Childbirth Experiences in the United Kingdom Compared to the Netherlands: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Lauri M M van den Berg, Jens Henrichs, Jeroen van Dillen, Soo Downe, Corine Verhoeven, Ank de Jonge
{"title":"Childbirth Experiences in the United Kingdom Compared to the Netherlands: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.","authors":"Lauri M M van den Berg, Jens Henrichs, Jeroen van Dillen, Soo Downe, Corine Verhoeven, Ank de Jonge","doi":"10.1111/birt.70006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study was performed to compare childbirth experiences in the United Kingdom (UK) and the Netherlands (NL) and identify determinants of positive childbirth experiences in both countries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Women who gave birth in the UK (n = 1303) or the NL (n = 900) between January 2017 and December 2020 who filled in the cross-sectional Babies Born Better survey were included in this study. Fully adjusted logistic regression models were used to assess differences in the odds of a positive childbirth experience between the two countries. Hierarchical logistic regression analyses were performed to identify determinants of a positive childbirth experience, including socio-demographic factors, pregnancy and childbirth outcomes, and care-related determinants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Respondents giving birth in the UK had decreased odds of a positive childbirth experience compared to NL respondents (66% vs. 85%, AOR 0.45, CI 0.35-0.57). Significant determinants for a positive childbirth experience were multiparity, absence of pregnancy complications, a spontaneous vaginal birth, and giving birth at home. UK respondents who had a planned caesarean section had a higher likelihood of reporting a positive childbirth experience when adjusted for confounders. Having a doctor as the primary birth care provider was less likely to be associated with a positive childbirth experience in the UK.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most women in both the NL and the UK reported positive childbirth experiences, but NL respondents were more likely to do so. Determinants of a positive birth experience were mostly factors associated with uncomplicated labor and birth, or linked with fulfilled choices and with being multiparous.</p>","PeriodicalId":55350,"journal":{"name":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.70006","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: This study was performed to compare childbirth experiences in the United Kingdom (UK) and the Netherlands (NL) and identify determinants of positive childbirth experiences in both countries.

Methods: Women who gave birth in the UK (n = 1303) or the NL (n = 900) between January 2017 and December 2020 who filled in the cross-sectional Babies Born Better survey were included in this study. Fully adjusted logistic regression models were used to assess differences in the odds of a positive childbirth experience between the two countries. Hierarchical logistic regression analyses were performed to identify determinants of a positive childbirth experience, including socio-demographic factors, pregnancy and childbirth outcomes, and care-related determinants.

Results: Respondents giving birth in the UK had decreased odds of a positive childbirth experience compared to NL respondents (66% vs. 85%, AOR 0.45, CI 0.35-0.57). Significant determinants for a positive childbirth experience were multiparity, absence of pregnancy complications, a spontaneous vaginal birth, and giving birth at home. UK respondents who had a planned caesarean section had a higher likelihood of reporting a positive childbirth experience when adjusted for confounders. Having a doctor as the primary birth care provider was less likely to be associated with a positive childbirth experience in the UK.

Conclusions: Most women in both the NL and the UK reported positive childbirth experiences, but NL respondents were more likely to do so. Determinants of a positive birth experience were mostly factors associated with uncomplicated labor and birth, or linked with fulfilled choices and with being multiparous.

英国与荷兰的分娩经验比较:一项横断面调查研究。
本研究旨在比较英国(UK)和荷兰(NL)的分娩经历,并确定两国积极分娩经历的决定因素。方法:2017年1月至2020年12月期间在英国(n = 1303)或英国(n = 900)分娩的妇女(n = 900)填写了横断面婴儿出生更好的调查。完全调整的逻辑回归模型被用来评估两国之间积极分娩经历的几率差异。进行了分层逻辑回归分析,以确定积极分娩经历的决定因素,包括社会人口因素、妊娠和分娩结局以及与护理相关的决定因素。结果:与NL受访者相比,在英国分娩的受访者积极分娩经历的几率降低(66%对85%,AOR 0.45, CI 0.35-0.57)。积极分娩经历的重要决定因素是多胎、无妊娠并发症、自然阴道分娩和在家分娩。在调整混杂因素后,计划剖腹产的英国受访者报告积极分娩经历的可能性更高。在英国,有医生作为初级分娩保健提供者不太可能与积极的分娩经历联系在一起。结论:美国和英国的大多数女性都报告了积极的分娩经历,但美国的受访者更有可能这样做。积极的分娩经历的决定因素主要是与简单的分娩和分娩有关的因素,或者与完成的选择和多胞胎有关。
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
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care
Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care is a multidisciplinary, refereed journal devoted to issues and practices in the care of childbearing women, infants, and families. It is written by and for professionals in maternal and neonatal health, nurses, midwives, physicians, public health workers, doulas, social scientists, childbirth educators, lactation counselors, epidemiologists, and other health caregivers and policymakers in perinatal care.
×
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