Women's views and experiences of publicly-funded homebirth programs in Victoria, Australia: A cross-sectional survey.
Homebirth
Maternity/pregnancy care
Public care
Satisfaction
Women’s views
Journal
Women and birth : journal of the Australian College of Midwives
ISSN: 1878-1799
Titre abrégé: Women Birth
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101266131
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2019
Jun 2019
Historique:
received:
03
05
2018
revised:
15
06
2018
accepted:
26
07
2018
pubmed:
15
8
2018
medline:
6
8
2019
entrez:
15
8
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
It is critical women's voices are heard if there is to be more widespread implementation of midwifery-led continuity models. Publicly-funded homebirth is one such model, yet there has been limited systematic evaluation from the women's perspective. Examine women's experiences of and views about the two publicly-funded homebirth programs in Victoria, Australia. A cross-sectional design was used. All eligible women enrolled in the two pilot homebirth programs in metropolitan Melbourne whose infants were eight weeks of age or more during the evaluation period were invited to participate in a postal survey. A structured questionnaire was used, with some open-ended questions to enable extra comments. We explored women's reasons for choosing homebirth; views of care; experience of labour and birth; views on transfer; and overall experience of the homebirth program. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Simple thematic analysis was used for open-ended questions. The survey response rate was 71% (96/136). A high percentage of women rated their care as 'Very good': pregnancy 81%; labour and birth 90%; and the early postpartum period 83%. Women reported low levels of anxiety during labour and birth, were able to express their feelings, felt in control, and coped physically and emotionally better than they had expected. They felt well supported by midwives and overall reported very positive experiences of the homebirth programs. These two publicly-funded homebirth pilot programs demonstrated very positive care ratings by women. These findings, along with the clinical outcomes (reported separately), support the continuation and expansion of the program.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
It is critical women's voices are heard if there is to be more widespread implementation of midwifery-led continuity models. Publicly-funded homebirth is one such model, yet there has been limited systematic evaluation from the women's perspective.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
Examine women's experiences of and views about the two publicly-funded homebirth programs in Victoria, Australia.
METHODS
METHODS
A cross-sectional design was used. All eligible women enrolled in the two pilot homebirth programs in metropolitan Melbourne whose infants were eight weeks of age or more during the evaluation period were invited to participate in a postal survey. A structured questionnaire was used, with some open-ended questions to enable extra comments. We explored women's reasons for choosing homebirth; views of care; experience of labour and birth; views on transfer; and overall experience of the homebirth program. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Simple thematic analysis was used for open-ended questions.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
The survey response rate was 71% (96/136). A high percentage of women rated their care as 'Very good': pregnancy 81%; labour and birth 90%; and the early postpartum period 83%. Women reported low levels of anxiety during labour and birth, were able to express their feelings, felt in control, and coped physically and emotionally better than they had expected. They felt well supported by midwives and overall reported very positive experiences of the homebirth programs.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
These two publicly-funded homebirth pilot programs demonstrated very positive care ratings by women. These findings, along with the clinical outcomes (reported separately), support the continuation and expansion of the program.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30104172
pii: S1871-5192(18)30242-7
doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2018.07.019
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
221-230Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2018 Australian College of Midwives. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.