Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Women Birth ; 24(4): 165-72, 2011 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21167799

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In February 2009 the Improving Maternity Services in Australia - The Report of the Maternity Services Review (MSR) was released and recommended improving women's access to and availability of birth centres. It was unclear if this was in response to an overwhelming request for birth centres in the submissions received by the commonwealth or a compromise for excluding homebirth from the maternity service reforms. AIM: The aim of this paper was to examine what was said in the submissions to the MSR about birth centres. METHODS: Data for this study comprised 832 submissions to the MSR that are publicly available on the Commonwealth of Australia Department of Health and Ageing website. All 832 submissions were downloaded, and read for any mention of the words 'birth centre', 'birth center'. Content analysis was used to categorise and report the data. RESULTS: Of the 832 submissions to the MSR 197 (24%) mentioned birth centres while 470 (60%) of the submissions mentioned homebirth. Only 31 (4%) of the submissions to the Maternity Review mentioned birth centres without mentioning home birth also. Most of the submissions emphasised that 'everything should be on the menu' when it came to place of birth and care provider. Reasons for choosing a birth centre were identified as: 'the best compromise available, 'the right and natural way' and 'the birth centre as safe'. Women had certain requirements of a birth centre that included: 'continuity of carer', 'midwife led', 'a sanctum from medicalised care', 'resources to cope with demand', 'close to home', and 'flexible guidelines and admission criteria'. Women weighed up a series of requirements when deciding whether to give birth in a birth centre. DISCUSSION: The recommendation by the MSR to expand birth centres and ignore home birth is at odds with the strong view expressed that 'everything should be on the menu'. The requirements women described of birth centre care are also at odds with current trends. CONCLUSION: If there is to be an expansion of birth centres, service providers need to make sure that women's views are central to the design. Women will not cease having homebirths due to expanded birth centre options.


Assuntos
Centros de Assistência à Gravidez e ao Parto , Reforma dos Serviços de Saúde , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Parto Domiciliar , Serviços de Saúde Materna , Tocologia , Austrália , Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente , Estudos de Avaliação como Assunto , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Relatório de Pesquisa
2.
Women Birth ; 24(4): 148-55, 2011 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21074508

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In February 2009 the Improving Maternity Services in Australia - The Report of the Maternity Services Review (MSR) was released, with the personal stories of women making up 407 of the more than 900 submissions received. A significant proportion (53%) of the women were said to have had personal experience with homebirth. Little information is provided on what was said about homebirth in these submissions and the decision by the MSR not to include homebirth in the funding and insurance reforms being proposed is at odds with the apparent demand for this option of care. METHOD: Data for this study comprised 832 submissions to the MSR that are publicly available on the Commonwealth of Australia Department of Health and Aging website. All 832 submissions were downloaded, coded and then entered into NVivo. Content analysis was used to analyse the data that related to homebirth. FINDINGS: 450 of the submissions were from consumers of maternity services (54%). Four hundred and seventy (60%) of the submissions mentioned homebirth. Overall there were 715 references to home birth in the submissions. The submissions mentioning homebirth most commonly discussed the 'Benefits' and 'Barriers' in accessing this option of care. Benefits to the baby, mother and family were described, along with the benefits obtained from having a midwife at the birth, receiving continuity of care and having a good birth experience. Barriers were described as not having access to a midwife, no funding, no insurance and lack of clinical privileging for midwives. CONCLUSION: Many positive recommendations have come from the MSR, however the decision to exclude homebirth from these reforms is perplexing considering the large number of submissions describing the benefits of and barriers to homebirth in Australia. A concerning number of submissions discuss having had or having considered an unattended birth at home due to these barriers. Overall there is the belief that not enabling access to funded, insured homebirth in Australia is a violation of human rights. It appears that homebirth was considered by the MSR as 'too hot to handle' and by dismissing it as a minority issue the government sought to avoided dealing with homebirth as a 'sensitive and controversial issue.'


Assuntos
Atitude Frente a Saúde , Estudos de Avaliação como Assunto , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Parto Domiciliar , Serviços de Saúde Materna , Tocologia , Satisfação do Paciente , Austrália , Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente , Família , Feminino , Apoio Financeiro , Parto Domiciliar/economia , Humanos , Seguro Saúde , Serviços de Saúde Materna/economia , Gravidez , Relatório de Pesquisa
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...