TY - GEN
T1 - Caring for vulnerable pregnant women in general practice
T2 - General practitioners’ challenges of assessing, collaborating, and reporting on vulnerable pregnant women
AU - Brygger Venø, Louse
PY - 2022/9/19
Y1 - 2022/9/19
N2 - Pregnant women, who are vulnerable in terms of psychiatric diseases, mental health problems, or social problems, are prone to increased risk of complications during preg-nancy, birth, and the postpartum period, with an accompanying risk of complications for the child. Antenatal care (ANC) for this group of pregnant women seeks to prevent these complications by offering specialized support within a cross-sectoral framework, which for severely vulnerable pregnant women is situated in the social-obstetric outpatient clinics. General practitioners (GPs) are the first healthcare professionals who consult women in early pregnancy. They have an essential task to assess pregnant women’s risks and resources to plan individualized ANC. Nevertheless, a national report evaluat-ing the social-obstetric outpatient clinics shows that only one-fourth of pregnant women with severe vulnerability are referred from general practice. This indicates that GPs, to a certain extent, do not manage to assess all vulnerable pregnant women.The task of assessing vulnerability in pregnancy can be complex. It involves a thorough history of both somatic diseases, psychiatric diseases, and mental health problems, in-cluding a history of alcohol and drug abuse and social resources. As signs of vulnerabil-ity are not always visible or known in advance, assessment often involves GPs relying on intuition. Afterward, the GPs must decide how to address the vulnerability sensitively to the woman and whether to offer a referral for specialized obstetric support. Addition-ally, the GP must evaluate the need for social reporting if the woman or her partner is vulnerable to the degree that complicates the ability to care for the coming child. The collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women is conducted in an interplay between the GP, obstetricians, midwives, health visitors, psychologists or psychiatrists, and in par-ticular circumstances, the municipal social care systems.This thesis aims to gain knowledge of GPs behavior and perceived challenges when managing ANC for vulnerable pregnant women and collaborating with cross-sectoral partners in the ANC and municipal social care. This first involves three qualitative stud-ies to explore the GPs’ perceived vulnerability indicators in pregnancy, the barriers, and facilitators in assessing and addressing vulnerability, and barriers and facilitators when collaborating and reporting on vulnerable pregnant women. Second, it involves a ques-tionnaire study aiming to explore the proportions of GPs’ perceived barriers in assess-ment and possible associations with GP and practice characteristics, as well as practice organization of ANC, i.e., time allocated to ANC, delegating ANC to staff, and prioritiz-ing continuity in ANC. In 2019, five focus group interviews were conducted with 20 GPs from the Region of Southern Denmark. Analyses were performed with theoretical frames of the bio-psycho-social model and behavior theories according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). A questionnaire was developed inspired by literature studies, experiences of the research group, and the results of the qualitative analyses guided by the TDF domains. Data collection was undertaken in late 2021, and 760 (22%) of all Danish GPs respond-ed.The qualitative studies demonstrated that GPs understand the concept of vulnerability in pregnancy within a psychosocial frame, distinguishing between obvious vulnerability – e.g., known somatic or psychiatric diagnoses or known social problems, and intangible vulnerability – such as traits of lacking resilience and perceived odd contact, or just on retrospective sensations. Barriers to assessing and addressing vulnerability were lacking attention and overview when delegating antenatal care to practice staff, lacking continui-ty of care, time constraints, ethical dilemmas, and low trust in gut feelings due to a lack-ing GP-patient relationship. When a longstanding GP-patient relationship was present, emotions and fear of damaging the GP-patient relationship could limit GPs in addressing vulnerability. Facilitators were attention to the woman’s social life, a strong GP-patient relation, trusting one’s gut feelings of vulnerability, information from colleagues, and structural changes in antenatal care in practice. Barriers in the cross-sectoral collabora-tion were the uncertainty of the ANC levels, poor attention to the benefits of collaborat-ing with partners in ANC and social care, not prioritizing time for collaboration, dissatis-facting experience with municipal collaborators, and lacking two-way communication pathways with the municipal social services on minor concerns of vulnerability. Facilita-tors were interprofessional relationships, i.e. knowing the collaborators’ working con-texts, professional confidence due to a strong GP-patient relation, and positive collabora-tive experiences with the social care system, often from minor-sized municipalities ena-bling face-to-face meetings. Barriers to reporting were lacking routines in reporting on pregnant women, low confidence in judging needs for reporting, ethical dilemmas, fear of damaging the GP-patient relation, perceptions that reporting would do no good, and lack of feedback on the consequences of a report on one’s patient. Facilitators were at-tention to professional obligation, a strong GP-patient relation, and patients’ requests for social support. The questionnaire study demonstrated that the highest proportion of barriers to vulnera-bility assessment was related to lacking shared attention among GPs and staff towards potentially vulnerable women, lacking communicative routines in addressing vulnerabil-ity, insufficient medical record-keeping of indicators of vulnerability, lacking overview of whether assessing all vulnerable women and disagreeing that the remuneration for ANC matches the time used for assessment. GP and practice characteristics: Despite the GPs feeling competent in assessing vulnerability, GP characteristics like young age and male gender were associated with lacking attention and communicative routines. Organizational characteristics: Not prioritizing extra time for vulnerable women was associated with a lack of attention and communicative routines. Most importantly, pri-oritizing continuity of care was associated with reduced barriers to vulnerability assess-ment. Complete delegation of ANC consultations to practice staff was associated with improved record-keeping on vulnerability. The GPs who did not prioritize extra time for vulnerable women were less likely to be motivated to spend more time due to increased remuneration. This thesis highlights that to improve vulnerability assessment, there is a need for amendments in the practice management of ANC and the cross-sectoral collaboration between the GPs, and the partners of the antenatal and social care system. The GPs may consider structural changes facilitating shared attention among GPs and staff on poten-tially vulnerable pregnant women and prioritizing continuity and extra time in caring for vulnerable pregnant women. There is a potential need for continuous medical education on how to assess and address vulnerability in pregnant women and when a social report is needed to optimize their antenatal care. Policymakers should consider establishing a proper two-way communication system between the GPs and the municipal social ser-vices to enable better cross-sectoral communication and feedback regarding concerns of vulnerability not fulfilling the need for a social report. In addition, policymakers may consider ensuring that the municipal social services, provided patient consent, deliver sufficient information to the GPs on social support initiatives for their patients. This is essential information for the GP, indicating a potentially vulnerable woman or family.
AB - Pregnant women, who are vulnerable in terms of psychiatric diseases, mental health problems, or social problems, are prone to increased risk of complications during preg-nancy, birth, and the postpartum period, with an accompanying risk of complications for the child. Antenatal care (ANC) for this group of pregnant women seeks to prevent these complications by offering specialized support within a cross-sectoral framework, which for severely vulnerable pregnant women is situated in the social-obstetric outpatient clinics. General practitioners (GPs) are the first healthcare professionals who consult women in early pregnancy. They have an essential task to assess pregnant women’s risks and resources to plan individualized ANC. Nevertheless, a national report evaluat-ing the social-obstetric outpatient clinics shows that only one-fourth of pregnant women with severe vulnerability are referred from general practice. This indicates that GPs, to a certain extent, do not manage to assess all vulnerable pregnant women.The task of assessing vulnerability in pregnancy can be complex. It involves a thorough history of both somatic diseases, psychiatric diseases, and mental health problems, in-cluding a history of alcohol and drug abuse and social resources. As signs of vulnerabil-ity are not always visible or known in advance, assessment often involves GPs relying on intuition. Afterward, the GPs must decide how to address the vulnerability sensitively to the woman and whether to offer a referral for specialized obstetric support. Addition-ally, the GP must evaluate the need for social reporting if the woman or her partner is vulnerable to the degree that complicates the ability to care for the coming child. The collaboration on vulnerable pregnant women is conducted in an interplay between the GP, obstetricians, midwives, health visitors, psychologists or psychiatrists, and in par-ticular circumstances, the municipal social care systems.This thesis aims to gain knowledge of GPs behavior and perceived challenges when managing ANC for vulnerable pregnant women and collaborating with cross-sectoral partners in the ANC and municipal social care. This first involves three qualitative stud-ies to explore the GPs’ perceived vulnerability indicators in pregnancy, the barriers, and facilitators in assessing and addressing vulnerability, and barriers and facilitators when collaborating and reporting on vulnerable pregnant women. Second, it involves a ques-tionnaire study aiming to explore the proportions of GPs’ perceived barriers in assess-ment and possible associations with GP and practice characteristics, as well as practice organization of ANC, i.e., time allocated to ANC, delegating ANC to staff, and prioritiz-ing continuity in ANC. In 2019, five focus group interviews were conducted with 20 GPs from the Region of Southern Denmark. Analyses were performed with theoretical frames of the bio-psycho-social model and behavior theories according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). A questionnaire was developed inspired by literature studies, experiences of the research group, and the results of the qualitative analyses guided by the TDF domains. Data collection was undertaken in late 2021, and 760 (22%) of all Danish GPs respond-ed.The qualitative studies demonstrated that GPs understand the concept of vulnerability in pregnancy within a psychosocial frame, distinguishing between obvious vulnerability – e.g., known somatic or psychiatric diagnoses or known social problems, and intangible vulnerability – such as traits of lacking resilience and perceived odd contact, or just on retrospective sensations. Barriers to assessing and addressing vulnerability were lacking attention and overview when delegating antenatal care to practice staff, lacking continui-ty of care, time constraints, ethical dilemmas, and low trust in gut feelings due to a lack-ing GP-patient relationship. When a longstanding GP-patient relationship was present, emotions and fear of damaging the GP-patient relationship could limit GPs in addressing vulnerability. Facilitators were attention to the woman’s social life, a strong GP-patient relation, trusting one’s gut feelings of vulnerability, information from colleagues, and structural changes in antenatal care in practice. Barriers in the cross-sectoral collabora-tion were the uncertainty of the ANC levels, poor attention to the benefits of collaborat-ing with partners in ANC and social care, not prioritizing time for collaboration, dissatis-facting experience with municipal collaborators, and lacking two-way communication pathways with the municipal social services on minor concerns of vulnerability. Facilita-tors were interprofessional relationships, i.e. knowing the collaborators’ working con-texts, professional confidence due to a strong GP-patient relation, and positive collabora-tive experiences with the social care system, often from minor-sized municipalities ena-bling face-to-face meetings. Barriers to reporting were lacking routines in reporting on pregnant women, low confidence in judging needs for reporting, ethical dilemmas, fear of damaging the GP-patient relation, perceptions that reporting would do no good, and lack of feedback on the consequences of a report on one’s patient. Facilitators were at-tention to professional obligation, a strong GP-patient relation, and patients’ requests for social support. The questionnaire study demonstrated that the highest proportion of barriers to vulnera-bility assessment was related to lacking shared attention among GPs and staff towards potentially vulnerable women, lacking communicative routines in addressing vulnerabil-ity, insufficient medical record-keeping of indicators of vulnerability, lacking overview of whether assessing all vulnerable women and disagreeing that the remuneration for ANC matches the time used for assessment. GP and practice characteristics: Despite the GPs feeling competent in assessing vulnerability, GP characteristics like young age and male gender were associated with lacking attention and communicative routines. Organizational characteristics: Not prioritizing extra time for vulnerable women was associated with a lack of attention and communicative routines. Most importantly, pri-oritizing continuity of care was associated with reduced barriers to vulnerability assess-ment. Complete delegation of ANC consultations to practice staff was associated with improved record-keeping on vulnerability. The GPs who did not prioritize extra time for vulnerable women were less likely to be motivated to spend more time due to increased remuneration. This thesis highlights that to improve vulnerability assessment, there is a need for amendments in the practice management of ANC and the cross-sectoral collaboration between the GPs, and the partners of the antenatal and social care system. The GPs may consider structural changes facilitating shared attention among GPs and staff on poten-tially vulnerable pregnant women and prioritizing continuity and extra time in caring for vulnerable pregnant women. There is a potential need for continuous medical education on how to assess and address vulnerability in pregnant women and when a social report is needed to optimize their antenatal care. Policymakers should consider establishing a proper two-way communication system between the GPs and the municipal social ser-vices to enable better cross-sectoral communication and feedback regarding concerns of vulnerability not fulfilling the need for a social report. In addition, policymakers may consider ensuring that the municipal social services, provided patient consent, deliver sufficient information to the GPs on social support initiatives for their patients. This is essential information for the GP, indicating a potentially vulnerable woman or family.
U2 - 10.21996/p08y-3x83
DO - 10.21996/p08y-3x83
M3 - Ph.D. thesis
PB - Syddansk Universitet. Det Sundhedsvidenskabelige Fakultet
ER -