U.S. Nulliparas' Reasons for Expected Provider Type and Childbirth Setting

Overview

Journal J Perinat Educ

Publisher Springer

Date 2016 Mar 4

PMID 26937162

Citations 3

Authors

Adriana Arcia

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to describe nulliparas' reasons for the type of provider (i.e., midwife, physician) and childbirth setting (i.e., home, hospital, hospital-based birth center) that respondents expected for their births. Data were collected via a cross-sectional, descriptive, self-administered, Web-based survey including both close- and open-ended questions and were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Respondents were 220 nulliparous women aged 18-40 years, living in the United States, and pregnant at 20 or fewer weeks' gestation. Women's reasons were categorized broadly as relating to provider/setting attributes, relationship with provider/setting, normative choices, respondent attributes, and practical considerations. Respondents' reasons highlight misconceptions about childbirth care options, especially regarding midwifery and nonhospital settings, which may be addressed by childbirth education.

Citing Articles

The Video on Birth Care Options: Evaluation With University Students.

Soliday E, Ord G J Perinat Educ. 2020; 29(1):23-34.

PMID: 32021059 PMC: 6984376. DOI: 10.1891/1058-1243.29.1.23.

Accidental Infant Suffocation and Strangulation in Bed: Disparities and Opportunities.

Drowos J, Fils A, Mejia de Grubb M, Salemi J, Zoorob R, Hennekens C Matern Child Health J. 2019; 23(12):1670-1678.

PMID: 31243626 DOI: 10.1007/s10995-019-02786-5.

Washington State Childbearing Women's Experiences of Planned Home Births: A Heideggerian Phenomenological Investigation.

Fleming S, Healy M, Severtsen B, Donovan-Batson C J Perinat Educ. 2019; 26(1):10-17.

PMID: 30643373 PMC: 6314324. DOI: 10.1891/1058-1243.26.1.10.

References

Janssen P, Henderson A, Vedam S . The experience of planned home birth: views of the first 500 women. Birth. 2009; 36(4):297-304. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2009.00357.x. View

Jimenez V, Klein M, Hivon M, Mason C . A mirage of change: family-centered maternity care in practice. Birth. 2010; 37(2):160-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00396.x. View

Hall W, Hauck Y, Carty E, Hutton E, Fenwick J, Stoll K . Childbirth fear, anxiety, fatigue, and sleep deprivation in pregnant women. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2009; 38(5):567-76. DOI: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2009.01054.x. View

Hsieh H, Shannon S . Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005; 15(9):1277-88. DOI: 10.1177/1049732305276687. View

Arcia A . Facebook Advertisements for Inexpensive Participant Recruitment Among Women in Early Pregnancy. Health Educ Behav. 2013; 41(3):237-41. PMC: 3976452. DOI: 10.1177/1090198113504414. View

Boucher D, Bennett C, McFarlin B, Freeze R . Staying home to give birth: why women in the United States choose home birth. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2009; 54(2):119-26. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2008.09.006. View

Pazol K, Zane S, Parker W, Hall L, Berg C, Cook D . Abortion surveillance--United States, 2008. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2011; 60(15):1-41. View

Johnson P . Midwife and nurse-midwife. The effect of title on perception and confidence in services provided by professional midwives. The Midwifery Research Project Group. J Nurse Midwifery. 1998; 43(4):296-304. DOI: 10.1016/s0091-2182(98)00015-9. View

Miller A, Shriver T . Women's childbirth preferences and practices in the United States. Soc Sci Med. 2012; 75(4):709-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.03.051. View

10.

Bylund C . Mothers' involvement in decision making during the birthing process: a quantitative analysis of women's online birth stories. Health Commun. 2005; 18(1):23-39. DOI: 10.1207/s15327027hc1801_2. View

11.

. Choosing a birth attendant: the influence of a woman's childbirth definition. Soc Sci Med. 1997; 45(6):925-36. DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(97)00003-8. View

12.

Martin J, Hamilton B, Ventura S, Osterman M, Mathews T . Births: final data for 2011. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2014; 62(1):1-69, 72. View

13.

Romano A . A Changing Landscape: Implications of Pregnant Women's Internet Use for Childbirth Educators. J Perinat Educ. 2008; 16(4):18-24. PMC: 2174387. DOI: 10.1624/105812407X244903. View

14.

Callister L . Beliefs and perceptions of childbearing women choosing different primary health care providers. Clin Nurs Res. 1995; 4(2):168-80. DOI: 10.1177/105477389500400204. View

15.

Fuglenes D, Aas E, Botten G, Oian P, Kristiansen I . Why do some pregnant women prefer cesarean? The influence of parity, delivery experiences, and fear. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 205(1):45.e1-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.03.043. View

16.

Bracken J, Dryfhout V, Goldenhar L, Pauls R . Preferences and concerns for delivery: an antepartum survey. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008; 19(11):1527-31. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-008-0680-1. View

17.

Buyukbayrak E, Kaymaz O, Kars B, Karsidag A, Bektas E, Unal O . Caesarean delivery or vaginal birth: preference of Turkish pregnant women and influencing factors. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010; 30(2):155-8. DOI: 10.3109/01443610903461436. View

18.

Parry D . "We wanted a birth experience, not a medical experience": exploring Canadian women's use of midwifery. Health Care Women Int. 2008; 29(8):784-806. DOI: 10.1080/07399330802269451. View

19.

Lavender T, Chapple J . How women choose where to give birth. Pract Midwife. 2005; 8(7):10-5. View

20.

Angeja A, Washington A, Vargas J, Gomez R, Rojas I, Caughey A . Chilean women's preferences regarding mode of delivery: which do they prefer and why?. BJOG. 2006; 113(11):1253-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01069.x. View