In:
Birth, Wiley, Vol. 45, No. 3 ( 2018-09), p. 236-244
Kurzfassung:
In a national United States survey, we investigated whether crucial shared decision‐making standards were met for 2 common maternity care decisions. Methods Secondary analysis of Listening to Mothers III . A sequence of validated questions concerning shared decision‐making was adapted to 2 maternity care decisions: to induce labor or wait for spontaneous onset of labor among women who were told their baby may be “getting quite large” (N = 349); and for women with 1 or 2 prior cesareans (N = 393), the decision to have a repeat cesarean. Results Almost half (N = 163; 47%) of women who were told their baby might be large reported engaging in a discussion concerning possible labor induction vs waiting for labor, while a large majority (N = 321; 82%) of women with a prior cesarean discussed the option of a repeat cesarean or a planned vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). Women who engaged in discussions received disproportionate information about having the interventions and were more likely to experience the interventions (68% induction, 87% repeat cesarean) than women who did not. After adjustment, women who reported that their provider recommended scheduling a repeat cesarean were 14 times more likely to give birth via cesarean compared with those whose providers recommended planning VBAC ( AOR 14.2; 95% CI : 3.2, 63.0). Conclusion Our findings suggest that, for the decisions in question, established standards of shared decision‐making are not being reliably implemented in maternity care despite opportunities to do so. Provider recommendations and the disproportionate conveyance of reasons for an intervention appear to be related to higher levels of intervention.
Materialart:
Online-Ressource
ISSN:
0730-7659
,
1523-536X
DOI:
10.1111/birt.2018.45.issue-3
Sprache:
Englisch
Verlag:
Wiley
Publikationsdatum:
2018
ZDB Id:
2004021-0
ZDB Id:
2278817-7
