Sue Tohill, Katie Kirkham, Eleni Gkini, Catherine A. Moakes, Sergio A. Silverio, Gillian Horgan, Ben Wills, Jennifer A. Hutcheon, Joel Singer, Clive Stubbs, Jim G. Thornton, Peter von Dadelszen, Laura A. Magee, the WILL Trial Study Group
{"title":"WILL随机试验中妇女分娩经验(何时引产以限制妊娠高血压风险):混合方法分析。","authors":"Sue Tohill, Katie Kirkham, Eleni Gkini, Catherine A. Moakes, Sergio A. Silverio, Gillian Horgan, Ben Wills, Jennifer A. Hutcheon, Joel Singer, Clive Stubbs, Jim G. Thornton, Peter von Dadelszen, Laura A. Magee, the WILL Trial Study Group","doi":"10.1111/1471-0528.18257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To compare childbirth satisfaction in women with chronic or gestational hypertension, randomised to ‘planned early term birth at 38<sup>+0–3</sup> weeks' gestation’ (intervention) or ‘usual care at term’ (control).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Randomised trial.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Setting</h3>\n \n <p>Forty-two consultant-led maternity units, United Kingdom.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Population</h3>\n \n <p>357/403 women randomised completed the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Mixed-methods analysis of the 22-item CEQ, assessing: ‘Own capacity’, ‘Professional support’, ‘Perceived safety’ and ‘Participation’. Directed content analysis sorted free-text comments into themes covered by the CEQ and two additional themes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Outcome Measures</h3>\n \n <p>CEQ scores overall and by domain.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In intervention (vs. control) groups, the CEQ was completed by 177/202, 88.1% (vs. 180/202, 89.1%) participants, and 378 free-text comments were made by 93/177, 52.5% (vs. 98/180, 54.4%) participants. There was no significant difference in CEQ scores overall (3.1 ± 0.4 vs. 3.1 ± 0.4, respectively) or by domain (‘Own capacity’ [2.8 ± 0.5 vs. 2.7 ± 0.5, respectively]; ‘Professional support’ [3.7 ± 0.5 vs. 3.7 ± 0.6, respectively]; ‘Perceived safety’ [3.2 ± 0.6 vs. 3.1 ± 0.6, respectively]; and ‘Participation’ [2.6 ± 0.7 vs. 2.7 ± 0.6]). Most comments were positive (222/378, 58.7%), and about ‘Relational care and care interactions’ (CEQ ‘Professional support’). Neither the number nor positivity of comments appeared to differ between groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>For women with chronic or gestational hypertension who remain well at term, we found no difference in childbirth experience between women randomised to planned early term birth versus usual care at term. Shared decisions about timing of birth may be more influenced by differences in clinical outcomes and costs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\n \n <p>ISRCTN: 77258279</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50729,"journal":{"name":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","volume":"132 10","pages":"1426-1437"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1471-0528.18257","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Women's Childbirth Experiences in the WILL Randomised Trial (When to Induce Labour to Limit Risk in Pregnancy Hypertension): A Mixed Methods Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Sue Tohill, Katie Kirkham, Eleni Gkini, Catherine A. Moakes, Sergio A. Silverio, Gillian Horgan, Ben Wills, Jennifer A. Hutcheon, Joel Singer, Clive Stubbs, Jim G. Thornton, Peter von Dadelszen, Laura A. Magee, the WILL Trial Study Group\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1471-0528.18257\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>To compare childbirth satisfaction in women with chronic or gestational hypertension, randomised to ‘planned early term birth at 38<sup>+0–3</sup> weeks' gestation’ (intervention) or ‘usual care at term’ (control).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Design</h3>\\n \\n <p>Randomised trial.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Setting</h3>\\n \\n <p>Forty-two consultant-led maternity units, United Kingdom.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Population</h3>\\n \\n <p>357/403 women randomised completed the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Mixed-methods analysis of the 22-item CEQ, assessing: ‘Own capacity’, ‘Professional support’, ‘Perceived safety’ and ‘Participation’. Directed content analysis sorted free-text comments into themes covered by the CEQ and two additional themes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Main Outcome Measures</h3>\\n \\n <p>CEQ scores overall and by domain.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>In intervention (vs. control) groups, the CEQ was completed by 177/202, 88.1% (vs. 180/202, 89.1%) participants, and 378 free-text comments were made by 93/177, 52.5% (vs. 98/180, 54.4%) participants. There was no significant difference in CEQ scores overall (3.1 ± 0.4 vs. 3.1 ± 0.4, respectively) or by domain (‘Own capacity’ [2.8 ± 0.5 vs. 2.7 ± 0.5, respectively]; ‘Professional support’ [3.7 ± 0.5 vs. 3.7 ± 0.6, respectively]; ‘Perceived safety’ [3.2 ± 0.6 vs. 3.1 ± 0.6, respectively]; and ‘Participation’ [2.6 ± 0.7 vs. 2.7 ± 0.6]). Most comments were positive (222/378, 58.7%), and about ‘Relational care and care interactions’ (CEQ ‘Professional support’). Neither the number nor positivity of comments appeared to differ between groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>For women with chronic or gestational hypertension who remain well at term, we found no difference in childbirth experience between women randomised to planned early term birth versus usual care at term. Shared decisions about timing of birth may be more influenced by differences in clinical outcomes and costs.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\\n \\n <p>ISRCTN: 77258279</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50729,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology\",\"volume\":\"132 10\",\"pages\":\"1426-1437\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1471-0528.18257\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-0528.18257\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-0528.18257","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:比较慢性或妊娠期高血压患者的分娩满意度,随机分为“妊娠38+0-3周计划早产”组(干预组)和“足月常规护理组”(对照组)。DESIGNRandomised审判。背景:英国,42家由顾问领导的产科医院。357/403名妇女随机完成了分娩经历问卷(CEQ)。方法对22项CEQ进行混合分析,评估“自身能力”、“专业支持”、“感知安全”和“参与”。定向内容分析将自由文本评论分为CEQ涵盖的主题和另外两个主题。主要结果测量:ceq总体评分和按领域评分。结果干预组(与对照组)的CEQ完成率为177/202,占88.1%(180/202,占89.1%);93/177,占52.5%(98/180,占54.4%);CEQ总分(分别为3.1±0.4比3.1±0.4)或领域(“自身能力”[分别为2.8±0.5比2.7±0.5])无显著差异;“专业支持”[分别为3.7±0.5 vs 3.7±0.6];“感知安全性”[分别为3.2±0.6比3.1±0.6];“参与”[2.6±0.7 vs. 2.7±0.6])。大多数评论是积极的(222/378,58.7%),关于“关系关怀和关怀互动”(CEQ“专业支持”)。评论的数量和积极程度在不同群体之间似乎都没有差异。结论:对于足月健康的慢性或妊娠期高血压妇女,我们发现在足月随机分配到计划早产组的妇女与常规护理组的妇女在分娩经验上没有差异。关于分娩时间的共同决定可能更多地受到临床结果和成本差异的影响。试验注册电话:77258279。
Women's Childbirth Experiences in the WILL Randomised Trial (When to Induce Labour to Limit Risk in Pregnancy Hypertension): A Mixed Methods Analysis
Objective
To compare childbirth satisfaction in women with chronic or gestational hypertension, randomised to ‘planned early term birth at 38+0–3 weeks' gestation’ (intervention) or ‘usual care at term’ (control).
Design
Randomised trial.
Setting
Forty-two consultant-led maternity units, United Kingdom.
Population
357/403 women randomised completed the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ).
Methods
Mixed-methods analysis of the 22-item CEQ, assessing: ‘Own capacity’, ‘Professional support’, ‘Perceived safety’ and ‘Participation’. Directed content analysis sorted free-text comments into themes covered by the CEQ and two additional themes.
Main Outcome Measures
CEQ scores overall and by domain.
Results
In intervention (vs. control) groups, the CEQ was completed by 177/202, 88.1% (vs. 180/202, 89.1%) participants, and 378 free-text comments were made by 93/177, 52.5% (vs. 98/180, 54.4%) participants. There was no significant difference in CEQ scores overall (3.1 ± 0.4 vs. 3.1 ± 0.4, respectively) or by domain (‘Own capacity’ [2.8 ± 0.5 vs. 2.7 ± 0.5, respectively]; ‘Professional support’ [3.7 ± 0.5 vs. 3.7 ± 0.6, respectively]; ‘Perceived safety’ [3.2 ± 0.6 vs. 3.1 ± 0.6, respectively]; and ‘Participation’ [2.6 ± 0.7 vs. 2.7 ± 0.6]). Most comments were positive (222/378, 58.7%), and about ‘Relational care and care interactions’ (CEQ ‘Professional support’). Neither the number nor positivity of comments appeared to differ between groups.
Conclusion
For women with chronic or gestational hypertension who remain well at term, we found no difference in childbirth experience between women randomised to planned early term birth versus usual care at term. Shared decisions about timing of birth may be more influenced by differences in clinical outcomes and costs.
期刊介绍:
BJOG is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). The Journal publishes original, peer-reviewed work in all areas of obstetrics and gynaecology, including contraception, urogynaecology, fertility, oncology and clinical practice. Its aim is to publish the highest quality medical research in women''s health, worldwide.