Vaginal examinations and mistreatment of women during facility-based childbirth in health facilities: secondary analysis of labour observations in Ghana, Guinea and Nigeria.
maternal health
obstetrics
Journal
BMJ global health
ISSN: 2059-7908
Titre abrégé: BMJ Glob Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101685275
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2021
11 2021
Historique:
received:
16
06
2021
accepted:
24
10
2021
entrez:
18
11
2021
pubmed:
19
11
2021
medline:
15
12
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Previous research on mistreatment of women during childbirth has focused on physical and verbal abuse, neglect and stigmatisation. However, other manifestations of mistreatment, such as during vaginal examinations, are relatively underexplored. This study explores four types of mistreatment of women during vaginal examinations: (1) non-consented care, (2) sharing of private information, (3) exposure of genitalia and (4) exposure of breasts. A secondary analysis of data from the WHO multicountry study 'How Women Are Treated During Childbirth' was conducted. The study used direct, continuous labour observations of women giving birth in facilities in Ghana, Guinea and Nigeria. Descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to describe the different types of mistreatment of women during vaginal examinations and associated privacy measures (ie, availability of curtains). Of the 2016 women observed, 1430 (70.9%) underwent any vaginal examination. Across all vaginal examinations, 842/1430 (58.9%) women were observed to receive non-consented care; 233/1430 (16.4%) women had their private information shared; 397/1430 (27.8%) women had their genitalia exposed; and 356/1430 (24.9%) had their breasts exposed. The observed prevalence of mistreatment during vaginal examinations varied across countries. There were country-level differences in the association between absence of privacy measures and mistreatment. Absence of privacy measures was associated with sharing of private information (Ghana: adjusted OR (AOR) 3.8, 95% CI 1.6 to 8.9; Nigeria: AOR 4.9, 95% CI 1.9 to 12.7), genitalia exposure (Ghana: AOR 6.7, 95% CI 2.9 to 14.9; Nigeria: AOR 6.5, 95% CI 2.9 to 14.5), breast exposure (Ghana: AOR 5.9, 95% CI 2.8 to 12.9; Nigeria: AOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.3 to 5.9) and non-consented vaginal examination (Ghana: AOR 2.5, 95% CI 1.4 to 4.7; Guinea: AOR 0.21, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.38). Our results highlight the need to ensure better communication and consent processes for vaginal examination during childbirth. In some settings, measures such as availability of curtains were helpful to reduce women's exposure and sharing of private information, but context-specific interventions will be required to achieve respectful maternity care globally.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Previous research on mistreatment of women during childbirth has focused on physical and verbal abuse, neglect and stigmatisation. However, other manifestations of mistreatment, such as during vaginal examinations, are relatively underexplored. This study explores four types of mistreatment of women during vaginal examinations: (1) non-consented care, (2) sharing of private information, (3) exposure of genitalia and (4) exposure of breasts.
METHODS
A secondary analysis of data from the WHO multicountry study 'How Women Are Treated During Childbirth' was conducted. The study used direct, continuous labour observations of women giving birth in facilities in Ghana, Guinea and Nigeria. Descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to describe the different types of mistreatment of women during vaginal examinations and associated privacy measures (ie, availability of curtains).
RESULTS
Of the 2016 women observed, 1430 (70.9%) underwent any vaginal examination. Across all vaginal examinations, 842/1430 (58.9%) women were observed to receive non-consented care; 233/1430 (16.4%) women had their private information shared; 397/1430 (27.8%) women had their genitalia exposed; and 356/1430 (24.9%) had their breasts exposed. The observed prevalence of mistreatment during vaginal examinations varied across countries. There were country-level differences in the association between absence of privacy measures and mistreatment. Absence of privacy measures was associated with sharing of private information (Ghana: adjusted OR (AOR) 3.8, 95% CI 1.6 to 8.9; Nigeria: AOR 4.9, 95% CI 1.9 to 12.7), genitalia exposure (Ghana: AOR 6.7, 95% CI 2.9 to 14.9; Nigeria: AOR 6.5, 95% CI 2.9 to 14.5), breast exposure (Ghana: AOR 5.9, 95% CI 2.8 to 12.9; Nigeria: AOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.3 to 5.9) and non-consented vaginal examination (Ghana: AOR 2.5, 95% CI 1.4 to 4.7; Guinea: AOR 0.21, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.38).
CONCLUSION
Our results highlight the need to ensure better communication and consent processes for vaginal examination during childbirth. In some settings, measures such as availability of curtains were helpful to reduce women's exposure and sharing of private information, but context-specific interventions will be required to achieve respectful maternity care globally.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34789483
pii: bmjgh-2021-006640
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006640
pmc: PMC8733942
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Reprod Health. 2014 Sep 19;11(1):71
pubmed: 25238684
Reprod Health. 2018 Jan 11;15(1):9
pubmed: 29325572
Reprod Health. 2018 Dec 4;15(1):198
pubmed: 30514394
PLoS One. 2019 Oct 17;14(10):e0223701
pubmed: 31622382
J Prim Care Community Health. 2020 Jan-Dec;11:2150132720940517
pubmed: 32639899
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Nov;5(Suppl 2):
pubmed: 33234502
J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2018 Jun;39(2):90-95
pubmed: 28635536
Health Care Women Int. 2020 Jan;41(1):75-88
pubmed: 31204890
Epidemiol Health. 2018 Jul 1;40:e2018029
pubmed: 30056644
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016 Aug 19;16:236
pubmed: 27543002
Reprod Health. 2015 Jul 22;12:60
pubmed: 26198988
Lancet. 2014 Sep 20;384(9948):e42-4
pubmed: 24965825
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Mar 28;17(1):102
pubmed: 28351350
Birth. 2019 Sep;46(3):523-532
pubmed: 30680785
BMJ. 2014 Dec 03;349:g6886
pubmed: 25472418
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 15;18(1):132
pubmed: 30442102
PLoS Med. 2015 Jun 30;12(6):e1001847; discussion e1001847
pubmed: 26126110
Lancet. 2019 Nov 9;394(10210):1750-1763
pubmed: 31604660
BJOG. 2018 Jul;125(8):932-942
pubmed: 29117644
BJOG. 2013 Sep;120(10):1171-82
pubmed: 23750657
Lancet. 2013 May 18;381(9879):1747-55
pubmed: 23683641
Midwifery. 2002 Dec;18(4):296-303
pubmed: 12473444
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018 Aug 20;18(1):338
pubmed: 30126357
Reprod Health. 2012 Aug 28;9:16
pubmed: 22929060
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 May 22;17(10):
pubmed: 32456063
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015 Feb;128(2):110-3
pubmed: 25476154
Reprod Health Matters. 2018;26(53):70-87
pubmed: 30152268