Literature DB >> 28279637

A qualitative exploration of how midwives' and obstetricians' perception of risk affects care practices for low-risk women and normal birth.

Sandra Healy1, Eileen Humphreys2, Catriona Kennedy3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Maternity care is facing increasing intervention and iatrogenic morbidity rates. This can be attributed, in part, to higher-risk maternity populations, but also to a risk culture in which birth is increasingly seen as abnormal. Technology and intervention are used to prevent perceived implication in adverse outcomes and litigation. QUESTION: Does midwives' and obstetricians' perception of risk affect care practices for normal birth and low-risk women in labour, taking into account different settings?
METHODS: The research methods are developed within a qualitative framework. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and analysed thematically. A purposive sample of 25 midwives and obstetricians were recruited from three maternity settings in Ireland. This included obstetric-led hospitals, an alongside midwifery-led unit and the community.
FINDINGS: Midwifery is assuming a peripheral position with regard to normal birth as a progressive culture of risk and medicalisation affects the provision of maternity care. This is revealed in four themes; (1) professional autonomy and hierarchy in maternity care; (2) midwifery-led care as an undervalued and unsupported aspiration; (3) a shift in focus from striving for normality to risk management; and (4) viewing pregnancy through a 'risk-lens'. DISCUSSION: Factors connected to the increased medicalisation of birth contribute to the lack of midwifery responsibility for low-risk women and normal birth. Midwives are resigned to the current situation and as a profession are reluctant to take action.
CONCLUSION: Improved models of care, distinct from medical jurisdiction, are required. Midwives must take responsibility for leading change as their professional identity is in jeopardy.
Copyright © 2017 Australian College of Midwives. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Childbirth; Medicalisation; Midwives; Obstetricians; Risk

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28279637     DOI: 10.1016/j.wombi.2017.02.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Women Birth        ISSN: 1871-5192            Impact factor:   3.172


  4 in total

1.  Addressing a need. Holistic midwifery in the Netherlands: A qualitative analysis.

Authors:  Martine Hollander; Esteriek de Miranda; Frank Vandenbussche; Jeroen van Dillen; Lianne Holten
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Pregnancy related risk perception in pregnant women, midwives & doctors: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Suzanne Lee; Des Holden; Rebecca Webb; Susan Ayers
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 3.007

3.  Birthing outside the system: the motivation behind the choice to freebirth or have a homebirth with risk factors in Australia.

Authors:  Melanie K Jackson; Virginia Schmied; Hannah G Dahlen
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 3.007

4.  'The System is Not Set up for the Benefit of Women': Women's Experiences of Decision-Making During Pregnancy and Birth in Ireland.

Authors:  Susann Huschke
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2021-12-01
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.