Experiences of maternity care (MC): Perspectives among women, partners and service providers in Trinidad

Arlene James-Euin , Whitney Arneaud , Marcia Rollock , Debrah Lewis , Shirley Curtis , Suzanne Stalls , Susan Moffson , Shanon McNab , Jim Ricca , Pooja Sripad , Oscar Noel Ocho
{"title":"Experiences of maternity care (MC): Perspectives among women, partners and service providers in Trinidad","authors":"Arlene James-Euin ,&nbsp;Whitney Arneaud ,&nbsp;Marcia Rollock ,&nbsp;Debrah Lewis ,&nbsp;Shirley Curtis ,&nbsp;Suzanne Stalls ,&nbsp;Susan Moffson ,&nbsp;Shanon McNab ,&nbsp;Jim Ricca ,&nbsp;Pooja Sripad ,&nbsp;Oscar Noel Ocho","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmhs.2025.100099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Despite the growing global literature around Respectful Maternal and Newborn Care (RMNC), there has been limited information on reducing mistreatment and promoting RMNC in the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region. This formative study conducted in Trinidad and Tobago aimed to describe the current experiences of maternity care in the public and private sectors from the perspectives of women, their male partners, service providers and managers/administrators.</div><div><strong>Principal results</strong></div><div>Nested in a wider mixed methods study undertaken in four of five regions in Trinidad and Tobago, this paper focuses on qualitative findings from 45 interviews, six focus groups (n = 54) and insights from a co-design workshop to contextualize findings. We found that experiences of care sit along a continuum of respectful care to mistreatment, centering around five broad themes: 1) communication with healthcare staff, 2) judgment and/or discrimination; 3) decision-making and autonomy; 4) partner involvement; and 5) privacy and confidentiality. While open communication, enabling environments, birth planning, partner support and safeguarding personal information determined RMNC; non-verbal cues, provider preconceptions, and tensions between extant policy and practice led to experiences of mistreatment. Complexities identified across often convergent perspectives require broader systems solutions.</div></div><div><h3>Major conclusions</h3><div>This study expands the learning on women’s experience of childbirth by triangulating perceptions of women, their partners, health workers, and policymakers. Addressing mistreatment of both women and health workers and strengthening RMNC in Trinidad and Tobago and similar settings requires moving beyond interpersonal provider-client interactions to a culturally sensitive, multi-component, health systems approach.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":101183,"journal":{"name":"SSM - Health Systems","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100099"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SSM - Health Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949856225000510","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Despite the growing global literature around Respectful Maternal and Newborn Care (RMNC), there has been limited information on reducing mistreatment and promoting RMNC in the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region. This formative study conducted in Trinidad and Tobago aimed to describe the current experiences of maternity care in the public and private sectors from the perspectives of women, their male partners, service providers and managers/administrators.
Principal results
Nested in a wider mixed methods study undertaken in four of five regions in Trinidad and Tobago, this paper focuses on qualitative findings from 45 interviews, six focus groups (n = 54) and insights from a co-design workshop to contextualize findings. We found that experiences of care sit along a continuum of respectful care to mistreatment, centering around five broad themes: 1) communication with healthcare staff, 2) judgment and/or discrimination; 3) decision-making and autonomy; 4) partner involvement; and 5) privacy and confidentiality. While open communication, enabling environments, birth planning, partner support and safeguarding personal information determined RMNC; non-verbal cues, provider preconceptions, and tensions between extant policy and practice led to experiences of mistreatment. Complexities identified across often convergent perspectives require broader systems solutions.

Major conclusions

This study expands the learning on women’s experience of childbirth by triangulating perceptions of women, their partners, health workers, and policymakers. Addressing mistreatment of both women and health workers and strengthening RMNC in Trinidad and Tobago and similar settings requires moving beyond interpersonal provider-client interactions to a culturally sensitive, multi-component, health systems approach.
产妇护理经验:特立尼达妇女、合作伙伴和服务提供者的观点
尽管全球关于尊重母婴护理(RMNC)的文献越来越多,但在拉丁美洲和加勒比(LAC)地区,关于减少虐待和促进RMNC的信息有限。在特立尼达和多巴哥进行的这项形成性研究旨在从妇女、其男性伙伴、服务提供者和管理人员/行政人员的角度描述公共和私营部门目前的产妇护理经验。在特立尼达和多巴哥五个地区中的四个地区开展了一项更广泛的混合方法研究,本文着重于45次访谈、六个焦点小组(n = 54)的定性研究结果,以及一个共同设计研讨会的见解,以将研究结果置于背景中。我们发现,护理经历是一个从尊重护理到虐待的连续体,围绕着五个主题:1)与医护人员的沟通,2)判断和/或歧视;3)决策与自治;4)合伙人参与;5)隐私和保密。而开放的沟通,有利的环境,生育计划,伴侣支持和保护个人信息决定RMNC;非语言暗示,提供者先入为主的观念,以及现行政策和实践之间的紧张关系导致了虐待的经历。通过聚合视角识别的复杂性需要更广泛的系统解决方案。主要结论本研究通过对妇女、其伴侣、卫生工作者和政策制定者的看法进行三角测量,扩大了对妇女分娩经验的了解。在特立尼达和多巴哥以及类似的环境中,解决对妇女和卫生工作者的虐待问题并加强对妇女和卫生工作者的粗暴对待,需要超越人与人之间的提供者-客户互动,转向一种文化上敏感的、多成分的卫生系统方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信