印度妇女和临床医生对剖腹产和顺产的看法、偏好和经验:“米索前列醇或催产素引产”(MOLI)试验的定性亚研究。

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Kate Lightly, Shuchita Mundle, Jaya Tripathy, Pradeep Deshmukh, Beverly Winikoff, Andrew Weeks, Carol Kingdon
{"title":"印度妇女和临床医生对剖腹产和顺产的看法、偏好和经验:“米索前列醇或催产素引产”(MOLI)试验的定性亚研究。","authors":"Kate Lightly, Shuchita Mundle, Jaya Tripathy, Pradeep Deshmukh, Beverly Winikoff, Andrew Weeks, Carol Kingdon","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Caesarean use in India continues to rise and significant disparities exist. However, women and clinicians' views are under-researched. This paper aims to explore women and clinicians' views and preferences for mode of birth in two government hospitals in urban central India.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This qualitative study involved 53 semistructured interviews with high-risk women before and after induction of labour and eight focus groups with clinicians and researchers in two government hospitals in Maharashtra state. All women were recruited to the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) randomised controlled trial (NCT03749902) and were induced for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Data were analysed using the framework approach to thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Interactions between women, clinicians and families played an important role in women's birth experiences. Most women strongly preferred vaginal birth. While a vaginal birth was important to women for their long-term health and well-being, the safety of the baby was the priority. Both women and clinicians justified caesarean use to promote fetal safety. Contrary to clinicians' perceptions, women clearly understood their caesarean indications. The busy clinical environment was an important factor influencing the clinician's decision and threshold for caesarean. Three themes arose from the data: (1) women's preference for vaginal birth: a matter of 'Trouble for two hours or trouble for two months'; (2) clinicians' perspectives about caesarean use: 'Don't take a risk'; and (3) knowledge through experiences and interactions: 'The pain didn't come'.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Women strongly preferred 'normal delivery' but accepted caesarean birth to promote fetal safety. Clinicians felt labour and vaginal birth were often risky and prioritised fetal safety in this under-resourced context. Women who had a caesarean birth understood their indication for caesarean but, compared with vaginal birth, reported that caesarean caused them additional short- and long-term anxiety, health and social concerns.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04037683.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"10 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12414161/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Women and clinicians' views, preferences and experiences of caesarean section and vaginal birth in India: a qualitative substudy of the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) trial.\",\"authors\":\"Kate Lightly, Shuchita Mundle, Jaya Tripathy, Pradeep Deshmukh, Beverly Winikoff, Andrew Weeks, Carol Kingdon\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018393\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Caesarean use in India continues to rise and significant disparities exist. However, women and clinicians' views are under-researched. This paper aims to explore women and clinicians' views and preferences for mode of birth in two government hospitals in urban central India.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This qualitative study involved 53 semistructured interviews with high-risk women before and after induction of labour and eight focus groups with clinicians and researchers in two government hospitals in Maharashtra state. All women were recruited to the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) randomised controlled trial (NCT03749902) and were induced for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Data were analysed using the framework approach to thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Interactions between women, clinicians and families played an important role in women's birth experiences. Most women strongly preferred vaginal birth. While a vaginal birth was important to women for their long-term health and well-being, the safety of the baby was the priority. Both women and clinicians justified caesarean use to promote fetal safety. Contrary to clinicians' perceptions, women clearly understood their caesarean indications. The busy clinical environment was an important factor influencing the clinician's decision and threshold for caesarean. Three themes arose from the data: (1) women's preference for vaginal birth: a matter of 'Trouble for two hours or trouble for two months'; (2) clinicians' perspectives about caesarean use: 'Don't take a risk'; and (3) knowledge through experiences and interactions: 'The pain didn't come'.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Women strongly preferred 'normal delivery' but accepted caesarean birth to promote fetal safety. Clinicians felt labour and vaginal birth were often risky and prioritised fetal safety in this under-resourced context. Women who had a caesarean birth understood their indication for caesarean but, compared with vaginal birth, reported that caesarean caused them additional short- and long-term anxiety, health and social concerns.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04037683.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"volume\":\"10 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12414161/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018393\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018393","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:印度的剖腹产使用率持续上升,存在显著差异。然而,妇女和临床医生的观点还没有得到充分的研究。本文旨在探讨妇女和临床医生的观点和偏好的出生模式在城市中心印度两家政府医院。方法:本定性研究包括对引产前后高危妇女的53次半结构化访谈,以及马哈拉施特拉邦两家政府医院的临床医生和研究人员的8个焦点小组。所有妇女都被招募到“米索前列醇或催产素用于引产”(MOLI)随机对照试验(NCT03749902)中,并在怀孕期间诱导高血压疾病。数据分析采用主题分析的框架方法。结果:妇女、临床医生和家庭之间的互动在妇女的分娩经历中起着重要作用。大多数妇女强烈希望顺产。虽然阴道分娩对妇女的长期健康和福祉很重要,但婴儿的安全是优先考虑的问题。妇女和临床医生都认为使用剖腹产是合理的,以促进胎儿安全。与临床医生的看法相反,妇女清楚地了解他们的剖腹产指征。繁忙的临床环境是影响临床医生决定剖宫产的重要因素。这些数据引出了三个主题:(1)女性对顺产的偏好:这是“两小时的麻烦还是两个月的麻烦”;(2)临床医生对剖宫产的看法:“不要冒险”;(3)通过经验和互动获得的知识:“痛苦并没有到来”。结论:妇女强烈倾向于“正常分娩”,但接受剖腹产以促进胎儿安全。临床医生认为分娩和阴道分娩往往是有风险的,在这种资源不足的情况下优先考虑胎儿安全。剖宫产的妇女了解剖宫产的指征,但与顺产相比,她们报告说,剖宫产给她们带来了额外的短期和长期焦虑、健康和社会问题。试验注册号:NCT04037683。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Women and clinicians' views, preferences and experiences of caesarean section and vaginal birth in India: a qualitative substudy of the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) trial.

Women and clinicians' views, preferences and experiences of caesarean section and vaginal birth in India: a qualitative substudy of the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) trial.

Women and clinicians' views, preferences and experiences of caesarean section and vaginal birth in India: a qualitative substudy of the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) trial.

Introduction: Caesarean use in India continues to rise and significant disparities exist. However, women and clinicians' views are under-researched. This paper aims to explore women and clinicians' views and preferences for mode of birth in two government hospitals in urban central India.

Methods: This qualitative study involved 53 semistructured interviews with high-risk women before and after induction of labour and eight focus groups with clinicians and researchers in two government hospitals in Maharashtra state. All women were recruited to the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) randomised controlled trial (NCT03749902) and were induced for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Data were analysed using the framework approach to thematic analysis.

Results: Interactions between women, clinicians and families played an important role in women's birth experiences. Most women strongly preferred vaginal birth. While a vaginal birth was important to women for their long-term health and well-being, the safety of the baby was the priority. Both women and clinicians justified caesarean use to promote fetal safety. Contrary to clinicians' perceptions, women clearly understood their caesarean indications. The busy clinical environment was an important factor influencing the clinician's decision and threshold for caesarean. Three themes arose from the data: (1) women's preference for vaginal birth: a matter of 'Trouble for two hours or trouble for two months'; (2) clinicians' perspectives about caesarean use: 'Don't take a risk'; and (3) knowledge through experiences and interactions: 'The pain didn't come'.

Conclusion: Women strongly preferred 'normal delivery' but accepted caesarean birth to promote fetal safety. Clinicians felt labour and vaginal birth were often risky and prioritised fetal safety in this under-resourced context. Women who had a caesarean birth understood their indication for caesarean but, compared with vaginal birth, reported that caesarean caused them additional short- and long-term anxiety, health and social concerns.

Trial registration number: NCT04037683.

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
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
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