ORIGINAL PAPER
Women’s interest in birth centre care – is it time to make more options available?
1
Department of Rudiments of Midwifery, Institute of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health Sciences, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
2
Department of Nursing Management and Epidemiological Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
3
Department of Neonatology, University Hospital, Krakow, Poland
Submission date: 2018-07-17
Final revision date: 2018-10-13
Acceptance date: 2018-11-14
Publication date: 2019-06-28
Medical Studies 2019;35(2):117-122
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Birth centers, otherwise known as midwife-led units, midwifery units, are designed for women in physiological pregnancy, who would like to give birth in a possibly natural way. This type of care offers homelike environment, with basic medical equipment on-site.
Aim of the research:
To explore women’s preferences regarding an alternative model of perinatal care in birth centers.
Material and methods:
A two-phase study was used. In this exploratory descriptive study quantitative data were collected by anonymous questionnaire from 153 women in Poland from January 2017 to May 2017. A sample of women of childbearing age from various parts of Poland were recruited via the Internet and in-person.
Results:
Almost 79% of respondents declared their interest in giving birth in a natural rhythm led by a midwife. From the group potentially interested in giving birth in a birthing centre 41.2% of respondents fully agreed with the statement “Physiological birth in the home is a safe alternative to giving birth in the hospital”, and 23.5% of the respondents from the same group agreed with the above statement partially. All aspects that are the domains of midwife-led care in birth centres, such as the use of non-pharmacological pain relief, one-to-one midwife care during delivery, and intimate homelike surroundings, were important for over 70% of respondents.
Conclusions:
Women show interest in birth centre care during the perinatal period. Introducing birth centres into perinatal care for women in a physiological pregnancy with low risk of complications may match their needs.
Birth centers, otherwise known as midwife-led units, midwifery units, are designed for women in physiological pregnancy, who would like to give birth in a possibly natural way. This type of care offers homelike environment, with basic medical equipment on-site.
Aim of the research:
To explore women’s preferences regarding an alternative model of perinatal care in birth centers.
Material and methods:
A two-phase study was used. In this exploratory descriptive study quantitative data were collected by anonymous questionnaire from 153 women in Poland from January 2017 to May 2017. A sample of women of childbearing age from various parts of Poland were recruited via the Internet and in-person.
Results:
Almost 79% of respondents declared their interest in giving birth in a natural rhythm led by a midwife. From the group potentially interested in giving birth in a birthing centre 41.2% of respondents fully agreed with the statement “Physiological birth in the home is a safe alternative to giving birth in the hospital”, and 23.5% of the respondents from the same group agreed with the above statement partially. All aspects that are the domains of midwife-led care in birth centres, such as the use of non-pharmacological pain relief, one-to-one midwife care during delivery, and intimate homelike surroundings, were important for over 70% of respondents.
Conclusions:
Women show interest in birth centre care during the perinatal period. Introducing birth centres into perinatal care for women in a physiological pregnancy with low risk of complications may match their needs.
REFERENCES (21)
1.
WHO recommendations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience. Geneva: World Health Organization 2018.
2.
Kirkham M. Birth Centres. A Social Model for Maternity Care. Elsevier, London 2003.
3.
Better Births. Improving outcomes of maternity services in England. A Five Year Forward View for maternity care. National Maternity Review 2015; Available at: http://www.england.nhs.uk/ourw....
6.
Hodnett ED, Downe S, Walsh D, Weston J. Alternative versus conventional institutional settings for birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; 8: CD000012.
7.
Iwanowicz-Palus GJ, Stadnicka G, Bień A. Organizacja opieki przedkoncepcyjnej i okołoporodowej determinantą zdrowia rodziny i społeczeństwa. Med Og Nauk Zdr 2013; 19: 313-318.
8.
The Royal College of Midwives (RCM). Standards for birth centres in England: a standards document. London 2008.
9.
Junge I. Dom Narodzin – alternatywa dla szpitala. Konferencja „Poród jako doświadczenie kobiety – rola, misja, odpowiedzialność położnej i lekarza”. Fundacja Rodzić po Ludzku, Warszawa-Rynia 2005.
10.
Stobnicka D, Iwanowicz-Palus G, Bień A. Alternatywne miejsca porodu. In: Alternatywne metody opieki okołoporodowej. Iwanowicz-Palus GI (ed). Wydawnictwo Lekarskie PZWL, Warsaw 2007; 103-105.
11.
Opieka okołoporodowa na oddziałach położniczych. Informacja o wynikach kontroli. Najwyższa Izba Kontroli. Nr ewid. 203/2015/P/15/065/LB; Available at: https://www.nik.gov.pl/plik/id....
12.
OECD (2015), Health at a Glance 2015: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing, Paris; doi: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1787/health_glance-2015-en.
13.
Childbirth with Dignity Foundation 2017. Raport z monitoringu oddziałów położniczych. Medykalizacja porodu w Polsce. Warszawa, 2017; Available at: http://www.rodzicpoludzku.pl/i..._ Polsce_2017.pdf.
14.
Redshaw M, Heikkila K. Delivered with care: a national survey of women’s experience of maternity care 2010. University of Oxford, Oxford 2010.
15.
Karlström A, Nested A, Hildingsson I. The meaning of a very positive birth experience: focus groups discussions with women. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2015; 15: 251.
16.
Macfarlane A, Rocca-Ihenacho L, Turner L. Survey of women’s experiences of care in a new freestanding midwifery unit in an inner city area of London, England. Midwifery 2014; 30: 1009-1020.
17.
Hollowell J, Rowe R, Townend J, Knight M, Li Y, Linsell L, Redshaw M, Brocklehurst P, Macfarlane A, Marlow N, McCourt C, Newburn M, Sandall J, Silverton L. The Birthplace in England national prospective cohort study: further analyses to enhance policy and service delivery decision-making for planned place of birth. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2015.
18.
Begley C, Devane D, Clarke M, McCann C, Hughes P, Reilly M, Maguire R, Higgins S, Finan A, Gormally S, Doyle M. Comparison of midwife-led and consultant-led care of healthy women at low risk of childbirth complications in the Republic of Ireland: a randomised trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2011; 11: 85.
19.
Gottvall K, Grunewald C, Waldenström U. Safety of birth centre care: perinatal mortality over a 10-year period. BJOG 2004; 111: 71-8.
20.
Overgaard C, Fenger-Grøn M, Sandall J. The impact of birthplace on women’s birth experiences and perceptions of care. Soc Sci Med 2012; 74: 973-81.
21.
Safer Childbirth. Minimum Standards for the Organization and Delivery of Care in Labour. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists 2007; Available at: https://www.rcog.org.uk/global... 2007.pdf.
| eISSN: | 2300-6722 |
| ISSN: | 1899-1874 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
