Dataset Information

Building Cross-sectoral Collaborations to Address Perinatal Health Inequities: Insights From the Dutch Healthy Pregnancy 4 All-3 Program.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Addressing perinatal health inequities is the joint responsibility of professionals working for local governments, the medical, social, and public health sector. Cross-sectoral collaboration between these professionals is challenging. For such collaborations to succeed, a transition, ie, a fundamental shift in the dominant structure, culture, and practices at the systems level, is necessary. We investigated facilitators and barriers for cross-sectoral collaborations, when addressing perinatal health inequities in the Netherlands. Additionally, we studied how cross-sectoral collaborations can be facilitated by action research.

Methods

We used interview and questionnaire data of the Healthy Pregnancy 4 All-3 (HP4All-3) program, which resulted from action research in six Dutch municipalities. All interviews were coded using open codes related to facilitators and barriers for cross-sectoral collaboration and categorized into three subgroups: structural, cultural, or practical. The answers to the questionnaire were analyzed and summarized quantitatively.

Results

We conducted 53 interviews with a total of 81 professionals. The most important ingredients for cross-sectoral collaborations mentioned by the interviewees were: (1) structural: having a solid network with a clear overview of professionals working in the different sectors, (2) cultural: having a joint vision/goal, and (3) practical: short lines of communication and timely sharing of information. A total of 85 professionals filled in (parts of) the questionnaire. Two-thirds to over 80 percent replied that the HP4All-3 program had an added value in building cross-sectoral collaborations.

Conclusion

Our research shows that cross-sectoral collaborations in the context of perinatal health are hampered by structural, cultural, and practical barriers. Analyzing facilitators and barriers at these three levels helps to identify bottlenecks in cross-sectoral collaboration. Action researchers can be of great advantage in facilitating collaboration, as they can offer an open setting for reflection and instigate a sense of urgency for building collaborations.

SUBMITTER: Daalderop LA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11365078 | biostudies-literature | 2024

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Building Cross-sectoral Collaborations to Address Perinatal Health Inequities: Insights From the Dutch Healthy Pregnancy 4 All-3 Program.

Daalderop Leonie A LA Barsties Lisa S LS Steenbergen Frank van FV Waelput Adja J M AJM Lagendijk Jacqueline J Been Jasper V JV Steegers Eric A P EAP Loorbach Derk D

International journal of health policy and management 20240709

<h4>Background</h4>Addressing perinatal health inequities is the joint responsibility of professionals working for local governments, the medical, social, and public health sector. Cross-sectoral collaboration between these professionals is challenging. For such collaborations to succeed, a transition, ie, a fundamental shift in the dominant structure, culture, and practices at the systems level, is necessary. We investigated facilitators and barriers for cross-sectoral collaborations, when addr ...[more]

PMID: 39099488

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telehealth technologies. Persistent disparities in telecommunication devices, internet connectivity, and digital literacy, however, undermine the potential for telemedicine to reduce barriers to health care access. Health systems may have a role in addressing these structural inequities. We describe the operationalization and feasibility of an internet-enabled tablet loaner program at a freestanding children's hospital.MethodsBetween October 2020 and October 2021, pediatricians enrolled families through ambulatory clinics at an academic urban freestanding children's hospital. Eligibility criteria included difficulty accessing virtual care due to lack of stable internet or device. Tablets featured an unlimited data package, access to the patient portal, and virtual visit platform. A private technology company managed device configuration and distribution. To characterize program impact, we compared the proportion of completed clinical encounters during the intervention compared with a preintervention period (March 2020-October 2020) and conducted a qualitative survey with program participants. Participant and visit characteristics were obtained from the electronic medical record and summarized with descriptive statistics.ResultsA total of 111 families participated in the tablet loaner program, the majority of whom were Hispanic (51.4%) and black, non-Hispanic (26.1%), and publicly insured (64.9%). Between the preintervention and intervention periods, there was a significant increase in completed video- and phone-based virtual visits (75.3 vs. 79.1%, p = 0.038). The proportion of video-based only visits increased from 82.9 to 88.9%. p < 0.001. Families reported that the tablet improved the patient's ability to receive medical care (93.7%) and was easy to use (93.9%).ConclusionThe tablet loaner initiative was associated with an improvement in markers of virtual visit engagement and health care experience. Efforts to expand telemedicine equity must consider technological access and digital literacy as well as broad coalitions across industry, government, and community organizations.

Project description:Geographical inequalities in perinatal health and child welfare require attention. To improve the identification, and care, of mothers and young children at risk of adverse health outcomes, the HP4All-2 program was developed. The program consists of three studies, focusing on creating a continuum for risk selection and tailored care pathways from preconception and antenatal care towards 1) postpartum care, 2) early childhood care, as well as 3) interconception care. The program has been implemented in ten municipalities in the Netherlands, aiming to target communities with a relatively disadvantageous position with regard to perinatal and child health outcomes. To delineate the position of the ten participating municipalities, we present municipal and regional differences in the prevalence of perinatal mortality, perinatal morbidity, children living in deprived neighbourhoods, and children living in families on welfare.Data on all singleton births in the Netherlands between 2009 and 2014 were analysed for the prevalence of perinatal mortality and morbidity. In addition, national data on children living in deprived neighbourhoods and children living in families on welfare between 2009 and 2012 were analysed. The prevalence of these outcomes were calculated and ranked for 62 geographical areas, the 50 largest municipalities and the 12 provinces, to determine the position of the municipalities that participate in HP4All-2.Considerable geographical differences were present for all four outcomes. The municipalities that participate in HP4All-2 are among the 25 municipalities with the highest prevalence of perinatal mortality, perinatal morbidity, children living in deprived neighbourhoods, or children in families on welfare.This study illustrates geographical differences in perinatal health and/or child welfare outcomes and demonstrates that the HP4All-2 program targets municipalities with a relative unfavourable position. By targeting these municipalities, the program is expected to contribute most to improving the care for young children and their mothers at risk, and hence to reducing their risks and health inequalities.

Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has brought tremendous changes in healthcare delivery and exacerbated a wide range of inequities. Social workers across a broad range of healthcare settings bring an expertise in social, behavioural and mental healthcare needed to help address these health inequities. In addition, social workers integrate policy-directed interventions and solutions in clinical practice, which is a needed perspective for recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. It remains unclear, however, what the most pressing policy issues are that have emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, many social workers in health settings tend to underuse policy in their direct practice. The objectives of this scoping review are to: (1) systematically scope the literature on social work, COVID-19 pandemic and policy; and (2) describe the competencies required by social workers and the social work profession to address the policy issues emerging during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods and analysisThe scoping review follows Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage framework. Identification of literature published between 1 December 2019 and the search date, 31 March 2021, will take place in two stages: (1) title and abstract review, and (2) full-text review. In partnership with a health science librarian, the research team listed keywords related to social work and policy to search databases including Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Social Services Abstract and Social Work Abstracts. Two graduate-level research assistants will conduct screening and full-text review. Data will then be extracted, charted, analysed and summarised to report on our results and implications on practice, policy and future research.Ethics and disseminationResults will help develop a policy practice competence framework to inform how social workers can influence policy. We will share our findings through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. This study does not require Research Ethics Board approval as it uses publicly available sources of data.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine pre-pregnancy characteristics, pregnancy complications, and birth outcomes among respondents with self-reported disability compared to those without disability.MethodsA cross-sectional weighted sample of 2,006,700 respondents with singleton live births who participated in the United States Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) between 2018 and 2021 provided data on disability, including difficulty in vision, hearing, ambulation, cognition, communication, and self-care. We estimated covariate-adjusted odds of differences in pre-pregnancy chronic health conditions, pregnancy intention, intimate partner violence (IPV), depression, adequacy of prenatal care, pregnancy-related health conditions, and birth outcomes by disability status.ResultsOf the 2,006,700 respondents included, 59.5% reported no disability, 33.9% had moderate disability, and 6.6% had severe disability. Across most outcomes, there was a graded pattern with those with severe disability having the worst outcomes compared to the other two groups. Respondents with severe disability were more likely to report diabetes and hypertension before becoming pregnant than respondents without disabilities. Those respondents with severe disability or moderate disability had an increased odds of reporting IPV and depression than those with no disability. During pregnancy, respondents with severe disability had an increased odds of gestational diabetes (aOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.18, 1.80) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (aOR 1.70, 95% CI 1.43, 2.02) as compared to respondents with no disability. Respondents with moderate disability also had an increased odds of both gestational diabetes (aOR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06, 1.34) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.17, 1.42) as compared to those with no disability. The odds of reporting an unintended pregnancy were highest in respondents with a severe disability (aOR 1.66, 95% CI 1.43, 1.94) and were also increased in respondents with moderate disability (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.36, 1.62) as compared to those reporting no disability. Across most birth outcomes, respondents with severe disabilities had worse outcomes with an increased odds of low birth weight infants (aOR 1.28, 95% CI 1.08, 1.52), preterm birth (aOR 1.32, 95% CI 1.11, 1.57), and neonatal intensive care unit admission (aOR 1.45, 95% CI 1.02, 2.06) as compared to respondents with no disability. There were not differences in being classified as small for gestational age or infants' length of hospital stay by disability status.ConclusionsAcross the perinatal period, respondents with moderate or severe disability experienced worse outcomes than those without disability. There is a critical need to improve pre-conception health in an effort to reduce inequities in pregnancy outcomes. Additionally, health care providers and systems must provide equitable access to care to persons with disabilities to reduce inequities in outcomes.

Dataset Information

Building Cross-sectoral Collaborations to Address Perinatal Health Inequities: Insights From the Dutch Healthy Pregnancy 4 All-3 Program.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Building Cross-sectoral Collaborations to Address Perinatal Health Inequities: Insights From the Dutch Healthy Pregnancy 4 All-3 Program.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets