OBJECTIVE: To explore women's birth experiences to develop an understanding of their perspectives on patient safety during hospital-based birth. DESIGN: Qualitative description using thematic analysis of interview data. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen women ages 29 to 47 years. METHODS: Women participated in individual or small group interviews about their birth experiences, the physical environment, interactions with clinicians, and what safety meant to them in the context of birth. An interdisciplinary group of five investigators from nursing, medicine, product design, and journalism analyzed transcripts thematically to examine how women experienced feeling safe or unsafe and identify opportunities for improvements in care. RESULTS: Participants experienced feelings of safety on a continuum. These feelings were affected by confidence in providers, the environment and organizational factors, interpersonal interactions, and actions people took during risk moments of rapid or confusing change. Well-organized teams and sensitive interpersonal interactions that demonstrated human connection supported feelings of safety, whereas some routine aspects of care threatened feelings of safety. CONCLUSION: Physical and emotional safety are inextricably embedded in the patient experience, yet this connection may be overlooked in some inpatient birth settings. Clinicians should be mindful of how the birth environment and their behaviors in it can affect a woman's feelings of safety during birth. Human connection is especially important during risk moments, which represent a liminal space at the intersection of physical and emotional safety. At least one team member should focus on the provision of emotional support during rapidly changing situations to mitigate the potential for negative experiences that can result in emotional harm.
OBJECTIVE: To explore women's birth experiences to develop an understanding of their perspectives on patient safety during hospital-based birth. DESIGN: Qualitative description using thematic analysis of interview data. PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen women ages 29 to 47 years. METHODS:Women participated in individual or small group interviews about their birth experiences, the physical environment, interactions with clinicians, and what safety meant to them in the context of birth. An interdisciplinary group of five investigators from nursing, medicine, product design, and journalism analyzed transcripts thematically to examine how women experienced feeling safe or unsafe and identify opportunities for improvements in care. RESULTS:Participants experienced feelings of safety on a continuum. These feelings were affected by confidence in providers, the environment and organizational factors, interpersonal interactions, and actions people took during risk moments of rapid or confusing change. Well-organized teams and sensitive interpersonal interactions that demonstrated human connection supported feelings of safety, whereas some routine aspects of care threatened feelings of safety. CONCLUSION: Physical and emotional safety are inextricably embedded in the patient experience, yet this connection may be overlooked in some inpatient birth settings. Clinicians should be mindful of how the birth environment and their behaviors in it can affect a woman's feelings of safety during birth. Human connection is especially important during risk moments, which represent a liminal space at the intersection of physical and emotional safety. At least one team member should focus on the provision of emotional support during rapidly changing situations to mitigate the potential for negative experiences that can result in emotional harm.
Authors: Jeremy P Daniels; Kate Hunc; D Douglas Cochrane; Roxane Carr; Nicola T Shaw; Annemarie Taylor; Susan Heathcote; Rollin Brant; Joanne Lim; J Mark Ansermino Journal: CMAJ Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Anton J Kuzel; Steven H Woolf; Valerie J Gilchrist; John D Engel; Thomas A LaVeist; Charles Vincent; Richard M Frankel Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2004 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Zackary Berger; Tabor E Flickinger; Elizabeth Pfoh; Kathryn A Martinez; Sydney M Dy Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 7.035
Authors: M H Hollander; E van Hastenberg; J van Dillen; M G van Pampus; E de Miranda; C A I Stramrood Journal: Arch Womens Ment Health Date: 2017-05-29 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Jules P Sherman; Laura C Hedli; Alexandria I Kristensen-Cabrera; Steven S Lipman; Doug Schwandt; Henry C Lee; Lillian Sie; Louis P Halamek; Naola S Austin Journal: Am J Perinatol Date: 2019-04-23 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Molly R Altman; Amelia R Gavin; Meghan K Eagen-Torkko; Ira Kantrowitz-Gordon; Rue M Khosa; Selina A Mohammed Journal: Glob Qual Nurs Res Date: 2021-03-31