Affiliation:
1. St. Luke's International University, Graduate School, Midwifery Tokyo Japan
2. Japanese Red Cross Toyota College of Nursing Toyota Japan
3. Department of Nursing Osaka Women's and Children's Hospital Osaka Japan
4. Department of Maternal Fetal Medicine Osaka Women's and Children's Hospital Osaka Japan
5. St. Luke's International University, Women's Health & Midwifery Tokyo Japan
Abstract
AbstractAimTo clarify the state of screening and support systems for socially high‐risk pregnant women at obstetric facilities across Japan and identify the characteristics of facilities related to the implementation of screening.MethodsThis cross‐sectional study used a self‐administered questionnaire. Participants were managers of hospitals, clinics, and midwifery birth centers handling deliveries in 47 prefectures across Japan. The questionnaire comprised items regarding the characteristics of participants and their facilities, service provision related to socially high‐risk women available at the facility, the number of specified pregnant women (tokutei ninpu) per year, methods of screening, and support systems within the obstetric facilities. Descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed using IBM‐SPSS version 24 for the association between facility characteristics and screening practices for socially high‐risk pregnant women.ResultsValid responses were received from 716 of 2512 obstetric facilities. Rates of specified expectant mothers per annual number of deliveries were identified as follows: perinatal medical centers (2.7%), general hospitals (1.6%), obstetrics and gynecology hospitals (1.0%), and clinics (0.8%). A total of 426 facilities (60.6%) reported screening all expectant mothers to identify socially high‐risk pregnant women. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that facility characteristics and service/care provision related to screening practices included availability of in‐hospital midwife‐led care and in‐hospital midwifery clinics (adjusted odds ratio 1.61; 95% CI [1.30, 1.47]), one‐on‐one care by midwife (1.73; 95% CI [1.15, 2.59]), multidisciplinary meetings within the facility (1.70; 95% CI [1.14, 2.56]), follow‐up support systems after discharge (1.90; 95% CI [1.17, 3.09]), and participation in the regional council for children in need of protection (2.33; 95% CI [1.13, 4.81]).ConclusionsApproximately 60% of surveyed obstetric facilities screen for socially high‐risk women. Increasing service provision at facilities may be necessary to implement screening.