产科护理知情同意的做法和观点:在三级产科单位定性研究。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Sally Ely, Susanne Langer, Hans Peter Dietz, Ka Lai Shek
{"title":"产科护理知情同意的做法和观点:在三级产科单位定性研究。","authors":"Sally Ely, Susanne Langer, Hans Peter Dietz, Ka Lai Shek","doi":"10.1111/ajo.13932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although consent has long been accepted as necessary in maternity care, the concept of informed consent for planned vaginal birth has polarised maternity politics. The publication of the NSW Consent Manual outlines new standards of informed consent, signalling the need for examination of current maternity consent practices.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To examine informed consent and disclosure of material risks in birth in a prospective qualitative study of midwives and obstetricians.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews to examine practices and perspectives of obstetricians and midwives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-two telephone interviews were concluded. Five sub-themes were identified: (1) non-compliance with the NSW Consent Manual, (2) risk communication/informed consent in maternity care, (3) consent practices in instrumental birth, (4) who should deliver risk information and when (5) barriers to change in consent practice (obstetricians only).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>One hundred per cent of participants (18 obstetricians, 4 midwives) described risk communication/informed consent practices that were non-complaint with the standards set out in the 2020 NSW Consent Manual. Eighty-three per cent (15/18) of obstetricians reported that current hospital-wide maternity care practices in risk communication/informed consent are inadequate. Sixty-one per cent (11/18) of obstetricians specifically singled out informed consent practices regarding instrumental birth to be inadequate. Ninety-four per cent (17/18) of obstetricians believe that maternity care consent practices need to be improved. The results of this study indicate that material risks of vaginal birth, caesarean section and instrumental birth, are not routinely disclosed during antenatal courses. Urgent resources and structural change are required to uphold women's legal right to bodily autonomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":55429,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maternity Care Informed Consent Practices and Perspectives: A Qualitative Study at a Tertiary Maternity Unit.\",\"authors\":\"Sally Ely, Susanne Langer, Hans Peter Dietz, Ka Lai Shek\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajo.13932\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although consent has long been accepted as necessary in maternity care, the concept of informed consent for planned vaginal birth has polarised maternity politics. The publication of the NSW Consent Manual outlines new standards of informed consent, signalling the need for examination of current maternity consent practices.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To examine informed consent and disclosure of material risks in birth in a prospective qualitative study of midwives and obstetricians.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews to examine practices and perspectives of obstetricians and midwives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-two telephone interviews were concluded. Five sub-themes were identified: (1) non-compliance with the NSW Consent Manual, (2) risk communication/informed consent in maternity care, (3) consent practices in instrumental birth, (4) who should deliver risk information and when (5) barriers to change in consent practice (obstetricians only).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>One hundred per cent of participants (18 obstetricians, 4 midwives) described risk communication/informed consent practices that were non-complaint with the standards set out in the 2020 NSW Consent Manual. Eighty-three per cent (15/18) of obstetricians reported that current hospital-wide maternity care practices in risk communication/informed consent are inadequate. Sixty-one per cent (11/18) of obstetricians specifically singled out informed consent practices regarding instrumental birth to be inadequate. Ninety-four per cent (17/18) of obstetricians believe that maternity care consent practices need to be improved. The results of this study indicate that material risks of vaginal birth, caesarean section and instrumental birth, are not routinely disclosed during antenatal courses. Urgent resources and structural change are required to uphold women's legal right to bodily autonomy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13932\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13932","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:虽然同意长期以来被认为是产科护理的必要条件,但计划阴道分娩的知情同意概念使产科政治两极分化。新南威尔士州同意手册的出版概述了知情同意的新标准,表明需要审查目前的产妇同意做法。目的:在一项对助产士和产科医生的前瞻性定性研究中,检查分娩中物质风险的知情同意和披露。材料和方法:定性研究使用半结构化访谈来检查实践和产科医生和助产士的观点。结果:共进行了22次电话访谈。确定了五个子主题:(1)不遵守NSW同意手册,(2)产科护理中的风险沟通/知情同意,(3)器械分娩中的同意实践,(4)谁应该提供风险信息以及何时(5)同意实践中改变的障碍(仅限产科医生)。结论:100%的参与者(18名产科医生,4名助产士)描述了符合2020年新南威尔士州同意手册中规定的标准的风险沟通/知情同意实践。83%(15/18)的产科医生报告说,目前全医院在风险沟通/知情同意方面的产科护理做法不足。61%(11/18)的产科医生特别指出,关于器械分娩的知情同意做法是不充分的。94%(17/18)的产科医生认为需要改进产妇护理同意做法。本研究结果表明,阴道分娩、剖腹产和器械分娩的物质风险在产前课程中没有被常规披露。需要紧急资源和结构变革来维护妇女身体自主权的合法权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Maternity Care Informed Consent Practices and Perspectives: A Qualitative Study at a Tertiary Maternity Unit.

Background: Although consent has long been accepted as necessary in maternity care, the concept of informed consent for planned vaginal birth has polarised maternity politics. The publication of the NSW Consent Manual outlines new standards of informed consent, signalling the need for examination of current maternity consent practices.

Aims: To examine informed consent and disclosure of material risks in birth in a prospective qualitative study of midwives and obstetricians.

Materials and methods: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews to examine practices and perspectives of obstetricians and midwives.

Results: Twenty-two telephone interviews were concluded. Five sub-themes were identified: (1) non-compliance with the NSW Consent Manual, (2) risk communication/informed consent in maternity care, (3) consent practices in instrumental birth, (4) who should deliver risk information and when (5) barriers to change in consent practice (obstetricians only).

Conclusions: One hundred per cent of participants (18 obstetricians, 4 midwives) described risk communication/informed consent practices that were non-complaint with the standards set out in the 2020 NSW Consent Manual. Eighty-three per cent (15/18) of obstetricians reported that current hospital-wide maternity care practices in risk communication/informed consent are inadequate. Sixty-one per cent (11/18) of obstetricians specifically singled out informed consent practices regarding instrumental birth to be inadequate. Ninety-four per cent (17/18) of obstetricians believe that maternity care consent practices need to be improved. The results of this study indicate that material risks of vaginal birth, caesarean section and instrumental birth, are not routinely disclosed during antenatal courses. Urgent resources and structural change are required to uphold women's legal right to bodily autonomy.

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
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
165
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ANZJOG) is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the RANZCOG Research foundation. ANZJOG aims to provide a medium for the publication of original contributions to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of obstetrics and gynaecology and related disciplines. Articles are peer reviewed by clinicians or researchers expert in the field of the submitted work. From time to time the journal will also publish printed abstracts from the RANZCOG Annual Scientific Meeting and meetings of relevant special interest groups, where the accepted abstracts have undergone the journals peer review acceptance 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信