Preventing traumatic childbirth experiences: 2192 women's perceptions and views
- PMID: 28553692
- PMCID: PMC5509770
- DOI: 10.1007/s00737-017-0729-6
Preventing traumatic childbirth experiences: 2192 women's perceptions and views
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to explore and quantify perceptions and experiences of women with a traumatic childbirth experience in order to identify areas for prevention and to help midwives and obstetricians improve woman-centered care. A retrospective survey was conducted online among 2192 women with a self-reported traumatic childbirth experience. Women were recruited in March 2016 through social media, including specific parent support groups. They filled out a 35-item questionnaire of which the most important items were (1) self-reported attributions of the trauma and how they believe the traumatic experience could have been prevented (2) by the caregivers or (3) by themselves. The responses most frequently given were (1) Lack and/or loss of control (54.6%), Fear for baby's health/life (49.9%), and High intensity of pain/physical discomfort (47.4%); (2) Communicate/explain (39.1%), Listen to me (more) (36.9%), and Support me (more/better) emotionally/practically (29.8%); and (3) Nothing (37.0%), Ask for (26.9%), or Refuse (16.5%) certain interventions. Primiparous participants chose High intensity of pain/physical discomfort, Long duration of delivery, and Discrepancy between expectations and reality more often and Fear for own health/life, A bad outcome, and Delivery went too fast less often than multiparous participants. Women attribute their traumatic childbirth experience primarily to lack and/or loss of control, issues of communication, and practical/emotional support. They believe that in many cases, their trauma could have been reduced or prevented by better communication and support by their caregiver or if they themselves had asked for or refused interventions.
Keywords: Childbirth; Communication; Control; Interventions; PTSD; Postpartum; Prevention; Support; Traumatic.
Conflict of interest statement
Disclosure of interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Details of ethics approval
Ethics approval was waived by the medical ethics committee of the Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Funding
No funding was required for this study.
References
-
- American Psychiatric Association: Washington DC (2000) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th edn.-Text Revision)
-
- Brouwers H (2014) Perinatal care in the Netherlands 2013. Utrecht: Foundation Perinatal Registration the Netherlands
-
- CBS website accessed 12-6-2016: http://statline.cbs.nl/statweb/publication/?vw=t&dm=slnl&pa=37422ned&d1=...
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
