Judith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing & Midwifery, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3086, Australia; The Royal Women's Hospital, Locked Bag 300, Grattan St & Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Judith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing & Midwifery, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3086, Australia.
Women Birth. 2019 Jun;32(3):221-230. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2018.07.019. Epub 2018 Aug 10.
It is critical women's voices are heard if there is to be more widespread implementation of midwifery-led continuity models. Publicly-funded homebirth is one such model, yet there has been limited systematic evaluation from the women's perspective.
Examine women's experiences of and views about the two publicly-funded homebirth programs in Victoria, Australia.
A cross-sectional design was used. All eligible women enrolled in the two pilot homebirth programs in metropolitan Melbourne whose infants were eight weeks of age or more during the evaluation period were invited to participate in a postal survey. A structured questionnaire was used, with some open-ended questions to enable extra comments. We explored women's reasons for choosing homebirth; views of care; experience of labour and birth; views on transfer; and overall experience of the homebirth program. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Simple thematic analysis was used for open-ended questions.
The survey response rate was 71% (96/136). A high percentage of women rated their care as 'Very good': pregnancy 81%; labour and birth 90%; and the early postpartum period 83%. Women reported low levels of anxiety during labour and birth, were able to express their feelings, felt in control, and coped physically and emotionally better than they had expected. They felt well supported by midwives and overall reported very positive experiences of the homebirth programs.
These two publicly-funded homebirth pilot programs demonstrated very positive care ratings by women. These findings, along with the clinical outcomes (reported separately), support the continuation and expansion of the program.
如果要更广泛地实施助产士主导的连续性模式，就必须倾听女性的声音。公共资助的家庭分娩就是这样一种模式，但从女性的角度来看，对其进行的系统评估有限。
调查澳大利亚维多利亚州两种公共资助家庭分娩项目中女性的体验和看法。
采用横断面设计。在评估期间，墨尔本大都市区参与两个试点家庭分娩项目且其婴儿已 8 周或以上的所有符合条件的女性均被邀请参与邮寄调查。使用结构化问卷，其中包含一些开放式问题以允许额外评论。我们探讨了女性选择家庭分娩的原因；对护理的看法；分娩经历；对转移的看法；以及家庭分娩项目的整体体验。使用描述性统计数据对数据进行分析。对开放式问题采用简单的主题分析。
调查的回复率为 71%（96/136）。很多女性对其护理评价为“非常好”：怀孕 81%；分娩 90%；产后早期 83%。女性在分娩期间报告焦虑程度较低，能够表达自己的感受，感到掌控，身体和情绪方面的应对能力比预期的要好。她们感到助产士的支持很好，总体上对家庭分娩项目的体验非常积极。
这两个公共资助的家庭分娩试点项目得到了女性的高度评价。这些发现以及临床结果（另行报告）支持该项目的持续和扩展。
