Jennifer Eustace1, Kathleen Baird2, Amornrat S Saito1, Debra K Creedy3. 1. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, University Drive, Meadowbrook, Queensland 4131, Australia. 2. Menzies Health Institute Qld, Griffith University, Queensland 4131, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, University Drive, Meadowbrook, Queensland 4131, Australia. Electronic address: k.baird@griffith.edu.au. 3. Menzies Health Institute Qld, Griffith University, Queensland 4131, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, University Drive, Meadowbrook, Queensland 4131, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reducing violence against women is a national public health priority in Australia. Routine antenatal intimate partner violence screening by a skilled midwife is essential for assessment, support and appropriate referral, but can be challenging to implement. AIM: To explore midwives' experiences of routine enquiry, perceptions of facilitators and barriers, and suggested strategies to improve practice. METHOD: A qualitative descriptive design was used. Participants were recruited from an e-mail bulletin by the Australian College of Midwives. In-depth telephone interviews were conducted with 21 midwives. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. FINDINGS: Three themes were identified: The first theme; Asking the Question incorporated the belief that whilst asking women about intimate partner violence were within the role of the midwife, participants felt unsupported and unprepared. The second theme; The big fear factor represented concerns around positive disclosures of intimate partner violence, including a sense of responsibility, worries about encouraging women to disclose without clear processes and resources to support them. The third theme; Building a relationship incorporated the importance of continuity of care, trust and rapport-building. Continuity of care was identified as a positive enabler for routine enquiry. A perceived lack of support, time pressures, and presence of a partner at appointments were all considered barriers to routine enquiry. CONCLUSION: Routine enquiry about IPV is a valuable and important midwifery role. Midwives described frustration and fear when women disclosed violence. The perceived level of support from health services varied according to practice contexts and needs to be improved.
BACKGROUND: Reducing violence against women is a national public health priority in Australia. Routine antenatal intimate partner violence screening by a skilled midwife is essential for assessment, support and appropriate referral, but can be challenging to implement. AIM: To explore midwives' experiences of routine enquiry, perceptions of facilitators and barriers, and suggested strategies to improve practice. METHOD: A qualitative descriptive design was used. Participants were recruited from an e-mail bulletin by the Australian College of Midwives. In-depth telephone interviews were conducted with 21 midwives. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. FINDINGS: Three themes were identified: The first theme; Asking the Question incorporated the belief that whilst asking women about intimate partner violence were within the role of the midwife, participants felt unsupported and unprepared. The second theme; The big fear factor represented concerns around positive disclosures of intimate partner violence, including a sense of responsibility, worries about encouraging women to disclose without clear processes and resources to support them. The third theme; Building a relationship incorporated the importance of continuity of care, trust and rapport-building. Continuity of care was identified as a positive enabler for routine enquiry. A perceived lack of support, time pressures, and presence of a partner at appointments were all considered barriers to routine enquiry. CONCLUSION: Routine enquiry about IPV is a valuable and important midwifery role. Midwives described frustration and fear when women disclosed violence. The perceived level of support from health services varied according to practice contexts and needs to be improved.
Authors: Mary McCauley; Jennifer Head; Jaki Lambert; Shamsa Zafar; Nynke van den Broek Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2017-09-22 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Lisa Garnweidner-Holme; Lena Henriksen; Eva Marie Flaathen; Tone Klette Bøhler; Mirjam Lukasse Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2020-05-20 Impact factor: 4.773
Authors: Eva Marie Engebakken Flaathen; Mirjam Lukasse; Lisa Garnweidner-Holme; Jeanette Angelshaug; Lena Henriksen Journal: Violence Against Women Date: 2020-09-28
Authors: Laura Andreu-Pejó; Ma Jesús Valero-Chillerón; Víctor Manuel González-Chordá; Desirée Mena Tudela; Agueda Cervera Gasch Journal: Nurs Health Sci Date: 2022-07-08 Impact factor: 2.214