17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Understanding the perspectives and values of midwives, obstetricians and obstetric registrars regarding episiotomy: qualitative interview study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          Insight into perspectives and values of care providers on episiotomy can be a first step towards reducing variation in its use. We aimed to gain insight into these perspectives and values.

          Setting

          Maternity care in the Netherlands.

          Participants

          Midwives, obstetricians and obstetric registrars working in primary, secondary or tertiary care, purposively sampled, based on their perceived episiotomy rate and/or region of work.

          Primary and secondary outcome measures

          Perspectives and values of care providers which were explored using semistructured in-depth interviews.

          Results

          The following four themes were identified, using the evidence-based practice-model of Satterfield et al as a framework: ‘Care providers’ vision on childbirth’, ‘Discrepancy between restrictive perspective and daily practice’, ‘Clinical expertise versus literature-based practice’ and ‘Involvement of women in the decision’. Perspectives, values and practices regarding episiotomy were strongly influenced by care providers’ underlying visions on childbirth. Although care providers often emphasised the importance of restrictive episiotomy policy, a discrepancy was found between this vision and the large number of varying indications for episiotomy. Although on one hand care providers cited evidence to support their practice, on the other hand, many based their decision-making to a larger extent on clinical experience. Although most care providers considered women’s autonomy to be important, at the moment of deciding on episiotomy, the involvement of women in the decision was perceived as minimal, and real informed consent generally did not take place, neither during labour, nor prenatally. Many care providers belittled episiotomy in their language.

          Conclusions

          Care providers’ underlying vision on episiotomy and childbirth was an important contributor to the large variations in episiotomy usage. Their clinical expertise was a more important component in decision-making on episiotomy than the literature. Women were minimally involved in the decision for performing episiotomy. More research is required to achieve consensus on indications for episiotomy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references53

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pain and women's satisfaction with the experience of childbirth: a systematic review.

              To summarize what is known about satisfaction with childbirth, with particular attention to the roles of pain and pain relief. A systematic review of 137 reports of factors influencing women's evaluations of their childbirth experiences. The reports included descriptive studies, randomized controlled trials, and systematic reviews of intrapartum interventions. Results were summarized qualitatively. Four factors-personal expectations, the amount of support from caregivers, the quality of the caregiver-patient relationship, and involvement in decision making-appear to be so important that they override the influences of age, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, childbirth preparation, the physical birth environment, pain, immobility, medical interventions, and continuity of care, when women evaluate their childbirth experiences. The influences of pain, pain relief, and intrapartum medical interventions on subsequent satisfaction are neither as obvious, as direct, nor as powerful as the influences of the attitudes and behaviors of the caregivers.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2021
                13 January 2021
                : 11
                : 1
                : e037536
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Midwifery Science , Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, AVAG, Amsterdam Public Health , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [2 ]departmentResearch Centre for Midwifery Science , Zuyd University , Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [3 ]departmentDepartment of Midwifery Science , AVAG, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [4 ]departmentDepartment of Obstetrics , Leiden University Medical Centre , Leiden, Netherlands
                [5 ]Academie Verloskunde Amsterdam Groningen , Amsterdam, Netherlands
                [6 ]departmentAthena Institute , VU University , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Mrs Anna Seijmonsbergen-Schermers; a.seijmonsbergen@ 123456amsterdamumc.nl
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5946-2205
                Article
                bmjopen-2020-037536
                10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037536
                7812089
                33441351
                5f60ccae-9f4f-44f1-ae04-73a5dbdd992b
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 28 February 2020
                : 26 October 2020
                : 16 November 2020
                Categories
                Obstetrics and Gynaecology
                1506
                Original research
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                qualitative research,obstetrics,perinatology
                Medicine
                qualitative research, obstetrics, perinatology

                Comments

                Comment on this article