Gutiérrez Verónica Blanco, Bozhilova Lyuba V, Darko Natalie, Georgieva Antoniya, O'Hara Kenton
EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Digital Health and Care, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Oxford Labour Monitoring Group, Nuffield Department of Women's & Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025 Jun 2;25(1):647. doi: 10.1186/s12884-025-07765-z.
Intrapartum Electronic Fetal Monitoring interpretation is subjective, variable and dependent on clinical expertise. Electronic Fetal Monitoring is also influenced by human factors, such as the labour ward context, staffing pressures, situational awareness, local protocols, workflow variations, team dynamics, and reporting cultures. This paper explored whether, and how, socio-technical factors may have the potential to contribute to disparities in intrapartum Electronic Fetal Monitoring care and their implications for maternal and neonatal health.
This study employed an exploratory qualitative design to investigate clinicians' experiences of Electronic Fetal Monitoring. Eighteen semi-structured interviews were undertaken online with midwives, student midwives and obstetricians involved in labour ward care in the UK. Critical Race Feminism and Intersectionality theories shaped the study design and analysis. Interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
Seven themes were identified under the overarching theme intersectional dynamics in intrapartum Electronic Fetal Monitoring: 1) Social determinants in Electronic Fetal Monitoring interpretation, (2) Disparities in care expectations and decision agency, (3) Cultural influence on decision choices, (4) Disparities in communication, (5) Rationalising Electronic Fetal Monitoring outcomes towards preferred course of action, (6) Stereotypes and bias, and (7) Wider influences of Electronic Fetal Monitoring and labour care.
Electronic Fetal Monitoring is a socially and contextually interpreted tool used to support particular interventions or inactions. Electronic Fetal Monitoring management is subject to systematic contextual influences, maternal Social Determinants of Health and biases that may further contribute to disparities in labour care and outcomes. Addressing maternal Social Determinants of Health while providing Electronic Fetal Monitoring care is vital to promoting equitable care, facilitating a positive experience and improving health outcomes.
产时电子胎儿监护的解读具有主观性、变异性,且依赖临床专业知识。电子胎儿监护还受到人为因素的影响,如产房环境、人员配备压力、情境意识、当地协议、工作流程差异、团队动态以及报告文化等。本文探讨了社会技术因素是否以及如何可能导致产时电子胎儿监护护理的差异及其对孕产妇和新生儿健康的影响。
本研究采用探索性定性设计来调查临床医生对电子胎儿监护的体验。对英国参与产房护理的助产士、助产专业学生和产科医生进行了18次在线半结构化访谈。批判种族女性主义和交叉性理论塑造了研究设计与分析。访谈采用反思性主题分析法进行分析。
在产时电子胎儿监护的总体主题交叉动态下确定了七个主题:1)电子胎儿监护解读中的社会决定因素,(2)护理期望和决策自主权的差异,(3)文化对决策选择的影响,(4)沟通差异,(5)将电子胎儿监护结果合理化以采取首选行动方案,(6)刻板印象和偏见,以及(7)电子胎儿监护和分娩护理的更广泛影响。
电子胎儿监护是一种用于支持特定干预措施或不作为的具有社会和情境解读性的工具。电子胎儿监护管理受到系统的情境影响、孕产妇健康的社会决定因素以及偏见的影响,这些可能进一步导致分娩护理和结果的差异。在提供电子胎儿监护护理的同时解决孕产妇健康的社会决定因素对于促进公平护理、促成积极体验和改善健康结果至关重要。