</scp>‐dwelling Somali Bantu refugee women: A qualitative study

Agbemenu, Kafuli; Volpe, Ellen M.; Dyer, Ervin

doi:10.1111/jocn.14162

Cited by 25 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Quality of services: • staff conduct seen as inappropriate, • women wanted examinations and consults to be more respectful. .70 Agbemenu et al (2018) [ 53 ]; HC USA; CO Somalia Explore the reproductive health decision-making, FP and care during pregnancy and childbirth of Somali Bantu women in Buffalo Convenience sample via snowball technique; Somali Bantu Community Organization office; 5 semi-structured FGDs n = 30; refugees; 18–35 yrs. (40%) 36–55 (47%) 55+ (10%); yrs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Access to preventive sexual and reproductive health care for women from refugee-like backgrounds: a systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Globally, the number of forcibly displaced women is growing. Refugee and displaced women have poorer health outcomes compared to migrant and host country populations. Conflict, persecution, violence or natural disasters and under-resourced health systems in their country of origin contribute to displacement experiences of refugee and displaced women. Poor health outcomes are further exacerbated by the migration journey and challenging resettlement in host countries. Preventive sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs of refugee and displaced women are poorly understood. The aim was to synthesise the evidence about access to preventive SRH care of refugee and displaced women. Methods A systematic review of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies of women aged 18 to 64 years and health care providers' (HCPs’) perspectives on barriers to and enablers of SRH care was undertaken. The search strategy was registered with PROSPERO in advance of the search (ID CRD42020173039). The MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, and Global health databases were searched for peer-reviewed publications published any date up to 30th April 2020. Three authors performed full text screening independently. Publications were reviewed and assessed for quality. Study findings were thematically extracted and reported in a narrative synthesis. Reporting of the review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations. Results The search yielded 4083 results, of which 28 papers reporting 28 studies met inclusion criteria. Most related to contraception and cervical or breast cancer screening. Three main themes and ten subthemes relating to SRH care access were identified: interpersonal and patient encounter factors (including knowledge, awareness, perceived need for and use of preventive SRH care; language and communication barriers), health system factors (including HCPs discrimination and lack of quality health resources; financial barriers and unmet need; HCP characteristics; health system navigation) and sociocultural factors and the refugee experience (including family influence; religious and cultural factors). Conclusions Implications for clinical practice and policy include giving women the option of seeing women HCPs, increasing the scope of practice for HCPs, ensuring adequate time is available during consultations to listen and develop refugee and displaced women’s trust and confidence, strengthening education for refugee and displaced women unfamiliar with preventive care and refining HCPs’ and interpreters’ cultural competency. More research is needed on HCPs’ views regarding care for refugee and displaced women.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Access to preventive sexual and reproductive health care for women from refugee-like backgrounds: a systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prenatal care underutilization among African refugee women may also reflect poor health care utilization by refugees upon resettlement in general, in addition to avoidance of health care, and specifically reproductive health care, due to histories of trauma, including female genital cutting. [30][31][32][33][34] Additional social and language barriers and experiences of discrimination both outside and within the health care system, especially related to reproductive health, may also worsen health care utilization among African refugee women. 33,34 These findings are particularly relevant because of their implication for women's public health and for maternal health care providers who take care of African refugee women in the prenatal and birthing process.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproductive Health Outcomes in African Refugee Women: A Comparative Study

Agbemenu

Auerbach

Murshid

et al. 2019

Journal of Women's Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: African refugee women in the United States are at risk of poor reproductive health outcomes; however, examination of reproductive health outcomes in this population remains inadequate. We compared:(1) prepregnancy health and prenatal behavior; (2) prenatal history and prenatal care utilization; and (3) labor and birth outcomes between African refugee women and U.S.-born Black and White women. Methods: A secondary data analysis of enhanced electronic birth certificate data was used. Univariate comparisons using chi-squared tests for dichotomous variables and analysis of variance and/or Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous variables were conducted for Refugee versus Black versus White women. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: From 2007 to 2016, 789 African refugee, 17,487 Black, and 59,615 White women in our population gave birth. African refugees experienced more favorable health outcomes than U.S.-born groups on variables examined. Compared to U.S.-born women, African refugee women had fewer prepregnancy health risks ( p < 0.001), fewer preterm births ( p < 0.001), fewer low birth weight infants ( p < 0.001), and higher rates of vaginal deliveries ( p < 0.001). These favorable outcomes occurred despite later initiation of prenatal care ( p < 0.001) and lower scores of prenatal care adequacy among refugee women compared to U.S.-born groups ( p < 0.001). Conclusions:The healthy immigrant effect appears to extend to reproductive health outcomes in our studied population of African refugee women. However, based on our data, targeted, culturally-congruent education surrounding family planning and prenatal care is recommended. Insight from reproductive health care experiences of African refugee women can provide understanding of the protective factors contributing to the healthy immigrant effect in reproductive health outcomes, and knowledge gained can be utilized to improve outcomes in other at-risk groups.

show abstract

“…Research demonstrates that a majority of people making pregnancy decisions consult or are influenced by someone close to them, including partners, parents, or friends, and that many pregnant people view these perspectives as very important to their decision-making process (Agbemenu et al, 2018; Osur et al, 2015). Social influences are not limited to close family and friends; they also include religious leaders, healthcare providers, public figures, and strangers on the internet (Lagan et al, 2010).…”

Section: The Proposed Pdmmmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Pregnancy Decision-Making Model: Psychological, Relational, and Cultural Factors Affecting Unintended Pregnancy

Klann

Wong

2020

Psychology of Women Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empirical data from the past 50 years have illuminated some of the factors that influence pregnancy decision-making. Yet, formal models of pregnancy decision-making are uncommon and rarely incorporate cultural perspectives. In order to address this gap in the literature, we propose the Pregnancy Decision-Making Model (PDMM), a comprehensive model of the factors that are likely to affect pregnancy decisions in the context of unintended pregnancy, with special attention to relational and intersectional components of pregnancy decisions. The PDMM begins with three primary Evaluation factors: Evaluation of Capital, Evaluation of Values, and Evaluation of Narratives. Barriers to Access are proposed to be a key factor in limiting agency and autonomy and determining pregnancy outcomes. Social Influences are also hypothesized to influence Evaluation factors and their relationship with outcome variables, which include the Pregnancy Outcome, Decisional Certainty, and Decisional Satisfaction. As the PDMM is designed to be flexible in its prediction of a variety of outcomes, we consider a number of possible permutations of the model. Finally, we discuss the utility of the PDMM for inspiring future research, as well as the practical implications of the model.

show abstract

Reproductive health decision‐making among US‐dwelling Somali Bantu refugee women: A qualitative study

Cited by 25 publications

References 13 publications

Access to preventive sexual and reproductive health care for women from refugee-like backgrounds: a systematic review

Access to preventive sexual and reproductive health care for women from refugee-like backgrounds: a systematic review

Reproductive Health Outcomes in African Refugee Women: A Comparative Study

A Pregnancy Decision-Making Model: Psychological, Relational, and Cultural Factors Affecting Unintended Pregnancy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About