What do mothers think about their antenatal classes? A mixed-method study in Switzerland.
Delivery
Maternal health services
Obstetric
Patient satisfaction
Pregnant mothers
Prenatal education
Journal
BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Oct 2023
19 Oct 2023
Historique:
received:
05
05
2023
accepted:
04
10
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
20
10
2023
entrez:
19
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Research so far has evaluated the effect of antenatal classes, but few studies have investigated its usefulness from the perspective of mothers after birth. Antenatal classes evolved from pain management to a mother-centred approach, including birth plans and parenting education. Evaluating the perception of the usefulness of these classes is important to meet mother's needs. However, so far, research on the mothers' perception of the usefulness of these classes is sparse, particularly when measured after childbirth. Given that antenatal classes are considered as adult education, it is necessary to carry out this evaluation after mothers have had an opportunity to apply some of the competences they acquired during the antenatal classes during their childbirth. This study investigated mothers' satisfaction and perceived usefulness of antenatal classes provided within a university hospital in Switzerland, as assessed in the postpartum period. Primiparous mothers who gave birth at a Swiss university hospital from January 2018 to September 2020 were contacted. Those who had attended the hospital's antenatal classes were invited to complete a questionnaire consisting of a quantitative and qualitative part about usefulness and satisfaction about antenatal classes. Quantitative data were analysed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis. Among the 259 mothers who answered, 61% (n = 158) were globally satisfied with the antenatal classes and 56.2% (n = 145) found the sessions useful in general. However, looking at the utility score of each theme, none of them achieved a score of usefulness above 44%. The timing of some of these sessions was questioned. Some mothers regretted the lack of accurate information, especially on labour complications and postnatal care. Antenatal classes were valued for their peer support. However, in their salutogenic vision of empowerment, they did not address the complications of childbirth, even though this was what some mothers needed. Furthermore, these classes could also be more oriented towards the postpartum period, as requested by some mothers. Revising antenatal classes to fit mothers' needs could lead to greater satisfaction and thus a better impact on the well-being of mothers and their families.
Sections du résumé
PROBLEM
OBJECTIVE
Research so far has evaluated the effect of antenatal classes, but few studies have investigated its usefulness from the perspective of mothers after birth.
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Antenatal classes evolved from pain management to a mother-centred approach, including birth plans and parenting education. Evaluating the perception of the usefulness of these classes is important to meet mother's needs. However, so far, research on the mothers' perception of the usefulness of these classes is sparse, particularly when measured after childbirth. Given that antenatal classes are considered as adult education, it is necessary to carry out this evaluation after mothers have had an opportunity to apply some of the competences they acquired during the antenatal classes during their childbirth.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
This study investigated mothers' satisfaction and perceived usefulness of antenatal classes provided within a university hospital in Switzerland, as assessed in the postpartum period.
METHODS
METHODS
Primiparous mothers who gave birth at a Swiss university hospital from January 2018 to September 2020 were contacted. Those who had attended the hospital's antenatal classes were invited to complete a questionnaire consisting of a quantitative and qualitative part about usefulness and satisfaction about antenatal classes. Quantitative data were analysed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Among the 259 mothers who answered, 61% (n = 158) were globally satisfied with the antenatal classes and 56.2% (n = 145) found the sessions useful in general. However, looking at the utility score of each theme, none of them achieved a score of usefulness above 44%. The timing of some of these sessions was questioned. Some mothers regretted the lack of accurate information, especially on labour complications and postnatal care.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
Antenatal classes were valued for their peer support. However, in their salutogenic vision of empowerment, they did not address the complications of childbirth, even though this was what some mothers needed. Furthermore, these classes could also be more oriented towards the postpartum period, as requested by some mothers.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Revising antenatal classes to fit mothers' needs could lead to greater satisfaction and thus a better impact on the well-being of mothers and their families.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37858110
doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-06049-8
pii: 10.1186/s12884-023-06049-8
pmc: PMC10585766
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
741Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Medicina (Kaunas). 2021 Jun 07;57(6):
pubmed: 34200128
J Perinat Educ. 2006 Fall;15(4):18-27
pubmed: 17768431
Perspect Public Health. 2017 Mar;137(2):89-101
pubmed: 27004489
Women Birth. 2013 Mar;26(1):e5-8
pubmed: 23063931
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Jul 24;19(1):264
pubmed: 31340770
Women Birth. 2021 May;34(3):219-230
pubmed: 32360106
BMJ Open. 2019 Mar 30;9(3):e026484
pubmed: 30928952
Int Urogynecol J. 2011 Sep;22(9):1127-34
pubmed: 21512827
J Perinat Educ. 2012 Winter;21(1):11-7
pubmed: 23277726
Clin Ter. 2020 Jan-Feb;170(1):e78-e86
pubmed: 31850489
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2018 Oct;72(10):933-939
pubmed: 29921649
Midwifery. 2013 May;29(5):425-33
pubmed: 22541692
Sci Rep. 2022 Jun 23;12(1):10717
pubmed: 35739298
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2005 May;84(5):436-43
pubmed: 15842207
BJOG. 2009 Aug;116(9):1167-76
pubmed: 19538406
Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 7;11(1):13990
pubmed: 34234162
Womens Health (Lond). 2023 Jan-Dec;19:17455057221150098
pubmed: 36692031
Clin Perinatol. 1998 Jun;25(2):389-402
pubmed: 9647000
J Perinat Educ. 2018 Jun;27(3):163-174
pubmed: 30364409
Midwifery. 2022 Oct;113:103432
pubmed: 35907268
Int Nurs Rev. 2009 Sep;56(3):361-8
pubmed: 19702811
Midwifery. 2016 Aug;39:1-11
pubmed: 27321714
Midwifery. 2018 Feb;57:1-7
pubmed: 29128739
Aust J Midwifery. 2001 Sep;14(3):14-21
pubmed: 12760007
Int Breastfeed J. 2020 Oct 14;15(1):85
pubmed: 33054789
Sci Rep. 2021 Jan 12;11(1):833
pubmed: 33436979
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18;(3):CD002869
pubmed: 17636711
J Perinat Educ. 2008 Fall;17(4):33-42
pubmed: 19436529
Swiss Med Wkly. 2021 Sep 17;151:w30009
pubmed: 34546015