An audit on trends of vaginal delivery after one previous caesarean section

Risk in Maternity Care: A Concept Analysis

AIM: To analyze the concept of risk in maternity care.

DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1966–2010), CINAHL (1980–2010), EMBASE (1980–2010), PsycINFO (1980–2010), and Social Science Citation Index were searched. Key text books were sourced. Media literature was reviewed by perusal of newspaper articles, health supplements, and popular Internet health care websites.

REVIEW METHODS: The principle-based method of concept analysis was used to guide the analysis of risk in maternity care.

RESULTS: The epistemological principle identified the ambiguous nature of the risk concept, with risk having diverse meanings for different individuals. The pragmatic principle demonstrated that the current systematic approach to risk assessment often fails to identify those who succumb to risk issues. The linguistic principle portrays the ambiguity of risk perception with “risk” considered according to past experiences, knowledge, and individual attitudes. The logical principle identified a strong link between safety and uncertainty revealing that the risk concept lacks integrity and may not “hold its own.”

CONCLUSION: The concept of risk in maternity care is concerned with risk assessment, risk perception, and notions of safety and uncertainty. Risk in maternity care is diverse and dynamic. What constitutes as a risk today may not necessarily be viewed in the same light tomorrow.

Why do some pregnant women prefer cesarean? The influence of parity, delivery experiences, and fear

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify predictors of preferences for cesarean among pregnant women, and estimate how different predictors influence preferences.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional study based on the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (n = 58,881).

RESULTS

Of the study population, 6% preferred cesarean over vaginal delivery. While 2.4% of nulliparous had a strong preference for cesarean, the proportion among multiparous was 5.1%. The probability that a woman, absent potential predictors, would have a cesarean preference was similar (<2%) for both nulliparous or multiparous. In the presence of concurrent predictors such as previous cesarean, negative delivery experience, and fear of birth, the predicted probability of a cesarean request ranged from 20-75%.

CONCLUSION

The proportion of women with a strong preference for cesarean was higher among multiparous than nulliparous women, but the difference was attributable to factors such as previous cesarean or fear of delivery and not to parity per se.

What characterizes women in Norway who wish to have a caesarean section?

Aims: The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of pregnant women who wish to have a caesarean section. Methods: Data were collected as part of the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study conducted by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Pregnant women booked for antenatal care in Norway between 1999 and 2006 were invited to participate in the study. Data on women's interest in mode of delivery and a set of associated variables were gathered from a questionnaire completed by 55,859 women at 30 weeks of pregnancy. Results: A wish for caesarean section was expressed by 10% of the women, and 33% thought that the woman herself should be allowed to decide whether to have a caesarean section or not. A negative experience from a previous labour, a second birth, an age>35, a low level of education, being single, being unemployed, having an assisted conception, expecting more than one foetus, experiencing urinary and bowel incontinence before current pregnancy, experiencing pelvic pain, having a fear of childbirth and reporting negative intra-psychic phenomena were significantly associated with a wish for caesarean section. Conclusions: At 30 weeks of pregnancy, one out of 10 women in a sample of Norwegian women would choose a caesarean section. Negative experiences from previous pregnancies and fear of giving birth are two of the strongest factors associated with a wish for a caesarean section and should be taken into consideration.

A story of scrutiny and fear: Australian midwives' experiences of an external review of obstetric services, being involved with litigation and the impact on clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

to describe Australian midwives' experiences of an external review of obstetric services, involvement in legal proceedings and the impact on midwives' clinical practice and personal wellbeing.

BACKGROUND

the external review process (commonly referred to as the 'Douglas Inquiry') was initiated by a state government and was in response to hospital staff and consumer complaints that focused on anomalies in client care and a significantly high rate of adverse outcomes and clinical errors. It took place within the context of a number of legal proceedings against medical practitioners. As a result, some midwives employed by the hospital were called to give evidence at a variety of legal forums.

DESIGN

a qualitative study using an explorative descriptive design. Snowball sampling was used to invite 16 Australian midwives to participate in a tape-recorded interview. Thematic analysis and the techniques associated with constant comparison were used to analyse the data.

SETTING

Australian maternity tertiary referral centre.

FINDINGS

the analysis identified two overarching themes, 'A story of scrutiny' and 'A story of fear', each with a number of subthemes. 'A story of scrutiny' consists of three subthemes. 'A cloak and dagger affair' reflects the midwives' sense of being and feeling 'exposed' and 'vulnerable' whilst simultaneously being 'kept in the dark' and uninformed during the review process. The subtheme 'Being thrown to the wolves' describes the midwives' experiences of being involved, as witnesses, in medico-legal proceedings. The third subtheme, 'The Inquiry followed them home' outlines the effect on midwives' emotional wellbeing and personal relationships. The second major theme, 'A story of fear' again consists of a number of subthemes. 'Feeling unsafe at work: a culture of fear' describes the midwives' experiences of working within an environment they perceive as driven by the fear of litigation. In order to protect themselves and maintain a sense of control, the midwives adopted a number of strategies to 'feel safe' including defensive decision making and moving towards a medical philosophy of care. These concepts are captured within the subtheme 'Covering your back: setting boundaries'. The impact on relationships between midwives, women and medical practitioners is described within the subtheme 'Professional relationship: coloured by fear'. The effect on midwives' confidence and the resultant negative emotions elicited make up the subtheme 'Between a rock and a hard place: the midwives' distressing dilemma'. Finally the subtheme, 'Opting out: the changing nature of professional work practices' describes the specific professional decisions and work strategies that midwives made about their ability to continue working in an environment that they perceived as threatening.

CONCLUSION

the findings suggest that the midwife participants in this small study were totally unprepared and ill equipped, both personally and professionally, to deal with the consequences of working within an environment that was the centre of a number of high profile legal proceedings and an extensive external review of obstetric services. The midwives were naïve about legal processes and unprepared for the legal 'game playing' and media attention that often accompanies court proceedings. Despite the fact that no midwife faced litigation, the participants described their work environment as becoming increasingly stressful and permeated by a culture of fear. In turn, this situation has reinforced the need for some midwives to adopt an 'institution' ideology which reinforces birth as an abnormal event that needs to be medically managed. This has led to changes in professional and personal work practices. The findings also have implications for the midwifery workforce and retention. Although the findings are context specific, this study provides valuable insight into the phenomena of fear of litigation and its impact on midwifery practice. Given the similarities concerning obstetric litigation in some other Western nations, the findings have relevance in the international midwifery arena.

Have women become more willing to accept obstetric interventions and does this relate to mode of birth? Data from a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Concern has increased about rising rates of cesarean section and other obstetric interventions, and it has been suggested that a change in women's attitudes may be partly responsible. Our objectives were, first, to examine changes in women's antenatal willingness to accept obstetric interventions between 1987 and 2000 and, second, to look at the relationship between willingness to accept obstetric interventions and mode of birth.

METHODS

Data on willingness to accept obstetric interventions were collected at 35-36 weeks of pregnancy using postal questionnaires, and follow-up of women was conducted 6 weeks postnatally. Data are presented for 977 women drawn from 8 maternity units in England who were due to give birth in April to May 2000. To address the first objective, data were compared with the parent study carried out in 1987.

RESULTS

The sample had significantly more positive antenatal attitudes toward obstetric interventions than the comparable sample in 1987 (F= 42.25, df= 1, p < 0.001). Willingness to accept obstetric interventions was related to mode of birth. Binary logistic regression controlling for age, education, and parity showed that women with high "willingness to accept intervention" scores had a nearly twofold increase in the odds of an operative or instrumental birth (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.28-2.95) compared with women who had low scores. These attitudes also predicted epidural analgesia use, and differences in mode of birth were no longer significant when epidural use was included in the regression model.

CONCLUSIONS

A shift toward greater willingness to accept obstetric interventions appears to have occurred since 1987, and this shift does appear to relate to mode of birth in the 2000 cohort but not in 1987. The findings suggest that epidural analgesia use mediates the link.