Kadınların Özel Hastanede Doğum Yapma Tercihi ve Doğum Deneyimleri: Nitel Araştırma

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 210 - 217, 14.07.2022

Ummahan Yücel , Bihter Akın , Kübra Güzel

https://doi.org/10.53424/balikesirsbd.970863

Cited By: 1

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışma özel hastanede doğum yapmış kadınların doğum tercihi ve doğum deneyimlerini belirlemek amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir.
Gereç Yöntem: Çalışma, kadınların özel hastanede doğum yapma tercihleri ve deneyimlerini belirlemek amacıyla kalitatif türde planlanmıştır. Özel hastanede doğum yapmış 11 kadın ile bireysel derinlemesine görüşme yapılmıştır. Veriler MaxQda 2018 nitel veri analiz programında analiz edilmiştir.
Bulgular: Kadınların özel hastanede doğum yapma tercihi ve doğum deneyimleri ile ilgili ana temalar “özel hastanede doğum yapma kararı, devlet hastanesinde doğum yapma algısı ve fiziki ortam” olarak belirlenmiştir. Kadınlar hastane tercihinde bebeğin ve kendisinin sağlık durumunun riske girmesi durumunda gerekli personel ve ekipman varlığına dair herhangi bir ifade kullanmamıştır.
Sonuç: Kadınların doktor tercihi, sağlık çalışanlarının yaklaşımı ile ilgili beklentileri ve fiziki doğum ortamından dolayı özel hastaneyi tercih ettiği belirlenmiştir. Katılımcıların çoğu devlet hastenelerinden memnun kalacakları bir doğum hizmeti alamayacaklarını düşünmektedir. Doğum hizmetleri için alternatif sağlık kurumlarında nitelikli ve evebeynlerin memnun oldukları olumlu bir doğum deneyimi yaşabilecekleri doğum koşullarının sağlanması gerekir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Doğum, Hasta Tercihi, Hastaneler (Devlet), Hastaneler (Özel)

Destekleyen Kurum

Yok

Proje Numarası

Yok

Teşekkür

Yok

Childbirth Experiences of Women in A Private Hospital and Delivery Preference: Qualitative Research

Öz

Aim: This study was conducted to determine the birth preferences and birth experiences of women who gave birth in a private hospital.
Materials Method: The study was planned qualitatively in order to determine women's preferences and experiences of giving birth in private hospitals. 11 women who gave birth in a private hospital were interviewed in-depth individually. The data were analyzed in the MaxQda 2018 qualitative data analysis program.
Results: The main themes related to women's preference to give birth in a private hospital and their birth experiences are determined as “the decision to give birth in a private hospital, the perception of giving birth in a state hospital, and the physical environment”. The women haven’t made any statements regarding the availability of necessary personnel and equipment in case of risk of the health status of the baby and herself in the hospital preference.
Conclusion: It has been determined that women prefer private hospitals due to the choice of doctor, expectations about the approach of healthcare professionals, and the physical delivery environment. Most of the participants think that they will not be able to get a maternity service that they are satisfied with from state hospitals. For maternity services, alternative healthcare institutions should ensure that parents can have a qualified and positive birth experience that they are satisfied with that birth conditions should be provided.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Childbirth, Patient Preference, Hospitals (State), Hospitals (Private)

Proje Numarası

Yok

Kaynakça

• Adams, N., Tudehope, D., Gibbons, K. S., Flenady, V. (2018). Perinatal mortality disparities between public care and private obstetrician‐led care: a propensity score analysis. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics Gynaecology, 125(2):149-158.
• Aksay, Y., Gülhan, Y. B., Saygın, N., Körükçü, Ö. (2017). Gebelerin Psikososyal Sağlıkları Doğum Tercihini Etkiler Mi? Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(4):138-145.
• Aktaş, S., Erkek, Z. Y. (2018). Annelerin vajinal doğumu tercih etme nedenlerinin incelenmesi: Bir nitel araştırma örneği. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1):111-124.
• Althabe, F., Belizán, J. M. (2006). Caesarean section: the paradox. Lancet, 368(9546):1472.
• Boz, I., Teskereci, G., Akman, G. (2016). How did you choose a mode of birth? Experiences of nulliparous women from Turkey. Women Birth, 29(4):359-367.
• Bradfield, Z., Kelly, M., Hauck, Y., Duggan, R. (2019). Midwives ‘with woman’in the private obstetric model: Where divergent philosophies meet. Women Birth, 32(2):157-167.
• Coxon, K., Chisholm, A., Malouf, R., Rowe, R., Hollowell, J. (2017). What influences birth place preferences, choices and decision-making amongst healthy women with straightforward pregnancies in the UK? A qualitative evidence synthesis using a ‘best fit’framework approach. BMC pregnancy childbirth, 17(1):103.
• Fletcher, B. R., Rowe, R., Hollowell, J., Scanlon, M., Hinton, L., Rivero-Arias, O. (2019). Exploring women’s preferences for birth settings in England: A discrete choice experiment. PloS one, 14(4):e0215098.
• Gaskin, I. M. (2015). İna May’ın Doğuma Hazırlık Rehberi [Ina May’s guide to childbirth](Zeynep Birinci Güler & Özge Altınkaya Erkök, trans.).
• Grigg, C., Tracy, S. K., Daellenbach, R., Kensington, M., Schmied, V. (2014). An exploration of influences on women’s birthplace decision-making in New Zealand: a mixed methods prospective cohort within the Evaluating Maternity Units study. BMC pregnancy childbirth, 14(1):210.
• Hoang, H., Le, Q. (2012). Trade‐off between local access and safety considerations in childbirth: Rural Tasmanian women's perspectives. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 20(3):144-149.
• Hacettepe Üniversitesi Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü HÜNE. Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması (TNSA). (2018). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, Türkiye. http://www.hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/. Published 2018. Accessed.
• Hacettepe Üniversitesi Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü Enstitüsü HÜNE. Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması (TNSA). (2013). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü, Ankara. http://www.hips.hacettepe.edu.tr. Published 2013. Accessed 01.08.2020.
• Hernández-Martínez, A., Martínez-Galiano, J.M., Rodríguez-Almagro, J., Delgado-Rodríguez, M., Gómez-Salgado, J (2019). Evidence-based Birth Attendance in Spain: Private versus Public Centers. International Journal of Environmental Research Public Health, 16(5):894.
• Hutchinson, P. L., Do, M., Agha, S. (2011). Measuring client satisfaction and the quality of family planning services: a comparative analysis of public and private health facilities in Tanzania, Kenya and Ghana. BMC health services research, 11(1):203.
• Janssen, S. M., Lagro-Janssen, A. L. (2012). Physician's gender, communication style, patient preferences and patient satisfaction in gynecology and obstetrics: a systematic review. J Patient education, 89(2):221-226.
• Madi, B. C., Crow, R. (2003). A qualitative study of information about available options for childbirth venue and pregnant women's preference for a place of delivery. Midwifery, 19(4):328-336.
• Murray-Davis, B., McDonald, H., Rietsma, A., Coubrough, M., Hutton, E. (2014). Deciding on home or hospital birth: results of the Ontario choice of birthplace survey. Midwifery, 30(7):869-876.
• Ndwiga, C., Warren, C. E., Ritter, J., Sripad, P., Abuya, T. (2017). Exploring provider perspectives on respectful maternity care in Kenya:“work with what you have”. J Reproductive health, 14(1):99.
• Niino, Y. (2011). The increasing cesarean rate globally and what we can do about it. J Bioscience trends, 5(4):139-150.
• O'Donovan, C., O'Donovan, J. (2018). Why do women request an elective cesarean delivery for non‐medical reasons? A systematic review of the qualitative literature. Birth, 45(2):109-119.
• Okumus, F. (2017). Birth experiences of primiparous Turkish women: public and private hospitals. J Journal of Asian Midwives, 4(1):35-50.
• Panda, S., Begley, C., Daly, D. (2018). Clinicians’ views of factors influencing decision-making for caesarean section: A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies. PloS one, 13(7):e0200941.
• Pavlova, M., Hendrix, M., Nouwens, E., Nijhuis, J., van Merode, G. (2009). The choice of obstetric care by low-risk pregnant women in the Netherlands: implications for policy and management. Health Policy, 93(1):27-34.
• Penna, L., Arulkumaran, S. (2003). Cesarean section for non-medical reasons. J International Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics, 82(3):399-409.
• Robson, S. J., Laws, P., Sullivan, E. A. (2009). Adverse outcomes of labour in public and private hospitals in Australia: a population‐based descriptive study. J Medical Journal of Australia, 190(9):474-477.
• Setoodefar, M. (2020). Measurement Model of Women’s Preferences in Obstetrician and Gynecologist Selection in the Private Sector: Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis. J International Journal of Community Based Nursing Midwifery, 8(2):150.
• Singh, P., Hashmi, G., Swain, P. K. (2018). High prevalence of cesarean section births in private sector health facilities-analysis of district level household survey-4 (DLHS-4) of India. J BMC public health, 18(1):613.
• Strauss, A., Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques. Sage publications Thousand Oaks, CA.
• Surana, M., Dongre, A. (2018). Too much care? Private health care sector and surgical interventions during childbirth in India. Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, 1-26.
• Tayyari Dehbarez, N., Raun Morkbak, M., Gyrd-Hansen, D., Uldbjerg, N., Sogaard, R. (2018). Women’s Preferences for Birthing Hospital in Denmark: A Discrete Choice Experiment. Patient, 11 (6) 613–624.
• Tuan, T., Dung, V. T. M., Neu, I., Dibley, M. J. (2005). Comparative quality of private and public health services in rural Vietnam. J Health Policy Planning, 20(5):319-327.
• Uzel, H. G., Yanıkkerem, E. (2018). İntrapartum dönemde kanıta dayalı uygulamalar: Doğum yapan kadınların tercihleri. J Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 11(1):26-34.
• World Health Organization (WHO). (2018). WHO recommendation on effective communication between maternity care providers and women in labor. World Health Organization. https://extranet.who.int/rhl/topics/preconception-pregnancy-childbirth-and-postpartum-care/care-during-childbirth/who-recommendation-effective-communication-between-maternity-care-providers-and-women-labour. Published 2018. Accessed.
• van Haaren-ten Haken, T., Hendrix, M., Nieuwenhuijze, M., Budé, L., de Vries, R., Nijhuis, J. (2012). Preferred place of birth: characteristics and motives of low-risk nulliparous women in the Netherlands. Midwifery, 28(5):609-618.
• Vural, G., Erenel, A. Ş. (2017). Doğumun Medikalizasyonu Neden Artmıştır, Azaltabilir miyiz? Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Nursing, 4(2).
• Yıldırım, A., Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (9. Genişletilmiş Baskı) Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi. Yıldız, H. (2019). Pozitif Doğum Deneyimi İçin İntrapartum Bakım Modeli: Dünya Sağlık Örgütü Önerileri. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(2):98-105.