School of Nursing and Midwifery, Centre for Quality and Patient Safety, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
James Cook University, Queensland, Australia; Townsville Hospital and Health Service, Queensland, Australia.
Midwifery. 2022 Oct;113:103420. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2022.103420. Epub 2022 Jul 2.
Poor interprofessional collaboration and lack of decision-making with women have been identified as being detrimental to the quality, safety, and experience of maternity care. The aim of the Labouring Together study was to explore childbearing women's preferences for and experiences of collaboration and control over decision-making in maternity care.
A sequential, mixed-method, multi-site case study approach was used to explore the perceptions and experiences of childbearing women regarding collaboration and decision-making. Women's preferred role for decision-making compared to the actual experiences, and the influences upon their preferences and experiences of collaboration were explored using semi-structured interviews. An inductive approach was used for qualitative analysis of interviews, and cross-case analyses were conducted using replication logic.
Postnatal wards of 1 private and 3 public maternity services in both metropolitan and regional Victoria, Australia.
Postnatal women, over the age of 18 years (n=182).
Half (48.3%) of the participants indicated a preference for a shared decision-making role and 35% preferred an active role. Only 16.7% participants indicated a preference for a passive role, however 24.4% of women reported experiencing a passive decision-making role during their maternity care. Statistically significant differences were also identified between preferences for and experiences of decision-making among women who chose the private obstetrician model of maternity care compared to the public maternity care system. Negative impacts upon women's autonomy over decision-making included: poor access to midwifery models of care; poor access to relational continuity of care; poor understanding of the rights of the woman; inadequate information for women about the risks and benefits of all proposed interventions; and a bureaucratic style of decision-making based upon a dominant discourse of risk avoidance that could ultimately veto the woman's choice.
Despite evidence of the benefits for women of having autonomy over decision-making in their own care, fundamental barriers were identified that hindered women's participation in collaboration in maternity care. Shared decision-making with childbearing women is not routine practice in maternity care in Victoria, Australia.
Relational continuity of care is imperative to promote the autonomy of childbearing women and an environment conducive to women's active engagement in maternity care and participation in shared decision-making.
有研究指出,医护人员之间协作不佳,以及在决策时未能考虑产妇的意见,这对母婴护理的质量、安全和体验均造成不良影响。“共同分娩”研究旨在探讨产妇对母婴护理协作和决策的偏好和体验。本研究采用顺序、混合方法、多地点案例研究方法,探讨了产妇对协作和决策的看法和体验。通过半结构化访谈,探索了女性对决策的偏好与实际体验的差异,以及影响她们对协作的偏好和体验的因素。访谈的定性分析采用了归纳法,跨案例分析采用了复制逻辑。
澳大利亚维多利亚州的 1 家私立和 3 家公立医院的产后病房。
182 名年龄在 18 岁以上的产后女性。
有一半(48.3%)的参与者表示希望参与共同决策,35%的参与者希望发挥积极作用。只有 16.7%的参与者表示希望扮演被动角色,但 24.4%的女性在分娩期间报告经历了被动的决策过程。选择私立产科模式的产妇与选择公共产科系统的产妇相比,在决策偏好和体验方面也存在显著差异。对女性决策自主权产生负面影响的因素包括:获得助产模式护理的机会有限;获得关系连续性护理的机会有限;对女性权利的理解不足;向女性提供关于所有拟议干预措施的风险和益处的信息不足;以及基于风险规避主导话语的官僚式决策风格,这可能最终否决女性的选择。
尽管有证据表明,产妇在自身护理中拥有决策权对她们有益,但仍存在一些基本障碍,阻碍了产妇参与母婴护理的协作。在澳大利亚维多利亚州,共同决策并不是母婴护理的常规做法。
护理的关系连续性对促进产妇的自主权至关重要,为女性积极参与母婴护理和参与共同决策创造有利环境。