Literature DB >> 11895821

Qualitative study of evidence based leaflets in maternity care.

Helen Stapleton1, Mavis Kirkham, Gwenan Thomas.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the use of evidence based leaflets on informed choice in maternity services.
DESIGN: Non-participant observation of 886 antenatal consultations. 383 in depth interviews with women using maternity services and health professionals providing antenatal care.
SETTING: Women's homes; antenatal and ultrasound clinics in 13 maternity units in Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Childbearing women and health professionals who provide antenatal care. INTERVENTION: Provision of 10 pairs of Informed Choice leaflets for service users and staff and a training session in their use. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants' views and commonly observed responses during consultations and interviews.
RESULTS: Health professionals were positive about the leaflets and their potential to assist women in making informed choices, but competing demands within the clinical environment undermined their effective use. Time pressures limited discussion, and choice was often not available in practice. A widespread belief that technological intervention would be viewed positively in the event of litigation reinforced notions of "right" and "wrong" choices rather than "informed" choices. Hierarchical power structures resulted in obstetricians defining the norms of clinical practice and hence which choices were possible. Women's trust in health professionals ensured their compliance with professionally defined choices, and only rarely were they observed asking questions or making alternative requests. Midwives rarely discussed the contents of the leaflets or distinguished them from other literature related to pregnancy. The visibility and potential of the leaflets as evidence based decision aids was thus greatly reduced.
CONCLUSIONS: The way in which the leaflets were disseminated affected promotion of informed choice in maternity care. The culture into which the leaflets were introduced supported existing normative patterns of care and this ensured informed compliance rather than informed choice.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11895821      PMCID: PMC84395          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.324.7338.639

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  16 in total

Review 1.  Organisational culture and quality of health care.

Authors:  H T Davies; S M Nutley; R Mannion
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-06

2.  Informed decision making: an annotated bibliography and systematic review.

Authors:  H Bekker; J G Thornton; C M Airey; J B Connelly; J Hewison; M B Robinson; J Lilleyman; M MacIntosh; A J Maule; S Michie; A D Pearman
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.014

3.  The case for combining qualitative and quantitative approaches in health services research.

Authors:  R S Barbour
Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy       Date:  1999-01

4.  Why women say yes to prenatal diagnosis.

Authors:  N Press; C H Browner
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  Towards a feasible model for shared decision making: focus group study with general practice registrars.

Authors:  G Elwyn; A Edwards; R Gwyn; R Grol
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-18

6.  The medical visit context of treatment decision-making and the therapeutic relationship.

Authors:  Debra Roter
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Implementing shared decision-making in routine practice: barriers and opportunities.

Authors:  Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Diane Valade; Catherine Orlowski; Catherine Draus; Barbara Nabozny-Valerio; Susan Keiser
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Framing of information: its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients.

Authors:  T M Marteau
Journal:  Br J Soc Psychol       Date:  1989-03

9.  Evidence-informed patient choice. Practical issues of involving patients in decisions about health care technologies.

Authors:  V A Entwistle; T A Sheldon; A Sowden; I S Watt
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 2.188

10.  What determines quality in maternity care? Comparing the perceptions of childbearing women and midwives.

Authors:  S Proctor
Journal:  Birth       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 3.689

View more
  44 in total

1.  Evidence based leaflets in maternity care. Compliance, coercion, and power have huge effect in maternity services.

Authors:  Barbara Vernon; Sally Tracy; Tracy Reibel
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-07-06

Review 2.  The importance of patient preferences in treatment decisions--challenges for doctors.

Authors:  Rebecca E Say; Richard Thomson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-06

3.  Parental information use in the context of newborn bloodspot screening. An exploratory mixed methods study.

Authors:  Stuart G Nicholls; K W Southern
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2012-02-16

4.  Information giving and education in pregnancy: a review of qualitative studies.

Authors:  Mary L Nolan
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2009

Review 5.  Withholding policies from patients restricts their autonomy.

Authors:  Charlotte Williamson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-11-05

6.  Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory.

Authors:  Elizabeth H Bradley; Leslie A Curry; Kelly J Devers
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 7.  A systematic review of decision support needs of parents making child health decisions.

Authors:  Cath Jackson; Francine M Cheater; Innes Reid
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Conducting implementation research in community-based primary care: a qualitative study on integrating patient decision support interventions for cancer screening into routine practice.

Authors:  Dominick L Frosch; Kirsty J Singer; Stefan Timmermans
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Evaluating decision aids--where next?

Authors:  Alicia O'Cathain; Kate J Thomas
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Implementing breast cancer decision aids in community sites: barriers and resources.

Authors:  Kerry A Silvia; Elissa M Ozanne; Karen R Sepucha
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.