ArticleReproductive health2023
Women's voice on changes in childbirth care practices: a qualitative approach to women's experiences in Brazilian private hospitals participating in the Adequate Childbirth Project.
Article in Reproductive health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effects of a quality improvement project to reduce caesarean sections in selected private hospitals in Brazil.Reproductive health · 2024Article
- Caesarean delivery on maternal request: the perspective of the postpartum women.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Brazil, childbirth practices are strongly marked by surgical events and particularly in the private sector cesarean sections reach rates above 80%. The National Supplementary Health Agency proposed the Adequate Childbirth Project (PPA), a quality improvement project developed at Brazilian hospitals with the aim of changing the current model of childbirth care and reducing unnecessary cesarean sections. The objective of this study is to assess how the participation of women in the process of improving quality childbirth care occurred in two hospitals participating in the PPA.
methodQualitative study, based on interviews with 102 women attended at two hospitals that took part in the first and second stages of the "Healthy Birth", an evaluative hospital-based research, conducted in 2017-2018, that assessed the degree of implementation and the effects of PPA. After thematic content analysis, supported by MaxQda software, three categories emerged: (1) how women gathered knowledge about the PPA, (2) how women perceived it, and (3) which are their suggestions for the PPA improvement.
resultsThe PPA was unknown to most women before delivery. A polysemy of terms, including adequate childbirth, promotes recognition of the "new" model of care. Visits to the maternity hospital and antenatal care groups for pregnant women are opportunities for contacts that change the perception of what childbirth can be. Women have expectations of a relationship with maternity that is not limited to the moment of delivery. The listening channels established between hospitals and women are fragile and not systematized. By increasing the supply of listening spaces, one can also increase the request to leave their suggestions and contributions, and thus gain more allies in improving the project. Women are not yet included as PPA agents and their voices are silenced.
conclusionsWomen's participation to improve childbirth care is relevant and necessary. The women's voice in the PPA is still incipient, and maternity hospitals and health plan operators should create strategies to insert and engage them. Women's voices should be listened to not only during but also before and after childbirth.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.