4.6 Review

Experiences of breast feeding at work for physicians, residents and medical students: a scoping review

期刊

BMJ OPEN
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039418

关键词

health policy; medical education & training; health services administration & management

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To review and summarise the available literature regarding breastfeeding experiences of medical students, residents and physicians. Eligibility criteria Articles of any design, including non-peer reviewed data that examine the experiences of breast feeding of medical students, residents and staff physicians. Information sources Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science. Risk of bias All peer-reviewed studies underwent risk-of-bias assessment using relevant tools, depending on the study design. Included studies We included 71 citations; 51 surveys, 3 narrative descriptions, 9 editorials or letters to the editor, and 3 reviews. Synthesis of results Included articles were heterogeneous with respect to their study design, target population and outcomes reported. Most articles had a high risk of bias. Only five articles reported the impact of an intervention. Description of effect Despite heterogeneity, the majority of articles described important barriers to breast feeding for physicians, residents and medical students. These barriers were similar across studies, and included inadequate and inaccessible space, time constraints and inflexible scheduling, and lack of colleague support. The consequences of these barriers included low milk supply and early discontinuation of breast feeding. Strengths and limitations of evidence Due to the observed heterogeneity of articles identified in this review, we are unable to assess trends in barriers or duration of breastfeeding over time. Interpretation Interventions to overcome systemic and cultural barriers to breast feeding are needed to meet legal obligations of workplaces for physicians and trainees. These interventions should be formally evaluated using implementation science or quality improvement methods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据