Paul Richard Cassidy, Ángel Gordo, Ibone Olza, Jillian Cassidy
{"title":"围产期损失背景下西班牙医院的镇静管理:一项混合方法研究的结果","authors":"Paul Richard Cassidy, Ángel Gordo, Ibone Olza, Jillian Cassidy","doi":"10.1080/14461242.2022.2131456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article explores the contexts, processes and motivations behind the administration of sedatives (minor tranquilisers) in the time around perinatal loss. Using a mixed methods design, an online survey of 796 women and 13 narrative interviews were conducted. The participants had experienced a stillbirth or termination of pregnancy from 16 weeks or a neonatal death in Spanish hospitals. The quantitative (univariate and CHAID decision-tree) and qualitative (narrative-linguistic) analysis found that sedative administration was pervasive across care contexts and appears to be naturalised despite contradicting practice recommendations. Sedative administration was associated with emotional control and avoidance of loss, lack of accompaniment and on occasion with managing disruptive patients. Lack of informed consent was very common, with little explanation of side-effects prior to administration. In the participants' narratives, health professionals tended to construct sedatives as benign, but for some women the effects were counterproductive to loss and grief and related to persistent regrets about decisions. The study concludes that, in the context of perinatal loss, sedative administration was highly integrated into the fabric of medicalised care. As a socio-political and cultural practice underscored by gender-based care dynamics, there seems to be an imbalance between benefit and risk to women's welfare.</p>","PeriodicalId":46833,"journal":{"name":"Health Sociology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sedative administration in Spanish hospitals in the context of perinatal loss: findings from a mixed-methods study.\",\"authors\":\"Paul Richard Cassidy, Ángel Gordo, Ibone Olza, Jillian Cassidy\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14461242.2022.2131456\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article explores the contexts, processes and motivations behind the administration of sedatives (minor tranquilisers) in the time around perinatal loss. Using a mixed methods design, an online survey of 796 women and 13 narrative interviews were conducted. The participants had experienced a stillbirth or termination of pregnancy from 16 weeks or a neonatal death in Spanish hospitals. The quantitative (univariate and CHAID decision-tree) and qualitative (narrative-linguistic) analysis found that sedative administration was pervasive across care contexts and appears to be naturalised despite contradicting practice recommendations. Sedative administration was associated with emotional control and avoidance of loss, lack of accompaniment and on occasion with managing disruptive patients. Lack of informed consent was very common, with little explanation of side-effects prior to administration. In the participants' narratives, health professionals tended to construct sedatives as benign, but for some women the effects were counterproductive to loss and grief and related to persistent regrets about decisions. The study concludes that, in the context of perinatal loss, sedative administration was highly integrated into the fabric of medicalised care. As a socio-political and cultural practice underscored by gender-based care dynamics, there seems to be an imbalance between benefit and risk to women's welfare.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46833,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Sociology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Sociology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14461242.2022.2131456\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Sociology Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14461242.2022.2131456","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Sedative administration in Spanish hospitals in the context of perinatal loss: findings from a mixed-methods study.
This article explores the contexts, processes and motivations behind the administration of sedatives (minor tranquilisers) in the time around perinatal loss. Using a mixed methods design, an online survey of 796 women and 13 narrative interviews were conducted. The participants had experienced a stillbirth or termination of pregnancy from 16 weeks or a neonatal death in Spanish hospitals. The quantitative (univariate and CHAID decision-tree) and qualitative (narrative-linguistic) analysis found that sedative administration was pervasive across care contexts and appears to be naturalised despite contradicting practice recommendations. Sedative administration was associated with emotional control and avoidance of loss, lack of accompaniment and on occasion with managing disruptive patients. Lack of informed consent was very common, with little explanation of side-effects prior to administration. In the participants' narratives, health professionals tended to construct sedatives as benign, but for some women the effects were counterproductive to loss and grief and related to persistent regrets about decisions. The study concludes that, in the context of perinatal loss, sedative administration was highly integrated into the fabric of medicalised care. As a socio-political and cultural practice underscored by gender-based care dynamics, there seems to be an imbalance between benefit and risk to women's welfare.
期刊介绍:
An international, scholarly peer-reviewed journal, Health Sociology Review explores the contribution of sociology and sociological research methods to understanding health and illness; to health policy, promotion and practice; and to equity, social justice, social policy and social work. Health Sociology Review is published in association with The Australian Sociological Association (TASA) under the editorship of Eileen Willis. Health Sociology Review publishes original theoretical and research articles, literature reviews, special issues, symposia, commentaries and book reviews.