COVID-19大流行期间妇女引产经验:一项横断面调查

Q2 Nursing
Fiona Cross-Sudworth, Beck Taylor, Louisa Davidson, Laura Quinn, Joselle Wright, Ella Vitue, Sara Kenyon
{"title":"COVID-19大流行期间妇女引产经验:一项横断面调查","authors":"Fiona Cross-Sudworth, Beck Taylor, Louisa Davidson, Laura Quinn, Joselle Wright, Ella Vitue, Sara Kenyon","doi":"10.12968/bjom.2023.31.10.548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background/Aims Induction of labour is an increasingly common intervention. This study's aim was to explore women's experiences of induction, in particular of decision making and choice. Methods A cross-sectional study was carried out with women who were induced with live, term infant(s) in two urban trusts. Their experiences were assessed using a postal survey that included the birth satisfaction scale and open questions on women's experiences. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were used to test for associations between aspects of the induction process and women's characteristics (age, parity, ethnic group). Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results Half (52.9%) of the respondents reported waiting to start induction. The majority felt sufficiently involved in decision making (62.1%) and choice (59.6%). Most reported having enough information about the reason for (82%) and process of (83%) induction. The qualitative themes were emotional response, communication, feeling unheard, quality of care and the negative impact of COVID-19 policies. Conclusions Women's overall experiences were positive. Improvements should focus on reducing delays to induction.","PeriodicalId":52489,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Midwifery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Women's experiences of induction of labour during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey\",\"authors\":\"Fiona Cross-Sudworth, Beck Taylor, Louisa Davidson, Laura Quinn, Joselle Wright, Ella Vitue, Sara Kenyon\",\"doi\":\"10.12968/bjom.2023.31.10.548\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background/Aims Induction of labour is an increasingly common intervention. This study's aim was to explore women's experiences of induction, in particular of decision making and choice. Methods A cross-sectional study was carried out with women who were induced with live, term infant(s) in two urban trusts. Their experiences were assessed using a postal survey that included the birth satisfaction scale and open questions on women's experiences. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were used to test for associations between aspects of the induction process and women's characteristics (age, parity, ethnic group). Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results Half (52.9%) of the respondents reported waiting to start induction. The majority felt sufficiently involved in decision making (62.1%) and choice (59.6%). Most reported having enough information about the reason for (82%) and process of (83%) induction. The qualitative themes were emotional response, communication, feeling unheard, quality of care and the negative impact of COVID-19 policies. Conclusions Women's overall experiences were positive. Improvements should focus on reducing delays to induction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52489,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Midwifery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Midwifery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2023.31.10.548\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Midwifery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2023.31.10.548","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景/目的引产是一种越来越常见的干预措施。这项研究的目的是探讨妇女的感应经验,特别是决策和选择。方法采用横断面研究方法,对两家城市信托机构中引产足月活婴的妇女进行研究。他们的经历是通过邮政调查来评估的,其中包括生育满意度量表和关于女性经历的开放式问题。卡方检验和Fisher精确检验用于检验诱导过程的各个方面与女性特征(年龄、胎次、种族)之间的关联。对定性数据进行专题分析。结果有一半(52.9%)的受访者表示等待开始诱导。大多数人认为充分参与决策(62.1%)和选择(59.6%)。大多数人报告对诱导的原因(82%)和过程(83%)有足够的了解。定性主题是情绪反应、沟通、感觉被忽视、护理质量和COVID-19政策的负面影响。结论女性的整体体验是积极的。改进应侧重于减少诱导延迟。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Women's experiences of induction of labour during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey
Background/Aims Induction of labour is an increasingly common intervention. This study's aim was to explore women's experiences of induction, in particular of decision making and choice. Methods A cross-sectional study was carried out with women who were induced with live, term infant(s) in two urban trusts. Their experiences were assessed using a postal survey that included the birth satisfaction scale and open questions on women's experiences. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were used to test for associations between aspects of the induction process and women's characteristics (age, parity, ethnic group). Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results Half (52.9%) of the respondents reported waiting to start induction. The majority felt sufficiently involved in decision making (62.1%) and choice (59.6%). Most reported having enough information about the reason for (82%) and process of (83%) induction. The qualitative themes were emotional response, communication, feeling unheard, quality of care and the negative impact of COVID-19 policies. Conclusions Women's overall experiences were positive. Improvements should focus on reducing delays to induction.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Midwifery
British Journal of Midwifery Nursing-Maternity and Midwifery
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: British Journal of Midwifery (BJM) is the leading clinical journal for midwives. Published each month, the journal is written by midwives for midwives and peer reviewed by some of the foremost authorities in the profession. BJM is essential reading for all midwives. It contains the best clinical reviews, original research and evidence-based articles available, and ensures that midwives are kept fully up-to-date with the latest developments taking place in clinical practice. In addition, each issue of the journal contains a symposium on a particular theme, providing more in-depth clinical information.
×
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