In search of respect and continuity of care: Hungarian women's experiences with midwifery-led, community birth.

INTRODUCTION: To describe and compare intervention rates and experiences of respectful care when Hungarian women opt to give birth in the community. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey (N = 1257) in 2014. We calculated descriptive statistics comparing obstetric procedure rates, respectful care indicators, and autonomy (MADM scale) across four models of care (public insurance; chosen doctor or chosen midwife in the public system; private midwife-led community birth). We used an intention-to-treat approach. After adjusting for social and clinical covariates, we used logistic regression to estimate the odds of obstetric procedures and disrespectful care and linear regression to estimate the level of autonomy (MADM scale). FINDINGS: In the sample, 99 (7.8%) saw a community midwife for prenatal care. Those who planned community births had the lowest rates of cesarean at 9.1% (public: 30.4%; chosen doctor: 45.2%; chosen midwife 16.5%), induced labor at 7.1% (public: 23.1%; chosen doctor: 26.0%; chosen midwife: 19.4%), and episiotomy at 4.44% (public: 62.3%; chosen doctor: 66.2%; chosen midwife: 44.9%). Community birth clients reported the lowest rates of disrespectful care at 25.5% (public: 64.3%; chosen doctor: 44.3%; chosen midwife: 38.7%) and the highest average MADM score at 31.5 (public: 21.2; chosen doctor: 25.5; chosen midwife: 28.6). In regression analysis, community midwifery clients had significantly reduced odds of cesarean (0.35, 95% CI 0.16-0.79), induced labor (0.27, 95% CI 0.11-0.67), episiotomy (0.04, 95% CI 0.01-0.12), and disrespectful care (0.36, 95% CI 0.21-0.61), while also having significantly higher average MADM scores (5.71, 95% CI 4.08-7.36). CONCLUSIONS: Hungarian women who plan to give birth in the community have low obstetric procedure rates and report greater respect, in line with international data on the effects of place of birth and model of care on experiences of perinatal care.

Patient-Led Approaches to a Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery Calculator.

OBJECTIVE: To describe patient approaches to navigating their probability of a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) within the context of prediction scores generated from the original Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units' VBAC calculator, which incorporated race and ethnicity as one of six risk factors. METHODS: We invited a diverse group of participants with a history of prior cesarean delivery to participate in interviews and have their prenatal visits recorded. Using an open-ended iterative interview guide, we queried and observed these individuals' mode-of-birth decisions in the context of their VBAC calculator scores. We used a critical and feminist approach to analyze thematic data gleaned from interview and visit transcripts. RESULTS: Among the 31 participants who enrolled, their self-identified racial and ethnic categories included: Asian or South Asian (2); Black (4); Hispanic (12); Indigenous (1); White (8); and mixed-Black, -Hispanic, or -Asian background (4). Predicted VBAC success probabilities ranged from 12% to 95%. Participants completed 64 interviews, and 14 prenatal visits were recorded. We identified four themes that demonstrated a range of patient-led approaches to interpreting the probability generated by the VBAC calculator: 1) rejecting the role of race and ethnicity; 2) reframing failure, finding success; 3) factoring the physical experience of labor; and 4) modifying the probability for VBAC. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that a numeric probability for VBAC may not be highly valued or important to all patients, especially those who have strong intentions for VBAC. Black and Hispanic participants challenged the VBAC calculator's incorporation of race and ethnicity as a risk factor and resisted the implication it produced, especially that their bodies were less capable of achieving a vaginal birth. Our findings suggest that patient-led approaches to assessing and interpreting VBAC probability may be an untapped resource for achieving a more person-centered, equitable approach to counseling.

Epistemic Silences and Experiential Knowledge in Decisions After a First Cesarean: The case of a vaginal birth after cesarean calculator.

Evidence-based obstetrics can employ statistical models to justify greater use of cesareans, sometimes excluding experiential elements from informed decision making. Over the past decade, prenatal providers adopted a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) calculator designed to support patients in making informed decisions about their births by estimating their probability for a VBAC. Among other factors, the calculator used race and ethnicity to make its estimate, assigning lower probabilities for a successful VBAC to Black and Hispanic patients. I analyze how a diverse group of women and their providers engaged with the VBAC calculator. Some providers used low calculator scores to remove a shared decision-making model by prescriptively counseling Black and Hispanic women who desired a VBAC into undergoing repeat cesareans. Consequently, women racialized by the calculator as Black or Hispanic used experiential knowledge to challenge the calculator's assessment of their supposed lesser ability to give birth vaginally.

Birth includes us: Development of a community-led survey to capture experiences of pregnancy care among LGBTQ2S+ families.

BACKGROUND: Limited research captures the intersectional and nuanced experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, two-spirit, and other sexual and gender-minoritized (LGBTQ2S+) people when accessing perinatal care services, including care for pregnancy, birth, abortion, and/or pregnancy loss. METHODS: We describe the participatory research methods used to develop the Birth Includes Us survey, an online survey study to capture experiences of respectful perinatal care for LGBTQ2S+ individuals. From 2019 to 2021, our research team in collaboration with a multi-stakeholder Community Steering Council identified, adapted, and/or designed survey items which were reviewed and then content validated by community members with lived experience. RESULTS: The final survey instrument spans the perinatal care experience, from preconception to early parenthood, and includes items to capture experiences of care across different pregnancy roles (eg, pregnant person, partner/co-parent, intended parent using surrogacy) and pregnancy outcomes (eg, live birth, stillbirth, miscarriage, and abortion). Three validated measures of respectful perinatal care are included, as well as measures to assess experiences of racism, discrimination, and bias across intersections of identity. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: By centering diverse perspectives in the review process, the Birth Includes Us instrument is the first survey to assess the range of experiences within LGBTQ2S+ communities. This instrument is ready for implementation in studies that seek to examine geographic and identity-based perinatal health outcomes and care experiences among LGBTQ2S+ people.

Why Equitable Access to Vaginal Birth Requires Abolition of Race-Based Medicine.

In 2010, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network developed a decision aid, the Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) calculator, to help clinicians discern how one variable (race) might influence patients' success in delivering a baby vaginally following a prior birth by cesarean. The higher rate of cesarean deliveries among Black and Hispanic women in the United States has long demonstrated racial inequities in obstetrical care, however. Although the MFMU's new VBAC calculator no longer includes race or ethnicity, in response to calls for abolition of race-based medicine, this article argues that VBAC calculator use has never been race neutral. In fact, VBAC calculator use in the United States is laced with racism, compromises patients' autonomy, and undermines informed consent.

En 2010, la Red de Unidades de Medicina Maternofetal (MFMU, por sus siglas en inglés) del Instituto Nacional de Salud Infantil y Desarrollo Humano desarrolló una ayuda para tomar decisiones, la calculadora de partos vaginales después de una cesárea (PVDC), para ayudar a los médicos a discernir cómo una variable (la raza) podría influir en el éxito de las pacientes a la hora de dar a luz a un bebé por vía vaginal después de un parto anterior por cesárea. No obstante, la mayor tasa de partos por cesárea entre las mujeres afrodescendientes e hispanas en Estados Unidos ha demostrado desde hace tiempo las desigualdades raciales en la atención obstétrica. Aunque la nueva calculadora de PVDC de la MFMU ya no incluye la raza o el origen étnico, en respuesta a los llamados a la eliminación de la medicina racial, este artículo sostiene que el uso de la calculadora de PVDC nunca ha sido neutral desde el punto de vista racial. De hecho, el uso de la calculadora de PVDC en Estados Unidos está cargado de racismo, compromete la autonomía de las pacientes y socava el consentimiento informado.

Examining obstetric interventions and respectful maternity care in Hungary: Do informal payments for continuity of care link to quality?

BACKGROUND: In Hungary, 60% of women pay informally to secure continuity with a "chosen" provider for prenatal care and birth. It is unclear if paying informally influences quality of maternity care. This study examined associations between incentivized continuity care models and obstetric procedures and respectful care. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of Hungarian women (N = 589) in 2014. We calculated descriptive statistics comparing experiences among women who paid informally for continuity with a chosen provider with those who received care in the public health system. After adjusting for social and clinical covariates, we used logistic regression to estimate the odds of obstetric procedures and disrespectful care and linear regression to estimate the level of autonomy (MADM scale). RESULTS: Of women in our sample, 317 (53%) saw a chosen doctor, 68 (11%) a chosen midwife, and 204 (33%) had care in the public system. Women who paid an obstetrician informally had the highest rates of cesarean (49.5%), induction of labor (31.2%), and epidural (15%), and reported lower rates of disrespectful care (41%) compared to public care (64%). Paying for continuity with an obstetrician significantly predicted cesarean (aOR 1.61 [95%CI 1.00-2.58]), episiotomy (2.64, [1.39-5.03]), and epidural (3.15 [1.07-9.34]), but not induction of labor (1.59 [0.99-2.57]). Informal payment continuity models predicted increased autonomy scores (doctor: 3.97, 95% CI 2.39-5.55; midwife: 7.37, 95% CI 5.36-9.34) and reduced odds of disrespectful care. There were no differences in the prevalence of scheduled cesareans or inductions performed without a medical indication. CONCLUSIONS: Continuity models secured with informal payments significantly increased both women's experience of respectful care and rates of obstetric procedures. Intervention rates exceed global standards, and women do not choose elective procedures to preserve continuity.

The Giving Voice to Mothers study: inequity and mistreatment during pregnancy and childbirth in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Recently WHO researchers described seven dimensions of mistreatment in maternity care that have adverse impacts on quality and safety. Applying the WHO framework for quality care, service users partnered with NGOs, clinicians, and researchers, to design and conduct the Giving Voice to Mothers (GVtM)-US study. METHODS: Our multi-stakeholder team distributed an online cross-sectional survey to capture lived experiences of maternity care in diverse populations. Patient-designed items included indicators of verbal and physical abuse, autonomy, discrimination, failure to meet professional standards of care, poor rapport with providers, and poor conditions in the health system. We quantified the prevalence of mistreatment by race, socio-demographics, mode of birth, place of birth, and context of care, and describe the intersectional relationships between these variables. RESULTS: Of eligible participants (n = 2700), 2138 completed all sections of the survey. One in six women (17.3%) reported experiencing one or more types of mistreatment such as: loss of autonomy; being shouted at, scolded, or threatened; and being ignored, refused, or receiving no response to requests for help. Context of care (e.g. mode of birth; transfer; difference of opinion) correlated with increased reports of mistreatment. Experiences of mistreatment differed significantly by place of birth: 5.1% of women who gave birth at home versus 28.1% of women who gave birth at the hospital. Factors associated with a lower likelihood of mistreatment included having a vaginal birth, a community birth, a midwife, and being white, multiparous, and older than 30 years. Rates of mistreatment for women of colour were consistently higher even when examining interactions between race and other maternal characteristics. For example, 27.2% of women of colour with low SES reported any mistreatment versus 18.7% of white women with low SES. Regardless of maternal race, having a partner who was Black also increased reported mistreatment. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to use indicators developed by service users to describe mistreatment in childbirth in the US. Our findings suggest that mistreatment is experienced more frequently by women of colour, when birth occurs in hospitals, and among those with social, economic or health challenges. Mistreatment is exacerbated by unexpected obstetric interventions, and by patient-provider disagreements.

"Just a little help": A qualitative inquiry into the persistent use of uterine fundal pressure in the second stage of labor in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: Uterine fundal pressure, or the Kristeller maneuver (KM), is a non-evidence-based procedure used in the second stage of labor to physically force the fetus to delivery. Even though officially banned, the KM is practiced in 25% of vaginal deliveries in Spain. METHODS: Using semi-structured interviews (N = 10 women, N = 15 midwives, N = 3 obstetricians), we sought to understand how providers justify using the KM, and to describe the current circumstances in which the KM is practiced. Women described their preexisting knowledge of and experiences with the KM; providers described how they learned and practiced the KM. We used framework analysis to analyze the transcripts, and we consensus-coded across three independent investigators. RESULTS: Providers reported practicing a new, gentler Kristeller to which official policy did not apply. Providers knew the KM posed risks, but they assumed the risks resulted from poor technical training. Providers did not learn the KM through standard means, and they practiced it in secret. Women knew about the KM before delivery, and many had planned to refuse the procedure. Providers made women's refusal more difficult by offering the KM in coded terms as "just a little help." Women did not experience the KM as gentle, and the force of the procedure made their refusal nearly impossible. CONCLUSIONS: The normal birth policy has failed to achieve its objectives due to maternity care providers' unique logic surrounding a new KM technique. Women's ability to refuse the Kristeller is limited.

A systematic review of person-centered care interventions to improve quality of facility-based delivery.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted a systematic review to summarize the global evidence on person-centered care (PCC) interventions in delivery facilities in order to: (1) map the PCC objectives of past interventions (2) to explore the impact of PCC objectives on PCC and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We developed a search strategy based on a current definition of PCC. We searched for English-language, peer-reviewed and original research articles in multiple databases from 1990 to 2016 and conducted hand searches of the Cochrane library and gray literature. We used systematic review methodology that enabled us to extract and synthesize quantitative and qualitative data. We categorized interventions according to their primary and secondary PCC objectives. We categorized outcomes into person-centered and clinical (labor and delivery, perinatal, maternal mental health). RESULTS: Our initial search strategy yielded 9378 abstracts; we conducted full-text reviews of 32 quantitative, 6 qualitative, 2 mixed-methods studies, and 7 systematic reviews (N = 47). Past interventions pursued these primary PCC objectives: autonomy, supportive care, social support, the health facility environment, and dignity. An intervention's primary and secondary PCC objectives frequently did not align with the measured person-centered outcomes. Generally, PCC interventions either improved or made no difference to person-centered outcomes. There was no clear relationship between PCC objectives and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review presents a comprehensive analysis of facility-based delivery interventions using a current definition of person-centered care. Current definitions of PCC propose new domains of inquiry but may leave out previous domains.

How Should Trainees Respond in Situations of Obstetric Violence?

Argentina passed a law for humanized birth in 2004 and another law against obstetric violence in 2009, both of which stipulate the rights of women to achieve respectful maternity care. Clinicians and women might still be unaware of these laws, however. In this article, we discuss the case of a fourth-year medical student who, while visiting Argentina from the United States for his obstetric rotation, witnesses an act of obstetric violence. We show that the student's situation can be understood as one of moral distress and argue that, in this specific instance, it would be appropriate for the student to intervene by providing supportive care to the patient. However, we suggest that medical schools have an obligation to better prepare students for rotations conducted abroad.

Assessing quality of maternity care in Hungary: expert validation and testing of the mother-centered prenatal care (MCPC) survey instrument.

BACKGROUND: Instruments to assess quality of maternity care in Central and Eastern European (CEE) region are scarce, despite reports of poor doctor-patient communication, non-evidence-based care, and informal cash payments. We validated and tested an online questionnaire to study maternity care experiences among Hungarian women. METHODS: Following literature review, we collated validated items and scales from two previous English-language surveys and adapted them to the Hungarian context. An expert panel assessed items for clarity and relevance on a 4-point ordinal scale. We calculated item-level Content Validation Index (CVI) scores. We designed 9 new items concerning informal cash payments, as well as 7 new "model of care" categories based on mode of payment. The final questionnaire (N = 111 items) was tested in two samples of Hungarian women, representative (N = 600) and convenience (N = 657). We conducted bivariate analysis and thematic analysis of open-ended responses. RESULTS: Experts rated pre-existing English-language items as clear and relevant to Hungarian women's maternity care experiences with an average CVI for included questions of 0.97. Significant differences emerged across the model of care categories in terms of informal payments, informed consent practices, and women's perceptions of autonomy. Thematic analysis (N = 1015) of women's responses identified 13 priority areas of the maternity care experience, 9 of which were addressed by the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a comprehensive questionnaire that can be used to evaluate respectful maternity care, evidence-based practice, and informal cash payments in CEE region and beyond.

Informal cash payments for birth in Hungary: Are women paying to secure a known provider, respect, or quality of care?

BACKGROUND: In Central and Eastern Europe, many women make informal cash payments to ensure continuity of provider, i.e., to have a "chosen" doctor who provided their prenatal care, be present for birth. High rates of obstetric interventions and disrespectful maternity care are also common to the region. No previous study has examined the associations among informal payments, intervention rates, and quality of maternity care. METHODS: We distributed an online cross-sectional survey in 2014 to a nationally representative sample of Hungarian internet-using women (N = 600) who had given birth in the last 5 years. The survey included items related to socio-demographics, type of provider, obstetric interventions, and experiences of care. Women reported if they paid informally, and how much. We built a two-part model, where a bivariate probit model was used to estimate conditional probabilities of women paying informally, and a GLM model to explore the amount of payments. We calculated marginal effects of the covariates (provider choice, interventions, respectful care). RESULTS: Many more women (79%) with a chosen doctor paid informally (191 euros on average) compared to 17% of women without a chosen doctor (86 euros). Based on regression analysis, the chosen doctor's presence at birth was the principal determinant of payment. Intervention and procedure rates were significantly higher for women with a chosen doctor versus without (cesareans 45% vs. 33%; inductions 32% vs. 19%; episiotomy 75% vs. 62%; epidural 13% vs. 5%), but had no direct effect on payments. Half of the sample (42% with a chosen doctor, 62% without) reported some form of disrespectful care, but this did not reduce payments. CONCLUSION: Despite reporting disrespect and higher rates of interventions, women rewarded the presence of a chosen doctor with informal payments. They may be unaware of evidence-based standards, and trust that their chosen doctor provided high quality maternity care.

The Mother's Autonomy in Decision Making (MADM) scale: Patient-led development and psychometric testing of a new instrument to evaluate experience of maternity care.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a new instrument that assesses women's autonomy and role in decision making during maternity care. DESIGN: Through a community-based participatory research process, service users designed, content validated, and administered a cross-sectional quantitative survey, including 31 items on the experience of decision-making. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Pregnancy experiences (n = 2514) were reported by 1672 women who saw a single type of primary maternity care provider in British Columbia. They described care by a midwife, family physician or obstetrician during 1, 2 or 3 maternity care cycles. We conducted psychometric testing in three separate samples. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed reliability, item-to-total correlations, and the factor structure of the The Mothers' Autonomy in Decision Making (MADM) scale. We report MADM scores by care provider type, length of prenatal appointments, preferences for role in decision-making, and satisfaction with experience of decision-making. RESULTS: The MADM scale measures a single construct: autonomy in decision-making during maternity care. Cronbach alphas for the scale exceeded 0.90 for all samples and all provider groups. All item-to-total correlations were replicable across three samples and exceeded 0.7. Eigenvalue and scree plots exhibited a clear 90-degree angle, and factor analysis generated a one factor scale. MADM median scores were highest among women who were cared for by midwives, and 10 or more points lower for those who saw physicians. Increased time for prenatal appointments was associated with higher scale scores, and there were significant differences between providers with respect to average time spent in prenatal appointments. Midwifery care was associated with higher MADM scores, even during short prenatal appointments (<15 minutes). Among women who preferred to lead decisions around their care (90.8%), and who were dissatisfied with their experience of decision making, MADM scores were very low (median 14). Women with physician carers were consistently more likely to report dissatisfaction with their involvement in decision making. DISCUSSION: The Mothers Autonomy in Decision Making (MADM) scale is a reliable instrument for assessment of the experience of decision making during maternity care. This new scale was developed and content validated by community members representing various populations of childbearing women in BC including women from vulnerable populations. MADM measures women's ability to lead decision making, whether they are given enough time to consider their options, and whether their choices are respected. Women who experienced midwifery care reported greater autonomy than women under physician care, when engaging in decision-making around maternity care options. Differences in models of care, professional education, regulatory standards, and compensation for prenatal visits between midwives and physicians likely affect the time available for these discussions and prioritization of a shared decision making process. CONCLUSION: The MADM scale reflects person-driven priorities, and reliably assesses interactions with maternity providers related to a person's ability to lead decision-making over the course of maternity care.

The Mothers on Respect (MOR) index: measuring quality, safety, and human rights in childbirth.

BACKGROUND: Abuse of human rights in childbirth are documented in low, middle and high resource countries. A systematic review across 34 countries by the WHO Research Group on the Treatment of Women During Childbirth concluded that there is no consensus at a global level on how disrespectful maternity care is measured. In British Columbia, a community-led participatory action research team developed a survey tool that assesses women's experiences with maternity care, including disrespect and discrimination. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was completed by women of childbearing age from diverse communities across British Columbia. Several items (31/130) assessed characteristics of their communication with care providers. We assessed the psychometric properties of two versions of a scale (7 and 14 items), among women who described experiences with a single maternity provider (n=2514 experiences among 1672 women). We also calculated the proportion and selected characteristics of women who scored in the bottom 10th percentile (those who experienced the least respectful care). RESULTS: To demonstrate replicability, we report psychometric results separately for three samples of women (S1 and S2) (n=2271), (S3, n=1613). Analysis of item-to-total correlations and factor loadings indicated a single construct 14-item scale, which we named the Mothers on Respect index (MORi). Items in MORi assess the nature of respectful patient-provider interactions and their impact on a person's sense of comfort, behavior, and perceptions of racism or discrimination. The scale exhibited good internal consistency reliability. MORi- scores among these samples differed by socio-demographic profile, health status, experience with interventions and mode of birth, planned and actual place of birth, and type of provider. CONCLUSION: The MOR index is a reliable, patient-informed quality and safety indicator that can be applied across jurisdictions to assess the nature of provider-patient relationships, and access to person-centered maternity care.