Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Marques, Maria
Data de Publicação: 2017
Outros Autores: Sim-Sim, Margarida
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10174/21698
https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajns.20170606.15
Resumo: Background: The World Health Organization recommends preserving the physiology of childbirth. For a normal birth, the guidelines define obstetric practices in four categories, ranging from useful and to be encouraged to harmful and to be eliminated. Objective: to describe new mothers’ perception of care during childbirth in the light of the World Health Organization model. Methods: Cross-sectional study. A self-administered structured questionnaire was used for data collection. Convenience sample of 180 mothers. The average age was 30.8 years-old (SD=5.31). Results: On their own initiative, before leaving for the maternity, women carried out at home, some care not recommended by World Health Organization, like pubic shaving (83.7%). Category A represents above all the lack of a birth plan (80.6%), mobility (71.3%), massage /54.2%) and light feeding (72.6%). Positively represented are skin-to-skin contact (77%) and breast-feeding (75.6%). Category B highlights intravenous fluids access (81.6%), lithotomy position for delivery (82.9%) and directed pushing (86.9%). Pubic shaving is recognized by about 22% of participants. The Kristeller maneuver or fundal pressure, is widely applied in Category D (59.9%), highlighting continuous cardiotocography (89.2%), repeated vaginal examination carried out by various professionals (78.5%) and episiotomy (69.2%). Conclusion: The World Health Organization model is weakly implemented. The medicalized culture of childbirth seems to predominate in phenomena of human nature.
id RCAP_aeaba66aa7006770450d25900a218215
oai_identifier_str oai:dspace.uevora.pt:10174/21698
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO ModelLaborNormal birthNursingMidwiferyObstetricsBackground: The World Health Organization recommends preserving the physiology of childbirth. For a normal birth, the guidelines define obstetric practices in four categories, ranging from useful and to be encouraged to harmful and to be eliminated. Objective: to describe new mothers’ perception of care during childbirth in the light of the World Health Organization model. Methods: Cross-sectional study. A self-administered structured questionnaire was used for data collection. Convenience sample of 180 mothers. The average age was 30.8 years-old (SD=5.31). Results: On their own initiative, before leaving for the maternity, women carried out at home, some care not recommended by World Health Organization, like pubic shaving (83.7%). Category A represents above all the lack of a birth plan (80.6%), mobility (71.3%), massage /54.2%) and light feeding (72.6%). Positively represented are skin-to-skin contact (77%) and breast-feeding (75.6%). Category B highlights intravenous fluids access (81.6%), lithotomy position for delivery (82.9%) and directed pushing (86.9%). Pubic shaving is recognized by about 22% of participants. The Kristeller maneuver or fundal pressure, is widely applied in Category D (59.9%), highlighting continuous cardiotocography (89.2%), repeated vaginal examination carried out by various professionals (78.5%) and episiotomy (69.2%). Conclusion: The World Health Organization model is weakly implemented. The medicalized culture of childbirth seems to predominate in phenomena of human nature.Science Publishing Group2018-01-04T13:09:34Z2018-01-042017-12-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://hdl.handle.net/10174/21698http://hdl.handle.net/10174/21698https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajns.20170606.15porMarques, M. & Sim-Sim, M. (2017). Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model, American Journal of Nursing Science 6(6) 478-485. doi: 10.11648/j.ajns.20170606.15http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajns.20170606.15.pdfmjp3@uevora.ptmsimsim@uevora.pt744Marques, MariaSim-Sim, Margaridainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2024-01-03T19:12:36Zoai:dspace.uevora.pt:10174/21698Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T01:12:57.108447Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model
title Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model
spellingShingle Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model
Marques, Maria
Labor
Normal birth
Nursing
Midwifery
Obstetrics
title_short Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model
title_full Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model
title_fullStr Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model
title_full_unstemmed Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model
title_sort Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model
author Marques, Maria
author_facet Marques, Maria
Sim-Sim, Margarida
author_role author
author2 Sim-Sim, Margarida
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Marques, Maria
Sim-Sim, Margarida
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Labor
Normal birth
Nursing
Midwifery
Obstetrics
topic Labor
Normal birth
Nursing
Midwifery
Obstetrics
description Background: The World Health Organization recommends preserving the physiology of childbirth. For a normal birth, the guidelines define obstetric practices in four categories, ranging from useful and to be encouraged to harmful and to be eliminated. Objective: to describe new mothers’ perception of care during childbirth in the light of the World Health Organization model. Methods: Cross-sectional study. A self-administered structured questionnaire was used for data collection. Convenience sample of 180 mothers. The average age was 30.8 years-old (SD=5.31). Results: On their own initiative, before leaving for the maternity, women carried out at home, some care not recommended by World Health Organization, like pubic shaving (83.7%). Category A represents above all the lack of a birth plan (80.6%), mobility (71.3%), massage /54.2%) and light feeding (72.6%). Positively represented are skin-to-skin contact (77%) and breast-feeding (75.6%). Category B highlights intravenous fluids access (81.6%), lithotomy position for delivery (82.9%) and directed pushing (86.9%). Pubic shaving is recognized by about 22% of participants. The Kristeller maneuver or fundal pressure, is widely applied in Category D (59.9%), highlighting continuous cardiotocography (89.2%), repeated vaginal examination carried out by various professionals (78.5%) and episiotomy (69.2%). Conclusion: The World Health Organization model is weakly implemented. The medicalized culture of childbirth seems to predominate in phenomena of human nature.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-12-01T00:00:00Z
2018-01-04T13:09:34Z
2018-01-04
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10174/21698
http://hdl.handle.net/10174/21698
https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajns.20170606.15
url http://hdl.handle.net/10174/21698
https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajns.20170606.15
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Marques, M. & Sim-Sim, M. (2017). Perception of be Cared in Childbirth at the Light of the WHO Model, American Journal of Nursing Science 6(6) 478-485. doi: 10.11648/j.ajns.20170606.15
http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajns.20170606.15.pdf
mjp3@uevora.pt
msimsim@uevora.pt
744
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Science Publishing Group
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Science Publishing Group
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799136611154264064