School of Psychology, The University of Adelaide, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
Women Birth. 2013 Sep;26(3):207-12. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2013.03.001. Epub 2013 Apr 3.
Induction of labour often begins with the application of a priming agent to soften the cervix, generally requiring women to stay in hospital overnight (inpatient priming). An alternative is outpatient priming by a midwife, where women are allowed to go home following priming. This approach has the potential to impact, either positively or negatively, on the midwives involved.
To what extent did the introduction of outpatient priming influence midwives' work demands, work autonomy, stress and job satisfaction.
A before-after study (with two separate cross-sectional samples) was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial of outpatient versus inpatient priming, conducted at two metropolitan teaching hospitals in Australia. Midwives completed a questionnaire before the introduction of outpatient priming and again approximately two years later.
208 midwives participated (response rates-time 1:81% (87/108); time 2:78% (121/156)). A mixed model analysis test of pre-post intervention differences found no changes in work demand, work autonomy and satisfaction. At time 2, over 80% of midwives reported that the introduction of the practice had reduced or made no difference to their work stress and workload, and 93% reported that outpatient priming had increased or had no impact on their job satisfaction. Furthermore, 97% of respondents were of the opinion that the option of outpatient priming should continue to be offered.
Results suggest that outpatient priming for induction of labour is viable from a midwifery practice perspective, although more research is needed.
引产通常从应用软化宫颈的启动剂开始,通常需要女性住院过夜(住院启动)。另一种选择是由助产士进行门诊启动,在这种情况下,启动后允许女性回家。这种方法有可能对参与的助产士产生积极或消极的影响。
门诊启动的引入在多大程度上影响了助产士的工作需求、工作自主性、压力和工作满意度。
在澳大利亚的两家大都市教学医院进行门诊与住院启动的随机对照试验的同时,进行了一项前后研究(有两个单独的横断面样本)。助产士在门诊启动前和大约两年后完成了一份问卷。
共有 208 名助产士参与(回应率-时间 1:81%(87/108);时间 2:78%(121/156))。混合模型分析测试干预前后的差异发现,工作需求、工作自主性和满意度没有变化。在时间 2,超过 80%的助产士报告说,该实践的引入减少或没有增加他们的工作压力和工作量,93%的助产士报告说门诊启动增加或没有影响他们的工作满意度。此外,97%的受访者认为应该继续提供门诊启动的选择。
结果表明,从助产实践的角度来看,门诊启动用于引产是可行的,但需要进一步研究。