跨专业堕胎反对:对美国教学医院堕胎培训项目主任的全国调查和定性访谈。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY
Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health Pub Date : 2020-12-01 Epub Date: 2021-01-07 DOI:10.1363/psrh.12162
Ariana H Bennett, Lori Freedman, Uta Landy, Callie Langton, Elizabeth Ly, Corinne H Rocca
{"title":"跨专业堕胎反对:对美国教学医院堕胎培训项目主任的全国调查和定性访谈。","authors":"Ariana H Bennett,&nbsp;Lori Freedman,&nbsp;Uta Landy,&nbsp;Callie Langton,&nbsp;Elizabeth Ly,&nbsp;Corinne H Rocca","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Hospital policies and culture affect abortion provision. The prevalence and nature of colleague opposition to abortion and how this opposition limits abortion care in U.S. teaching hospitals have not been investigated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>As part of a mixed-methods study, a nationwide survey of residency and site directors at 169 accredited obstetrics-gynecology training programs was conducted in 2015-2016, and 18 in-depth interviews with program directors were conducted in 2014 and 2017. The prevalence and nature of interprofessional opposition were examined using descriptive statistics, and regional differences were investigated using logistic regression. A modified grounded theoretical approach was used to analyze interview data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 91% of survey respondents who reported that they or their colleagues had wanted or needed to provide abortions in the prior year, 69% faced opposition from colleagues. Most commonly, opposition came from nurses (58%), nursing administration (30%) and anesthesiologists (30%), manifesting as resistance to participating in or cooperating with procedures (51% and 38%, respectively). Fifty-nine percent of respondents had denied care to patients in the prior year because of colleagues' opposition. Respondents in the Midwest and South were more likely than those in the Northeast to deny abortion care to patients because of such opposition (odds ratios, 3.2 and 4.4, respectively). Interviews revealed how participants had to circumvent opposing colleagues, making abortion provision difficult and leading to delays in and, infrequently, denial of abortion care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Interprofessional opposition to abortion is widespread in U.S. teaching hospitals. Interventions are needed that prioritize patients' needs while recognizing the challenges hospital colleagues face in their abortion participation decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interprofessional Abortion Opposition: A National Survey and Qualitative Interviews with Abortion Training Program Directors at U.S. Teaching Hospitals.\",\"authors\":\"Ariana H Bennett,&nbsp;Lori Freedman,&nbsp;Uta Landy,&nbsp;Callie Langton,&nbsp;Elizabeth Ly,&nbsp;Corinne H Rocca\",\"doi\":\"10.1363/psrh.12162\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Hospital policies and culture affect abortion provision. The prevalence and nature of colleague opposition to abortion and how this opposition limits abortion care in U.S. teaching hospitals have not been investigated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>As part of a mixed-methods study, a nationwide survey of residency and site directors at 169 accredited obstetrics-gynecology training programs was conducted in 2015-2016, and 18 in-depth interviews with program directors were conducted in 2014 and 2017. The prevalence and nature of interprofessional opposition were examined using descriptive statistics, and regional differences were investigated using logistic regression. A modified grounded theoretical approach was used to analyze interview data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 91% of survey respondents who reported that they or their colleagues had wanted or needed to provide abortions in the prior year, 69% faced opposition from colleagues. Most commonly, opposition came from nurses (58%), nursing administration (30%) and anesthesiologists (30%), manifesting as resistance to participating in or cooperating with procedures (51% and 38%, respectively). Fifty-nine percent of respondents had denied care to patients in the prior year because of colleagues' opposition. Respondents in the Midwest and South were more likely than those in the Northeast to deny abortion care to patients because of such opposition (odds ratios, 3.2 and 4.4, respectively). Interviews revealed how participants had to circumvent opposing colleagues, making abortion provision difficult and leading to delays in and, infrequently, denial of abortion care.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Interprofessional opposition to abortion is widespread in U.S. teaching hospitals. Interventions are needed that prioritize patients' needs while recognizing the challenges hospital colleagues face in their abortion participation decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12162\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12162","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

背景:医院的政策和文化影响堕胎的提供。同事反对堕胎的普遍性和性质以及这种反对如何限制美国教学医院的堕胎护理尚未调查。方法:作为混合方法研究的一部分,在2015-2016年对169个经认证的妇产科培训项目的住院医师和现场主任进行了全国性调查,并在2014年和2017年对项目主任进行了18次深度访谈。使用描述性统计分析了专业间反对的流行程度和性质,并使用逻辑回归分析了区域差异。采用一种改进的扎根理论方法对访谈数据进行分析。结果:91%的受访者表示,他们或他们的同事在前一年想要或需要堕胎,其中69%的人遭到同事的反对。最常见的反对来自护士(58%)、护理管理人员(30%)和麻醉师(30%),表现为拒绝参与或配合手术(分别为51%和38%)。59%的受访者曾在前一年因同事的反对而拒绝为病人提供护理。中西部和南部的受访者比东北部的受访者更有可能因为这种反对而拒绝为患者提供堕胎护理(优势比分别为3.2和4.4)。采访揭示了参与者如何不得不绕过反对的同事,使堕胎的提供变得困难,并导致堕胎护理的延误,有时甚至被拒绝。结论:在美国教学医院,跨专业反对堕胎的现象普遍存在。干预措施需要优先考虑患者的需求,同时认识到医院同事在堕胎参与决策中面临的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Interprofessional Abortion Opposition: A National Survey and Qualitative Interviews with Abortion Training Program Directors at U.S. Teaching Hospitals.

Context: Hospital policies and culture affect abortion provision. The prevalence and nature of colleague opposition to abortion and how this opposition limits abortion care in U.S. teaching hospitals have not been investigated.

Methods: As part of a mixed-methods study, a nationwide survey of residency and site directors at 169 accredited obstetrics-gynecology training programs was conducted in 2015-2016, and 18 in-depth interviews with program directors were conducted in 2014 and 2017. The prevalence and nature of interprofessional opposition were examined using descriptive statistics, and regional differences were investigated using logistic regression. A modified grounded theoretical approach was used to analyze interview data.

Results: Among the 91% of survey respondents who reported that they or their colleagues had wanted or needed to provide abortions in the prior year, 69% faced opposition from colleagues. Most commonly, opposition came from nurses (58%), nursing administration (30%) and anesthesiologists (30%), manifesting as resistance to participating in or cooperating with procedures (51% and 38%, respectively). Fifty-nine percent of respondents had denied care to patients in the prior year because of colleagues' opposition. Respondents in the Midwest and South were more likely than those in the Northeast to deny abortion care to patients because of such opposition (odds ratios, 3.2 and 4.4, respectively). Interviews revealed how participants had to circumvent opposing colleagues, making abortion provision difficult and leading to delays in and, infrequently, denial of abortion care.

Conclusions: Interprofessional opposition to abortion is widespread in U.S. teaching hospitals. Interventions are needed that prioritize patients' needs while recognizing the challenges hospital colleagues face in their abortion participation decisions.

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
5.10
自引率
3.40%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health provides the latest peer-reviewed, policy-relevant research and analysis on sexual and reproductive health and rights in the United States and other developed countries. For more than four decades, Perspectives has offered unique insights into how reproductive health issues relate to one another; how they are affected by policies and programs; and their implications for individuals and societies. Published four times a year, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health includes original research, special reports and commentaries on the latest developments in the field of sexual and reproductive health, as well as staff-written summaries of recent findings in the field.
×
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