We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
We conducted an integrative review of the global-free maternity (FM) policies and evaluated the quality of care (QoC) and cost and cost implications to provide lessons for universal health coverage (UHC).
Methodology:
Using integrative review methods proposed by Whittemore and Knafl (2005), we searched through EBSCO Host, ArticleFirst, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, Emerald Insight, JSTOR, PubMed, Springer Link, Electronic collections online, and Google Scholar databases guided by the preferred reporting item for systematic review and meta-analysis protocol (PRISMA) guideline. Only empirical studies that described FM policies with components of quality and cost were included. There were 43 papers included, and the data were analysed thematically.
Results:
Forty-three studies that met the criteria were all from developing countries and had implemented different approaches of FM policy. Review findings demonstrated that some of the quality issues hindering the policies were poor management of complications, worsened referral systems, overburdening of staff because of increased utilisation, lack of transport, and low supply of stock. There were some quality improvements on monitoring vital signs by nurses and some procedures met the recommended standards. Equally, mothers still bear the burden of some costs such as the purchase of drugs, transport, informal payments despite policies being ‘free’.
Conclusions:
FM policies can reduce the financial burden on the households if well implemented and sustainably funded. Besides, they may also contribute to a decline in inequity between the rich and poor though not independently. In order to achieve the SDG goal of UHC by 2030, there is a need to promote awareness of the policy to the poor and disadvantaged women in rural areas to help narrow the inequality gap on utilisation and provide a sustainable form of transport through collaboration with partners to help reduce impoverishment of households. Also, there is a need to address elements such as cultural barriers and the role of traditional birth attendants which hinder women from seeking skilled care even when they are freely available.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.