What do safety and risk mean to women who choose to birth at home? A systematic review

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Candice Chauncy , Kate Dawson , Sara Bayes
{"title":"What do safety and risk mean to women who choose to birth at home? A systematic review","authors":"Candice Chauncy ,&nbsp;Kate Dawson ,&nbsp;Sara Bayes","doi":"10.1016/j.midw.2025.104340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Despite clear evidence to support the safety and efficacy of homebirth, the concept challenges the almost universal belief that hospital is the safest place to give birth. Homebirth remains largely unsupported around the world due to prevailing beliefs and constructs surrounding risk and safety. Despite barriers to access, women continue to choose home as a place to birth.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic review of qualitative research was conducted to explore and understand women's views on what constitutes risk and safety in labour and birth for those who choose to birth at home. All studies were evaluated for quality and relevance. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify themes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Analysis of the 29 papers included in this review identified three main themes: <em>risk of hospital birth, risk of homebirth,</em> and <em>safety of homebirth</em>, and convey that women who choose to birth at home view their social, emotional, psychological and spiritual safety as highly important, with homebirth protecting and respecting these factors. For the women in the studies we reviewed, physical safety was enhanced through having the expertise of a midwife present at their birth. Participants considered the cultural paradigm within hospital services to focus on care for the physical body and not the whole person, which had the potential to cause psychological and physical harm.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>This review demonstrated that women who choose to birth at home assess risk and safety differently to the way health care institutions assess these parameters. These findings will be of interest to maternity services and educators of maternity care practitioners.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":18495,"journal":{"name":"Midwifery","volume":"144 ","pages":"Article 104340"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Midwifery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266613825000592","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Despite clear evidence to support the safety and efficacy of homebirth, the concept challenges the almost universal belief that hospital is the safest place to give birth. Homebirth remains largely unsupported around the world due to prevailing beliefs and constructs surrounding risk and safety. Despite barriers to access, women continue to choose home as a place to birth.

Methods

A systematic review of qualitative research was conducted to explore and understand women's views on what constitutes risk and safety in labour and birth for those who choose to birth at home. All studies were evaluated for quality and relevance. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify themes.

Results

Analysis of the 29 papers included in this review identified three main themes: risk of hospital birth, risk of homebirth, and safety of homebirth, and convey that women who choose to birth at home view their social, emotional, psychological and spiritual safety as highly important, with homebirth protecting and respecting these factors. For the women in the studies we reviewed, physical safety was enhanced through having the expertise of a midwife present at their birth. Participants considered the cultural paradigm within hospital services to focus on care for the physical body and not the whole person, which had the potential to cause psychological and physical harm.

Discussion

This review demonstrated that women who choose to birth at home assess risk and safety differently to the way health care institutions assess these parameters. These findings will be of interest to maternity services and educators of maternity care practitioners.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Midwifery
Midwifery 医学-护理
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
221
审稿时长
13.4 weeks
期刊介绍: Midwifery publishes the latest peer reviewed international research to inform the safety, quality, outcomes and experiences of pregnancy, birth and maternity care for childbearing women, their babies and families. The journal’s publications support midwives and maternity care providers to explore and develop their knowledge, skills and attitudes informed by best available evidence. Midwifery provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for the publication, dissemination and discussion of advances in evidence, controversies and current research, and promotes continuing education through publication of systematic and other scholarly reviews and updates. Midwifery articles cover the cultural, clinical, psycho-social, sociological, epidemiological, education, managerial, workforce, organizational and technological areas of practice in preconception, maternal and infant care. The journal welcomes the highest quality scholarly research that employs rigorous methodology. Midwifery is a leading international journal in midwifery and maternal health with a current impact factor of 1.861 (© Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports 2016) and employs a double-blind peer review process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信