Mixed-method study of women's assessment and experience of childbirth care

被引:7
|
作者
Donate-Manzanares, Miriam [1 ]
Rodriguez-Cano, Teresa [2 ]
Rodriguez-Almagro, Julian [3 ]
Hernandez-Martinez, Antonio [3 ]
Santos-Hernandez, Gloria [4 ]
Beato-Fernandez, Luis [2 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Univ Infanta Leonor, Madrid, Spain
[2] Gen Univ Ciudad Real, Serv Psiquiatria Hosp, Calle Obispo Rafael Torija, Ciudad Real, Spain
[3] Fac Enfermeria Ciudad Real, Campus Ciudad Real,Calle Camilo Jose Cela, Ciudad Real, Spain
[4] Hosp Virgen Salud Toledo, Serv Obstet & Ginecol, Toledo, Spain
关键词
maternity; midwife; mixed-method; obstetric labour; parturition; patient satisfaction; quality improvement; quality management; quality of health care; BIRTH EXPERIENCE; HOSPITAL BIRTH; SATISFACTION; HEALTH; LABOR; PERSPECTIVE; QUALITY; RISK;
D O I
10.1111/jan.14984
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Aim To examine women's evaluations of quality of care from their perspectives. Background Assessing women's satisfaction with the quality of care they receive during childbirth is an important component of care quality that should be analysed. Evidence suggests that childbirth experience has an important impact on women's health. Therefore, taking into account the perceptions of women about quality is a means to improve care. However, studies examining care quality in this setting remain scarce. Design Mixed-methods explanatory sequential design. Methods A national survey with a sample of 1082 participants, and 15 semi-structured interviews. Data collection occurred between January 2017 and January 2019. Quantitative data were obtained through a validated scale, the Quality from the Patient's Perspective-Intrapartal questionnaire, whose score can range from 1 (minimum satisfaction) to 4 (maximum satisfaction). Semi-structured interviews were conducted for qualitative data. Descriptive statistics, group comparison and qualitative content analysis were included in data analysis. Results The mean score on the QPP-I tool was high (3.13; SD 0.74). Variables that had the most influence on the experience were type of birth, type of perineal trauma, admission of the baby, time since birth, home-birth, parity and duration of labour. Data from the qualitative interviews identified five themes that explained women's experiences with the quality of care. Previous expectations influence the emotions they have regarding the experience. Relationships with professionals and their social skills are fundamental for the evaluation of quality. The separation of the newborn appears as a factor that worsens the appreciation of women. Good pain management and continuity of care by specialists are also named as key elements of the quality of care. Conclusion Findings demonstrate that experience with childbirth care is of utmost importance for women. They also show the indisputable need to listen to their opinions and assessments when lines of improvement of quality are identified. Impact This study provides information that can improve the care that women receive during their childbirths. Using their opinions will make them feel an active part of the system and in this way, we will be closer to achieve excellence in our services.
引用
收藏
页码:4195 / 4210
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Assessment on quality of healthcare services during childbirth: A community-based mixed-method study in the women of Puducherry
    Chellamuthu, Lalithambigai
    Kanagat, Sadhvika
    Dakshinamurthy, Senkadhirdasan
    Boratne, Abhijit Vinodrao
    [J]. INDIAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY MEDICINE, 2023, 48 (04) : 550 - 555
  • [2] Canadian Women's Experience of Postnatal Care: A Mixed Method Study
    Dol, Justine
    Hughes, Brianna
    Murphy, Gail Tomblin
    Aston, Megan
    McMillan, Douglas
    Campbell-Yeo, Marsha
    [J]. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF NURSING RESEARCH, 2022, 54 (04) : 497 - 507
  • [3] Evaluating the effect of childbirth education class: a mixed-method study
    Lee, Linda Y. K.
    Holroyd, Eleanor
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL NURSING REVIEW, 2009, 56 (03) : 361 - 368
  • [4] Spontaneous childbirth-related mental images among pregnant women: a mixed-method study
    Favrod, Celine
    Holmes, Emily A.
    Vial, Yvan
    Harari, Mathilde Morisod
    Horsch, Antje
    [J]. JOURNAL OF REPRODUCTIVE AND INFANT PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 36 (04) : 393 - 405
  • [5] A Mixed-Method Study on the Assessment of Factors Influencing Nurses' Provision of Spiritual Care
    Fradelos, Evangelos C.
    Alikari, Victoria
    Artemi, Sofia
    Missouridou, Evdokia
    Mangoulia, Polyxeni
    Kyranou, Maria
    Saridi, Maria
    Toska, Aikaterini
    Tsaras, Konstantinos
    Tzavella, Foteini
    [J]. HEALTHCARE, 2024, 12 (08)
  • [6] Cognitive and Personality Factors Implicated in Pain Experience in Women With Endometriosis A Mixed-Method Study
    Zarbo, Cristina
    Brugnera, Agostino
    Dessi, Valentina
    Barbetta, Pietro
    Candeloro, Ilario
    Secomandi, Rita
    Betto, Enrico
    Malandrino, Chiara
    Bellia, Adriano
    Trezzi, Gaetano
    Rabboni, Massimo
    Compare, Angelo
    Frigerio, Luigi
    [J]. CLINICAL JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2019, 35 (12): : 948 - 957
  • [7] Women’s experience of childbirth care in health facilities: a qualitative assessment of respectful maternity care in Afghanistan
    Partamin Manalai
    Nasratullah Ansari
    Hannah Tappis
    Young Mi Kim
    Jelle Stekelenburg
    Jos van Roosmalen
    Sheena Currie
    [J]. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 24
  • [8] Women's experience of childbirth care in health facilities: a qualitative assessment of respectful maternity care in Afghanistan
    Manalai, Partamin
    Ansari, Nasratullah
    Tappis, Hannah
    Kim, Young Mi
    Stekelenburg, Jelle
    van Roosmalen, Jos
    Currie, Sheena
    [J]. BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [9] Midwives' experiences of supporting women's mental health: A mixed-method study
    Savory, N. A.
    Sanders, J.
    Hannigan, B.
    [J]. MIDWIFERY, 2022, 111
  • [10] A Mixed-Method Study of Psychologists' Use of Multicultural Assessment
    Edwards, Lisa M.
    Burkard, Alan W.
    Adams, Hadiya A.
    Newcomb, Shirley A.
    [J]. PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY-RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2017, 48 (02) : 131 - 138