Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38389073›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024

Association of personal and systemic factors on intrapartum risk perception and obstetric intervention rates: a cross-sectional study.

Nina H Peterwerth, Margareta Halek, Rainhild Schäfers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Nina H PeterwerthDepartment of Applied Health Sciences - Midwifery, University of Applied Sciences-Hochschule für Gesundheit, Gesundheitscampus 6-8, 44801, Bochum, Germany. nina.peterwerth@hs-gesundheit.de.
Margareta HalekSchool of Nursing Science, Faculty of Health, Department für Pflegewissenschaft, Fakultät für Gesundheit, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58455, Witten, Germany.
Rainhild SchäfersInstitute of Midwifery Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Münster, Malmedyweg 17-19, 48149, Münster, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRisk perception is fundamental to decision-making; therefore its exploration is essential to gaining a comprehensive understanding of the decision-making process for peripartum interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate associations between personal and systemic factors of the work setting and the risk perception of obstetric healthcare professionals, and in turn how this might influence decisions regarding obstetric interventions.

methodsCase vignettes were used to measure risk perception. A quantitative cross-sectional online survey was performed within an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design, and an intervention readiness score created. Associations were calculated using location and dispersion measures, t-tests and correlations in addition to multiple linear regression.

resultsRisk perception, as measured by the risk assessment score, was significantly lower (average 0.8 points) for midwives than for obstetricians (95%-CI [-0.673; -0.317], p < .001). Statistically significant correlations were found for: years of experience and annual number of births in the current workplace, but this was not clinically relevant; hours worked, with the groups of participants working ≥ 30,5 h showing a statistically significant higher risk perception than participants working 20,5-30 h (p = .005); and level of care of the current workplace, with the groups of participants working in a birth clinic (Level IV) showing a statistically significant lower risk perception than participants working in Level I hospital (highly specialised obstetric and neonatal care; p = .016). The option of midwife-led birthing care showed no correlation with risk perception. The survey identified that risk perception, occupation, years in the profession and number of hours worked (i.e. full or part time) represent significant influences on obstetric healthcare professionals' willingness to intervene.

conclusionsThe results of the survey give rise to the hypothesis that the personal and systemic factors of professional qualification, occupation, number of hours worked and level of acuity of the workplace are related to the risk perception of obstetric healthcare professionals. In turn, risk perception itself made a significant contribution to explaining differences in willingness to intervene, suggesting that it influences obstetricians' and midwives' decision-making. Overall, however, the correlations were weak and should be interpreted cautiously. The significant variations in the use of interventions must be addressed in order to provide the highest quality and best possible care for childbearing women and their families. To this end, developing strategies to improve interdisciplinary relationships and collaboration is of great importance.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00017172 (18.06.2019).

Indexed as

MidwiferyParturitionCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPerceptionPregnancyRisk AssessmentSurveys and QuestionnairesChildbirthDecision makingHealthcare professionalsMidwiferyObstetriciansRisk

Identifiers

PMID38389073
PMCPMC10882933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.