Abstract
What lessons have we learned from our early efforts at developing consultation and liaison services for childbirth care providers and the populations they serve? A text such as this does not easily lend itself to summarization. Its complexity together with the larger number of, as yet, unanswered questions makes the drawing of conclusions rather presumptuous.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ziporyn T: Medical news: “Rip van Winkle period ends for puerperal problems.” JAMA 251: 2061–2067, 1984.
Institute of Medicine, National Research Council: A Report of a Study by the Committee on Assessing Alternative Birth Settings: Research Issues in the Assessment of Birth Settings. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 1982, p 55.
Wortman CB, Kelty MC: Research on childbirth settings: The assessment of psychological variables, in Institute of Medicine & National Research Council (eds): Research Issues in the Assessment of Birth Settings. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 1982, p 102.
Chess S, Thomas A: Infant bonding: Mystique and reality. Am J Orthopsychiatry 52: 213–222, 1982.
Burchell RC: Predelivery removal of pubic hair. Obstet Gynecol 24: 272–273, 1964.
Kantor HI, Rember R, Tabio P: Value of shaving the pudendal-perineal area in delivery preparation. Obstet Gynecol 25: 509–512, 1965.
Parmelee AH, Haber A: Who is the “risk infant”? Clin Obstet Gynecol 16: 376–387, 1973.
Buck C, Gregg R, Stavraky, et al: The effect of single prenatal and natal complications upon the development of children of mature birthweight. Pediatr 43: 942, 1969.
Goodlin RC, Haesslein HC: When is it fetal distress? Am J Obstet Gynecol 128: 440–447, 1977.
Klaus MH, Kennell JH: Maternal-Infant Bonding. St. Louis, C.V. Mosby, 1976.
White L: Technology assessment from the stance of a medieval historian. American Historical Review 79: 1–13, 1974.
Tittnich EM, Brown N: Positive and negative uses of technology in human interactions. J Children in Contemporary Society 14: 15–21, 1981.
Pincus H: Making the case for consultation-liaison psychiatry: Issues in cost-effectiveness analysis. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 6: 173–179, 1984.
Mumford E, Schlesinger HJ, Glass GV, et al: A new look at evidence about reduced cost of medical utilization following mental health treatment. Am J Psychiatry 141: 1145–1158, 1984.
Lyons JS, Hammer JS, Wise TN, et al: Consultation-liaison psychiatry and cost-effectiveness research. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 7: 302–308, 1985.
Mitchell W, Thompson T: Some methodological issues in consultation-liaison psychiatry research. General Hospital Psychiatry 7: 66–72, 1985.
Lyons JS, Hammer JS, Strain JJ, et al: The timing of psychiatric consultation in the general hospital and length of hospital stay. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 8: 159–162, 1986.
Brent DA, Needleman HL: A data-based method for the evaluation of pediatric consultation-liaison activities. Presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, San Francisco, CA, October, 1983.
Trent PJ, Houpt JL, Eaton JS (eds) : Consultation Liaison Psychiatry: Evaluating its Effectiveness. HIMH, Rockville, MD, 1982.
Corea G: Childbirth 2000. Omni Magazine 1:48–50, 104–107, 1979.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1988 Plenum Publishing Corporation
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cohen, R.L. (1988). Conclusions and Future Directions. In: Psychiatric Consultation in Childbirth Settings. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5439-0_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5439-0_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-5441-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-5439-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive