Trend analysis of primary midwife-led delivery care at a Japanese perinatal center

Towards a better understanding of risk selection in maternal and newborn care: A systematic scoping review

Globally, millions of women and their children suffer due to preventable morbidity and mortality, associated with both underuse and overuse of maternal and newborn care. An effective system of risk selection that differentiates between what care should be provided and who should provide it is a global necessity to ensure women and children receive appropriate care, at the right place and the right time. Poor conceptualization of risk selection impedes evaluation and comparison of models of risk selection across various settings, which is necessary to improve maternal and newborn care. We conducted a scoping review to enhance the understanding of risk selection in maternal and newborn care. We included 210 papers, published over the past four decades, originating from 24 countries. Using inductive thematic analysis, we identified three main dimensions of risk selection: (1) risk selection as an organisational measure to optimally align women's and children's needs and resources, (2) risk selection as a practice to detect and assess risk and to make decisions about the delivery of care, and (3) risk selection as a tool to ensure safe care. We found that these three dimensions have three themes in common: risk selection (1) is viewed as both requiring and providing regulation, (2) has a provider centred focus and (3) aims to avoid underuse of care. Due to the methodological challenges of contextual diversity, the concept of risk selection needs clear indicators that capture the complexity of care to make cross-setting evaluation and comparison of risk selection possible. Moreover, a comprehensive understanding of risk selection needs to consider access disparity, women's needs, and unnecessary medicalization.

Women's decision-making processes and the influences on their mode of birth following a previous caesarean section in Taiwan: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is an alternative option for women who have had a previous caesarean section (CS); however, uptake is limited because of concern about the risks of uterine rupture. The aim of this study was to explore women's decision-making processes and the influences on their mode of birth following a previous CS.

METHODS

A qualitative approach was used. The research comprised three stages. Stage I consisted of naturalistic observation at 33-34 weeks' gestation. Stage II involved interviews with pregnant women at 35-37 weeks' gestation. Stage III consisted of interviews with the same women who were interviewed postnatally, 1 month after birth. The research was conducted in a private medical centre in northern Taiwan. Using a purposive sampling, 21 women and 9 obstetricians were recruited. Data collection involved in-depth interviews, observation and field notes. Constant comparative analysis was employed for data analysis.

RESULTS

Ensuring the safety of mother and baby was the focus of women's decisions. Women's decisions-making influences included previous birth experience, concern about the risks of vaginal birth, evaluation of mode of birth, current pregnancy situation, information resources and health insurance. In communicating with obstetricians, some women complied with obstetricians' recommendations for repeat caesarean section (RCS) without being informed of alternatives. Others used four step decision-making processes that included searching for information, listening to obstetricians' professional judgement, evaluating alternatives, and making a decision regarding mode of birth. After birth, women reflected on their decisions in three aspects: reflection on birth choices; reflection on factors influencing decisions; and reflection on outcomes of decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

The health and wellbeing of mother and baby were the major concerns for women. In response to the decision-making influences, women's interactions with obstetricians regarding birth choices varied from passive decision-making to shared decision-making. All women have the right to be informed of alternative birthing options. Routine provision of explanations by obstetricians regarding risks associated with alternative birth options, in addition to financial coverage for RCS from National Health Insurance, would assist women's decision-making. Establishment of a website to provide women with reliable information about birthing options may also assist women's decision-making.

Birthing postures and birth canal lacerations

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to assess the differences in the birth canal lacerations following the lateral and fours posture deliveries compared with those following the supine posture deliveries.

METHODS

We examined the birth canal lacerations of our "low risk" pregnant women under the midwife-led delivery care at Japanese Red Cross Katsushika Maternity Hospital between April 2006 and March 2015.

RESULTS

There were 3826, 1754 and 719 women who delivered with supine, lateral and fours postures. The rate of no laceration in the women who delivered with lateral posture was significant lower than that in the women who delivered with supine posture (OR 0.630, 95% CI 0.56-0.71, p < 0.01); however, the incidence of perineal laceration in the women who delivered with lateral posture was significant lower than that in the women who delivered with supine posture (OR 0.856, 95% CI 0.76-0.90, p < 0.01). The incidence of perineal laceration of third- or fourth-degree in the women who delivered with fours posture was significant higher than that in the women who delivered with supine posture (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.2-4.2, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The current results may be to help for self-determination of birthing postures in prenatal women.