Faculty of Health, Centre for Midwifery and Child and Family Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia.
School of Women's and Children's Health, UNSW Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2021 Mar;66(2):161-173. doi: 10.1111/jmwh.13168. Epub 2020 Dec 27.
The global rise in the rate of induction of labor and cesarean birth shows considerable unexplained variation both within and between countries. Prior research suggests that the extent to which women are engaged in the decision-making process about birth options, such as elective cesarean, induction of labor, or use of fetal monitoring, is heavily influenced by clinician beliefs and preferences. The aim of this study was to investigate the beliefs about labor interventions and birth options held by midwives and obstetric medical staff from 8 Sydney hospitals and assess how the health care providers' beliefs were associated with discipline or years of experience.
This is a survey study of midwives and obstetric staff that was distributed between November 2018 and July 2019. Modified from the previously validated birth attitudes survey for the Australian context, survey domains include (1) maternal choice and woman's role in birth, (2) safety by mode or place of birth, (3) attitudes toward cesarean birth for preventing urinary incontinence, (4) approaches to decrease cesarean birth rates, and (5) fears of birth mode. Responses were compared between professions and within professions by years of experience using Mann-Whitney U testing.
A total of 217 midwives and 58 medical staff completed the survey (response rate, 30.5%). Midwifery staff responses generally favored a physiologic approach to birth, versus beliefs more in favor of intervention (particularly cesarean birth) among medical staff. There was interprofessional discrepancy on most items, particularly regarding safety of mode or place of birth and approaches to decrease cesarean birth rates. Within disciplines, there was more variation in medical staff attitudes than within the midwifery staff. No clinically important differences in beliefs by years of experience were noted.
Clinicians need to be aware of their own beliefs and preferences about birth as a potential source of bias when counselling women, particularly when there are a range of treatment options and the evidence may not strongly favor one option over another. As both groups had similar perceptions about the importance of women's autonomy, shared decision-making training could help bridge belief gaps and improve care around birth decisions.
全球范围内,引产和剖宫产率的上升在国家内部和国家之间都存在着大量无法解释的差异。先前的研究表明,女性在选择分娩方式(如选择性剖宫产、引产或使用胎儿监测)的决策过程中所参与的程度,受到临床医生的信念和偏好的极大影响。本研究旨在调查 8 家悉尼医院的助产士和产科医务人员对分娩干预和分娩选择的信念,并评估医疗保健提供者的信念如何与专业或工作年限相关。
这是一项针对助产士和产科工作人员的调查研究,于 2018 年 11 月至 2019 年 7 月期间进行。该研究在澳大利亚先前经过验证的分娩态度调查的基础上进行了修改,调查领域包括(1)产妇的选择和产妇在分娩中的角色,(2)不同分娩方式或分娩地点的安全性,(3)剖宫产预防尿失禁的态度,(4)降低剖宫产率的方法,以及(5)对分娩方式的恐惧。采用 Mann-Whitney U 检验比较不同专业和同一专业内不同工作年限的人员的回答。
共有 217 名助产士和 58 名医务人员完成了调查(回应率为 30.5%)。助产士人员的回答普遍倾向于生理分娩方法,而医务人员的回答则更倾向于干预(特别是剖宫产)。大多数项目都存在跨专业差异,特别是在分娩方式或地点的安全性以及降低剖宫产率的方法方面。在同一专业内,医务人员的态度比助产士人员的态度变化更大。没有发现工作年限与信念之间存在明显的临床差异。
临床医生在为女性提供咨询时,需要意识到自己对分娩的信念和偏好可能是潜在的偏见来源,特别是当存在多种治疗选择且证据不能强烈支持一种选择优于另一种选择时。由于两组人员对女性自主权的重要性都有类似的认识,因此共享决策培训可以帮助缩小信念差距,并改善围绕分娩决策的护理。