» Articles » PMID: 38745603

Overview
Specialty Nursing
Date 2024 May 15
PMID 38745603
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Pregnant women have preferences about how they intend to manage labour pain. Unmet intentions can result in negative emotions and/or birth experiences.

Objective: To examine the antenatal level of intention for intrapartum pain relief and the factors that might predict this intention.

Design: A cross-sectional online survey-based study.

Setting And Participants: 414 healthy pregnant women in the Netherlands, predominantly receiving antenatal care from the community-based midwife who were recruited via maternity healthcare professionals and social media platforms.

Methods: The attitude towards intrapartum pain relief was measured with the Labour Pain Relief Attitude Questionnaire for pregnant women. Personality traits with the HEXACO-60 questionnaire, general psychological health with the Mental Health Inventory-5 and labour and birth anxiety with the Tilburg Pregnancy Distress Scale. Multiple linear regression was performed with the intention for pain relief as the dependant variable.

Results: The obstetrician as birth companion (<.001), the perception that because of the impact of pregnancy on the woman's body, using pain relief during labour is self-evident (<.001), feeling convinced that pain relief contributes to self-confidence during labour (=.023), and fear of the forthcoming birth (=.003) predicted women were more likely to use pain relief. The midwife as birth companion (=.047) and considering the partner in requesting pain relief (=.045) predicted women were less likely to use pain relief.

Conclusion: Understanding the reasons predicting women's intention of pain management during labour, provides insight in low-risk women's supportive needs prior to labour and are worth paying attention to during the antenatal period.

Citing Articles

Factors associated with the intention of pregnant women to give birth with epidural analgesia: a cross-sectional study.

Van Leugenhaege L, Degraeve J, Jacquemyn Y, Mestdagh E, Kuipers Y BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023; 23(1):598.

PMID: 37608256 PMC: 10463581. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-023-05887-w.

References
1.
Kelly M, Dunstan F, Lloyd K, Fone D . Evaluating cutpoints for the MHI-5 and MCS using the GHQ-12: a comparison of five different methods. BMC Psychiatry. 2008; 8:10. PMC: 2265280. DOI: 10.1186/1471-244X-8-10. View

2.
Van den Bussche E, Crombez G, Eccleston C, Sullivan M . Why women prefer epidural analgesia during childbirth: the role of beliefs about epidural analgesia and pain catastrophizing. Eur J Pain. 2006; 11(3):275-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2006.03.002. View

3.
Logtenberg S, Verhoeven C, Oude Rengerink K, Sluijs A, Freeman L, Schellevis F . Pharmacological pain relief and fear of childbirth in low risk women; secondary analysis of the RAVEL study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018; 18(1):347. PMC: 6109320. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-018-1986-8. View

4.
Seijmonsbergen-Schermers A, van den Akker T, Rydahl E, Beeckman K, Bogaerts A, Binfa L . Variations in use of childbirth interventions in 13 high-income countries: A multinational cross-sectional study. PLoS Med. 2020; 17(5):e1003103. PMC: 7244098. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003103. View

5.
Escott D, Slade P, Spiby H . Preparation for pain management during childbirth: the psychological aspects of coping strategy development in antenatal education. Clin Psychol Rev. 2009; 29(7):617-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2009.07.002. View