Smith-Oka Vania
University of Notre Dame, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2022 Mar;296:114734. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114734. Epub 2022 Jan 21.
This article deepens the current understanding of the sources of obstetric violence and iatrogenesis through an analysis of cesareans. The data are drawn from ethnographic research in 2018 at a public maternity hospital in Mexico. Data collection methods included observation, semi-structured interviews, and free lists with 12 senior obstetrics residents. Analysis of the data revealed that: (1) doctors used perceptions of high risk to justify their use of cesareans even when not clearly medically indicated; (2) doctors responded to scarcities of time and resources in the system by viewing cesareans as a less than ideal but acceptable solution; and (3) doctors practiced medicine defensively as a way to control their fear of risk and to pre-empt legal consequences from patients' demands. The discussion suggests that the relative ease of cesareans and the benefit they provided the doctor and medical system rather than the patient constituted forms of obstetric violence and iatrogenesis. These often arise as a consequence of either too much intervention or not enough in situations in which providers seized on unclear or presumed indications as pretexts to perform cesareans that were not clearly medically indicated.
本文通过对剖宫产手术的分析,深化了当前对产科暴力和医源性问题根源的理解。数据来源于2018年在墨西哥一家公立妇产医院进行的人种志研究。数据收集方法包括观察、半结构化访谈以及与12名高级产科住院医师进行的自由列举法。对数据的分析表明:(1)医生即使在没有明确医学指征的情况下,也会利用对高风险的认知来为其剖宫产手术的使用进行辩护;(2)医生将剖宫产视为一种不太理想但可接受的解决方案,以此应对系统中时间和资源的短缺;(3)医生采取防御性医疗行为,以控制他们对风险的恐惧,并预先防范患者诉求带来的法律后果。讨论表明,剖宫产手术的相对简便性以及它给医生和医疗系统而非患者带来的益处,构成了产科暴力和医源性问题的形式。这些问题往往是由于干预过多或过少导致的,在这些情况下,医疗服务提供者利用不明确或假定的指征作为借口,进行没有明确医学指征的剖宫产手术。