| Literature DB >> 32375667 |
Joana L Gonçalves1, Marina Fuertes2, Maria João Alves2, Sandra Antunes3, Ana Rita Almeida4, Rute Casimiro4, Margarida Santos3,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mothers' reports about pregnancy, maternity and their experiences during the perinatal period have been associated with infants' later quality of attachment and development. Yet, there has been little research with mothers of very preterm newborns. This study aimed to explore mothers' experiences related to pregnancy, premature birth, relationship with the newborn, and future perspectives, and to compare them in the context of distinct infants' at-birth-risk conditions.Entities:
Keywords: Birth; Maternal representations; Postpartum; Pregnancy; Prematurity
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32375667 PMCID: PMC7204281 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-020-02934-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ISSN: 1471-2393 Impact factor: 3.007
Infant and family demographics according to sample in each study group
| Infant and family variables | Sample | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apgar at first minute | FT | 50 | 8.59 | 1.59 | 4–10 |
| PT | 50 | 7.88 | 1.78 | 2–9 | |
| VPT | 50 | 6.55 | 2.38 | 1–9 | |
| Apgar at fifth minute | FT | 50 | 9.83 | .44 | 8–10 |
| PT | 50 | 9.25 | .87 | 7–10 | |
| VPT | 50 | 8.45 | 1.37 | 2–10 | |
| Gestational age (weeks) | FT | 50 | 39.11 | 1.09 | 37–41 |
| PT | 50 | 34.25 | 1.60 | 32–36 | |
| VPT | 50 | 28.25 | 2.47 | 24.5–31.6 | |
| Birthweight (g) | FT | 50 | 3238.66 | 398.56 | 2345–4190 |
| PT | 50 | 2141.25 | 405,837 | 1435–2890 | |
| VPT | 50 | 1165.96 | 453.45 | 500–2020 | |
| Parity | FT | 50 | 1.33 | .57 | 0–4 |
| PT | 50 | .80 | .96 | 0–2 | |
| VPT | 50 | 1.36 | .92 | 0–4 | |
| Maternal age | FT | 50 | 30.32 | 5.12 | 20–43 |
| PT | 50 | 27.94 | 5.80 | 18–42 | |
| VPT | 50 | 33.44 | 3.88 | 21–46 | |
| Maternal years of formal education | FT | 50 | 11.24 | 2.25 | 6–19 |
| PT | 50 | 10.01 | 3.23 | 4–19 | |
| VPT | 50 | 12.75 | 3.58 | 3–19 |
Note. FT Full-Term newborns, PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns. Maternal years of education = Number of years of education that mothers completed successfully
Frequency and percentage of maternal responses regarding pregnancy planning in each study group
| Study Group | Planned Pregnancy | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | Mixed/Ambivalent | |
| FT | 32 (64%) | 18 (36%) | 0 (0%) |
| PT | 10 (20%) | 40 (80%) | 0 (0%) |
| VPT | 18 (36%) | 31 (62%) | 1 (2%) |
| Total | 60 (40%) | 89 (59%) | 1 (1%) |
Note. FT Full-Term newborns, PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns
Frequency and percentage of maternal responses regarding pregnancy acceptance in each study group
| Study Group | Pregnancy Accepted | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | Mixed/Ambivalent | |
| FT | 4 (8%) | 46 (92%) | 0 (0%) |
| PT | 2 (4%) | 48 (96%) | 0 (0%) |
| VPT | 1 (2%) | 47 (94%) | 2 (4%) |
| Total | 7 (5%) | 141 (94%) | 2 (1%) |
Note. FT Full-Term newborns, PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns
Frequency and percentage of maternal responses regarding support received during pregnancy in each study group
| Study Group | Support received during pregnancy | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | In part | |
| FT | 0 (0%) | 48 (96%) | 2 (4%) |
| PT | 1 (2%) | 46 (92%) | 3 (6%) |
| VPT | 7 (14%) | 30 (60%) | 13 (26%) |
| Total | 8 (5%) | 124 (83%) | 18 (12%) |
Note. FT Full-Term newborns, PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns
Frequency and percentage of maternal responses regarding early birth and prematurity in each study group
| Study Group | Feelings of fear regarding the early birth and prematurity | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes, felt afraid | Yes, felt so afraid that felt shock/panic | |
| PT | 15 (30%) | 35 (70%) | 0 (0%) |
| VPT | 7 (14%) | 19 (38%) | 24 (48%) |
| Total | 22 (22%) | 54 (54%) | 24 (24%) |
Note. PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns
Frequency and percentage of maternal responses regarding maternal experience towards the evolving relationship with the newborn (subtheme of feeling love for the baby for the first time) in each study group
| Study Group | Feelings of love for the baby for the first time | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Does not identify | Pregnancy Confirmed | Belly Growth | When first felt the fetus movements | On the ultrasound | At birth | In the incubator | |
| FT | 1 (2%) | 27 (54%) | 4 (8%) | 7 (14%) | 4 (8%) | 7 (14%) | – |
| PT | 1 (2%) | 41 (82%) | 2 (4%) | 1 (2%) | 1 (2%) | 4 (8%) | 0 (0%) |
| VPT | 3 (6%) | 22 (44%) | 7 (14%) | 3 (6%) | 2 (4%) | 11 (22%) | 2 (4%) |
| Total | 5 (3%) | 90 (60%) | 13 (9%) | 11 (7%) | 7 (5%) | 22 (15%) | 2 (1%) |
Note. FT Full-Term newborns, PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns
Frequency and percentage of maternal responses regarding first separation from the baby in each study group
| Study Group | Feelings in the first separation from the baby | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Do not know | Fear/ | Felt sorry but accepted | Did not happen | |
| FT | 0 (0%) | 2 (4%) | 0 (0%) | 48 (96%) |
| PT | 3 (6%) | 28 (56%) | 16 (32%) | 3 (6%) |
| VPT | 3 (6%) | 17 (34%) | 30 (60%) | 0 (0%) |
| Total | 6 (4%) | 47 (31%) | 46 (31%) | 51 (34%) |
Note. FT Full-Term newborns, PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns
Frequency and percentage of maternal descriptions of newborn’s temperament in each study group
| Study Group | Characterization of newborn | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Do not know | Calm | Agitated/ | Mixed | |
| FT | 0 (0%) | 33 (66%) | 10 (20%) | 7 (14%) |
| PT | 10 (20%) | 30 (60%) | 5 (10%) | 5 (10%) |
| VPT | 16 (32%) | 13 (26%) | 20 (40%) | 1 (2%) |
| Total | 26 (17%) | 76 (51%) | 35 (23%) | 13 (9%) |
Note. FT Full-Term newborns, PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns
Frequency and percentage of maternal responses regarding the future perspectives (ability to take care of and to rear their baby) in each study group
| Study Group | Taking care of the baby in the future | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Do not know | Good and it will go well | Difficult but will learn | Afraid of not knowing | Do not want to think about it now | |
| FT | 7 (14%) | 30 (60%) | 1 (2%) | 12 (24%) | 0 (0%) |
| PT | 3 (6%) | 38 (76%) | 5 (10%) | 4 (8%) | 0 (0%) |
| VPT | 6 (12%) | 28 (56%) | 11 (22%) | 1 (2%) | 4 (8%) |
| Total | 16 (11%) | 96 (64%) | 17 (11%) | 17 (11%) | 4 (3%) |
Note. FT Full-Term newborns, PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns
Frequency and percentage of maternal responses regarding the subtheme of expecting difficulties in the future in each study group
| Study Group | Difficulties in the future | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Do not know | None | Some but will ask for help | Anticipates many difficulties | Do not want to think aboutit now | |
| FT | 0 (0%) | 15 (30%) | 30 (60%) | 5 (10%) | 0 (0%) |
| PT | 8 (16%) | 23 (46%) | 8 (16%) | 11 (22%) | 0 (0%) |
| VPT | 18 (36%) | 10 (20%) | 10 (20%) | 1 (2%) | 11 (22%) |
| Total | 26 (18%) | 48 (32%) | 48 (32%) | 17 (11%) | 11 (7%) |
Note. FT Full-Term newborns, PT Preterm newborns, VPT Very Preterm newborns
COREQ Checklist: Methods and reporting according to COREQ statement
| No Item | Description |
|---|---|
| 1. Interviewer | JLG, MF, and MJA conducted the interviews. |
| 2. Credentials | Three psychologists conducted the interviews: JLG, MSc in Psychology MF, PhD in Psychology MJA, MSc in Psychology |
| 3. Occupation | JLG was a PhD student at the University of Porto. MF was an Associate Professor at School of Education, Lisbon Polytechnic Institute and a Researcher at the Centre for Psychology, University of Porto. MJA was a researcher at School of Education, Lisbon Polytechnic Institute. JLG was awarded with the cited doctoral grant from the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (SFRH/BD/90853/2012). MF was the PI of the project funded by the cited grant from the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology/FEDER (PTDC/MHC-PED/1424/2014). MJA received salary support from the cited grant from the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology/FEDER (PTDC/MHC-PED/1424/2014). |
| 4. Gender | All interviewers were female. |
| 5. Experience and training | All interviewers had prior interviewing experience. Qualitative research training in interview conduction and analysis was provided to JLG, MF and MJA within the scope of their academic training in Psychology. |
| 6. Relationship established | A prior relationship between the interviewer and participants did not exist (with the exception of the brief initial contact at the time of recruitment, when mothers were invited to participate in the study). |
| 7. Participant knowledge of the interviewer | Prior to any data collection, we provided all potential participants with an overview of the study prior to signing of the informed consent. The interviewer provided a brief introduction prior to beginning an interview. |
| 8. Interviewer characteristics | No specific bias or assumptions to declare for any of the interviewers. All interviewers have been working on the field of clinical, neonatal and developmental psychology, with relevant published work concerning mother-infant relationship in the context of distinct infants’ at-birth-risk conditions, with a particular focus on the preterm birth within the scope of their research interests. |
| 9. Methodological orientation and Theory | The maternal interview followed the procedures of a previously established protocol [ Following the guidelines used in the previous study, we used content analysis, combining both grounded-theory and a hypothetical-deductive method which resulted in 5 themes and 7 subthemes. Using grounded theory to inductively derive additional themes that characterized the transcripts allowed to further describe our findings. |
| 10. Sampling | Purposive sampling. |
| 11. Method of approach | Participants were identified by two female research assistants who contacted personally, face-to-face, eligible mothers after delivery and explained the study’s purpose and procedures. |
| 12. Sample size | Although the total sample size in the study is large, there are three sub-groups, allowing in-depth analysis of all viewpoints. The three groups of mothers were recruited, with the aim of exploring their maternal pre- and perinatal experiences in depth, in the context of distinct infants’ at-birth-risk conditions. Content analysis does not preclude the use of large numbers and, as with all qualitative research, does not claim generalisations [ According to Bengtsson [ In our study, we expected a large diversity of responses and speeches (considering the large diversity of mothers’ backgrounds and health conditions associated with prematurity) resulting in several indicators in each Therefore, we decided to enlarge the sample to 50 participants to have enough representative and clarifying information for each subtheme and indicator in each group. |
| 13. Non-participation | No mother withdrew from participating in our study after signing the informed consent. |
| 14. Setting of data collection | At each of the three participating hospitals, we asked for a quiet silent room or office available in the maternity or nearby where the interview was conducted. |
| 15. Presence of non-participants | Our protocol did not allow non-participants. Any non-participants were immediately asked to leave if they entered the room where an interview took place. |
| 16. Description of sample | Our protocol allowed for collection of demographics, family, socio-economic characteristics, as well as medical and clinical information of the infant, mother and their families. |
| 17. Interview guide | This was pilot tested in a previous study [ |
| 18. Repeat interviews | No, our protocol was defined so that the interview should be conducted only one time, at the first 72 h postpartum, although flexibility was given for mothers to choose the best and most appropriate time within this temporal window. It was not our aim to conduct the same interview with the same participant more than one time. |
| 19. Audio/visual recording | Digital audio recordings were made and transcribed verbatim. |
| 20. Field notes | Field notes were not taken since the digital recordings were rapidly reviewed upon the return of the study team to the research center at the University. |
| 21. Duration | The individual one-on-one and face-to-face interviews lasted approximately 1 h. |
| 22. Data saturation | Lincoln and Guba’s [ |
| 23. Transcripts returned | We did not return transcripts to participants for comment and/or correction. However, (1) participants were provided with information related to dissemination of the research findings and given time to ask questions related to the basis for the research and (2) a group of 10 parents (both mothers and fathers) in the preterm group were invited to take part in a videotaped focus group to discuss and reflect about the study findings. Regarding ethical considerations, the transcripts had personal identifiers that were removed to protect the participants in the event of a security breach. After reviewing the transcripts for errors and inserting field notes, the researcher deleted all audio recordings. |
| 24. Number of data coders | All the seven authors participated in the coding process. |
| 25. Description of the coding tree | The coding tree used for initial assignment into the 5 major themes, that had already been used in a previous study [ |
| 26. Derivation of themes | Major themes were derived in advance; minor or subthemes were derived from the data inductively. |
| 27. Software | No software was used. |
| 28. Participant checking | To learn more about the participants’ perspectives, we invited a group of 10 parents (both mothers and fathers) in the preterm group to take part in a videotaped focus group to discuss and reflect about the study findings. The parents confirmed that the identified themes and subthemes reflected their experience, demonstrating an identification with the study results and stressing the need for more effective support responses in the hospital maternity and after discharge. |
| 29. Quotations presented | See results section (participants quotations were presented to illustrate the findings and each quotation is identified through the participant number). |
| 30. Data and findings consistent | Questions 30–32 of COREQ address the evaluation of the findings of a qualitative study and are intended for readers of qualitative research. They are included here for completeness. We have attempted to present our findings in this work clearly in a manner that was consistent with the data collected. |
| 31. Clarity of major themes | Major themes were clearly presented and discussed in the results and discussion sections. |
| 32. Clarity of minor themes | Minor themes were clearly presented and discussed in the results and discussion sections. |
Frequency and percentage of maternal descriptions of newborn’s temperament according to type of labor
| Characterization of newborn | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Do not know | Calm | Agitated/Weeping | Mixed | ||
| Birth | Vaginal | 13 (22,8%) | 28 (49,1%) | 11 (19,3%) | 5 (8,8%) |
| Caesarean | 23 (20,5%) | 47 (42,0%) | 35 (31,3%) | 7 (6,3%) | |
| Total | 36 (21,3%) | 75 (44,4%) | 46 (27,2%) | 12 (7,1%) | |
Frequency and percentage of maternal responses regarding the subtheme of difficulties in the future according to type of labor
| Difficulties in the future | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Do not know | None | Some but will ask for help | Anticipates many difficulties | Do not want to think about it now | ||
| Birth | Vaginal | 5 (8,6%) | 16 (27,6%) | 25 (43,1%) | 5 (8,6%) | 7 (12,1%) |
| Caesarean | 23 (20,2%) | 38 (33,3%) | 32 (28,1%) | 12 (10,5%) | 9 (7,9%) | |
| Total | 28 (16,3%) | 54 (31,4%) | 57 (33,1%) | 17 (9,9%) | 16 (9,3%) | |