Aim
To examine factors that influence intrapartum health outcomes among Black childbearing persons, including cisgender women, transmasculine and gender‐diverse birthing persons.
Background
Black ...childbearing persons are three to four times (243%) more likely to die while giving birth than any other racial/ethnic group. Black birthing persons are not just dying from complications but also from inequitable care from healthcare providers compared to their white counterparts.
Design
Discursive paper.
Method
Searching national literature published between 2010 and 2021 in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase and SCOPUS, we explored factors associated with poor intrapartum health outcomes among Black childbearing persons.
Discussion
Several studies have ruled out social determinants of health as sufficient causative factors for poor intrapartum health outcomes among Black birthing persons. Recent research has shown that discrimination by race heavily influences whether a birthing person dies while childbearing.
Conclusions
There is a historical context for obstetric medicine that includes harmful stereotypes, implicit bias and racism, all having a negative impact on intrapartum health outcomes. The existing health disparity among this population is endemic and requires close attention.
Impact on Nursing Practice
Nurses and other healthcare professionals must understand their role in establishing unbiased care that promotes respect for diversity, equity and inclusion.
No Patient or Public Contribution
There was no patient or public involvement in the design or drafting of this discursive paper.
To improve the knowledge of the patient service coordinators (PSCs) to increase compliance related to cervical cancer screening.
Descriptive.
All patient service coordinators who conduct registration ...and screening when patients are admitted to the academic medical center.
Effectiveness of the education was measured by three assessments: a pre‐ and postknowledge survey of the patient service coordinator was used to measure knowledge about cervical cancer, the screening process, and the State of Maryland cervical cancer screening mandate; a calculation of screening rates was used to compare the number of women screened to the number of women admitted; and an assessment of the completeness of each screening form.
Educational intervention that included cervical cancer screening, risk factors for cervical cancer, Maryland cervical cancer screening mandate, cervical cancer symptoms, and case studies of women screened within the program.
A two‐tailed paired samples t test indicated that the PSCs scored higher on the postsurvey (m‐7.68, s‐2.52) than the presurvey (m‐3.68, s‐1.77), t (32) = 8.949, p ≤ .0.5. A chi‐squared test was used to compare categorical variables. During the 4 weeks before the educational intervention, 34% (543 of 1602) of eligible women were screened; 51% (279/543) of screening forms were completed. For the 4 weeks after the educational intervention, 54% (n = 735 of 1,373) of eligible women were screened; 89% (656/735) of screening forms were completed. Both tests were found to be significant p < .000. There was a significant improvement of the PSC's knowledge, a 20% increase in the number of women screened, and completeness of the form increased by 38%.
These findings suggest that an educational intervention for registration staff can increase cervical cancer screening compliance and positively improve the ability of staff to screen inpatient women.
