Watchful waiting or induction of labour--a matter of informed choice: identification, analysis and critical appraisal of decision aids and patient information regarding care options for women with uncomplicated singleton late and post term pregnancies: a review

Perceptions of healthcare professionals regarding labour induction and augmentation: A qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Labour induction and augmentation procedures are commonly used in maternity units with or without medical indications. Research shows that healthcare professionals play a significant role in women's childbirth decisions.

AIM

To consolidate healthcare professionals' perceptions about labour induction and augmentation.

METHODS

Seven electronic databases were searched from their inception dates till January 2023: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations, and Theses Global. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and Sandelowski and Barroso's guidelines guided this review. Included studies' quality was appraised by the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool. Data were thematically synthesised. Review findings were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.

FINDINGS

Three main themes were identified from the 17 included studies: 1) Making sense of the phenomenon, 2) Two sides of the coin, and 3) The enlightened path ahead.

DISCUSSION

Healthcare professionals' labour induction and augmentation decisions were affected by personal (knowledge and moral philosophies), and external factors (women, community members, colleagues, and healthcare institutions). Some clinicians were unfamiliar with the proper labour induction/augmentation procedures, while others were worried about their decisions and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Suggestions for improvement include conducting labour induction/augmentation training for clinicians, having sufficient resources in facilities, and developing appropriate labour induction/augmentation clinical guidelines. Women and their partners, community members, and traditional healers could benefit from receiving labour induction/augmentation education. To improve health outcomes, healthcare professionals could deliver woman-centred care and collaborate.

Development and testing of a decision aid to achieve shared decision-making for routine labor induction

BACKGROUND

This quality improvement project aimed to create a decision aid for labor induction in healthy pregnancies at or beyond 39 weeks that met the needs of pregnant people least likely to experience shared decision-making and to identify and test implementation strategies to support its use in prenatal care.

METHODS

We used quality improvement and qualitative methods to develop, test, and refine a patient decision aid. The decision aid was tested in three languages by providers across obstetrics, family medicine, and midwifery practices at a tertiary care hospital and two community health centers. Outcomes included patients' understanding of their choices, pros and cons of choices, and the decision being theirs or a shared one with their provider.

RESULTS

Patient interview data indicated that shared decision-making on labor induction was achieved. Across three Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, we interviewed a diverse group of 24 pregnant people: 20 were people of color, 16 were publicly insured, and 15 were born outside the United States. All but one (23/24) reported feeling the decision was theirs or a shared one with their provider. The majority could name induction choices they had along with pros and cons. Interviewees described the decision-making experience as empowering and positive. Nine medical providers tested the decision aid and gave feedback. Providers stated the tool helped improve the quality of their counseling and reduce bias.

CONCLUSION

This project suggests that using an evidence-based and well-tested decision aid can help achieve shared decision-making on labor induction for a diverse group of pregnant people.

Attitudes of pregnant women and healthcare professionals to labour induction and obtaining consent for labour induction

Induction of labour is experienced by up to one third of women and can be a negative experience, in relation to both the decision about whether to have an induction of labour (IoL) and the experience of the process of IoL. This paper reviews the limited evidence of women's views on and experiences of: information provision; shared decision-making; preferences for method and location of IoL; indications for IoL; pain management; and effective communication and support. Healthcare professionals' views are reviewed, but are underrepresented, and further research is needed to understand experiences of gaining consent for IoL. Systematic review evidence is drawn on where possible, but reviews often found small numbers of papers for inclusion, and provide insights rather than conclusive evidence. Future research would benefit from using validated measures to assess the experience of IoL.

Addressing Conflicts of Interest in Health and Medicine: Current Evidence and Implications for Patient Decision Aid Development

BACKGROUND

More stringent policies for addressing conflicts of interest have been implemented around the world in recent years. Considering the value of revisiting conflict of interest quality standards set by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration, we sought to review evidence relevant to 2 questions: 1) What are the effects of different strategies for managing conflicts of interest? and 2) What are patients' perspectives on conflicts of interest?

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review of English-language articles and abstracts from 2010 to 2019 that reported relevant quantitative or qualitative research.

RESULTS

Of 1743 articles and 118 abstracts identified, 41 articles and 2 abstracts were included. Most evidence on the effects of conflict of interest management strategies pertained only to subsequent compliance with the management strategy. This evidence highlighted substantial noncompliance with prevailing requirements. Evidence on patient perspectives on conflicts of interest offered several insights, including the existence of diverse views on the acceptability of conflicts of interest, the salience of conflict of interest type and monetary value to patients, and the possibility that conflict of interest disclosure could have unintended effects. We identified no published research on the effects of IPDAS Collaboration conflict of interest quality standards on patient decision making or outcomes.

LIMITATIONS

Because we did not conduct a systematic review, we may have missed some evidence relevant to our review questions. In addition, our team did not include patient partners.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review have implications for the management of conflicts of interest not only in patient decision aid development but also in clinical practice guideline development, health and medical research reporting, and health care delivery.

The experiences of shared decision-making of women who had an induction of labour

OBJECTIVES

The importance of shared decision-making (SDM) in relation to induction of labour (IOL) is recognised, little is known about women's experiences of and satisfaction with decision-making and how this can be improved. The aim of this study was to 1) gain insight into women's experiences of SDM in relation to IOL, 2) understand the factors associated with satisfaction versus dissatisfaction during SDM, and 3) identify recommendations for service improvement.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 32 women who had a recent IOL at one of eight public hospitals in Sydney, Australia. An inductive approach to coding and categorisation of themes was used.

RESULTS

While women reported varied experiences with SDM, many reported not feeling that they had a choice about IOL, not being presented with the risks and benefits of different birth options, and receiving insufficient information about the IOL process and methods. Satisfaction versus dissatisfaction with SDM appeared more closely related to a woman's willingness to have an IOL and their willingness to defer decision-making, rather than the process of SDM. Recommendations for improvement included improved SDM practices, access to guidelines and continuity of care.

CONCLUSION

There is a need to improve SDM processes around IOL.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Particular areas for improvement include more comprehensive discussions surrounding the pros and cons of different birth methods and the IOL process. Decision aids and clinician training may assist with SDM.

Factors associated with women's birth beliefs and experiences of decision-making in the context of planned birth: A survey study

OBJECTIVE

In many high-income countries, approximately half of all births are now planned regarding timing, either by elective Caesarean Section (CS) or induction of labour (IOL). To what degree this is explained by women's birth beliefs and preferences, and in turn, factors such as parity and ethnicity that may influence them, is contentious. Within a broader study on Timing of Birth by planned CS or IOL, we aimed to explore the association between demographic and pregnancy factors, with women's birth beliefs and experiences of planned birth decision-making in late pregnancy.

DESIGN

Survey study of women's birth beliefs and experiences of planned birth decision-making. Both univariate analysis and ordinal regression modelling was performed to examine the influence of; parity; cultural background; continuity of pregnancy care; CS or IOL; and whether CS was "recommended" or "requested", on women's stated birth beliefs and decision-making experience.

SETTING

8 Sydney hospitals PARTICIPANTS: Women planned to have an IOL or CS between November 2018-July 2019.

MEASUREMENT

The survey included four statements regarding birth beliefs and ten statements about experiences of decision-making on a 5-item Likert scale, as well as questions about demographic and pregnancy factors that might influence these beliefs.

FINDINGS

Of 340 included surveys, 56% regarded IOL and 44% CS. Women indicated strong belief both that they should be supported to make decisions about their birth and that their doctor/midwife knows what is best for them (over 90% agreement for both). Regarding decision-making, over 90% also agreed they had trust in the person providing information, understood it, and had sufficient time for both questions and decision-making. However only 58% were provided written information, 19% felt they "didn't really have a choice", and 9% felt pressure to make a decision. On both univariate and multivariate analysis, women having CS (versus IOL) expressed more positive views of their experience and involvement in decision-making, as did women experiencing a pregnancy continuity-of-care model. Women identifying as from a specific cultural or ethnic background expressed more negative experiences. On modelling, the studied factors accounted for only a small proportion of the variation in responses (3-19%).

CONCLUSIONS

Continuity of pregnancy care was associated with positive decision-making experiences and cultural background with more negative experiences. Women whose planned birth was IOL versus CS also reported more negative decision-making experiences.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Attention to improving quality of information provision, including written information, to women having IOL and women of diverse background, is recommended to improve women's experiences of planned birth decision-making.

The Attitudes and Beliefs of Australian Midwives and Obstetricians About Birth Options and Labor Interventions

INTRODUCTION

The global rise in the rate of induction of labor and cesarean birth shows considerable unexplained variation both within and between countries. Prior research suggests that the extent to which women are engaged in the decision-making process about birth options, such as elective cesarean, induction of labor, or use of fetal monitoring, is heavily influenced by clinician beliefs and preferences. The aim of this study was to investigate the beliefs about labor interventions and birth options held by midwives and obstetric medical staff from 8 Sydney hospitals and assess how the health care providers' beliefs were associated with discipline or years of experience.

METHODS

This is a survey study of midwives and obstetric staff that was distributed between November 2018 and July 2019. Modified from the previously validated birth attitudes survey for the Australian context, survey domains include (1) maternal choice and woman's role in birth, (2) safety by mode or place of birth, (3) attitudes toward cesarean birth for preventing urinary incontinence, (4) approaches to decrease cesarean birth rates, and (5) fears of birth mode. Responses were compared between professions and within professions by years of experience using Mann-Whitney U testing.

RESULTS

A total of 217 midwives and 58 medical staff completed the survey (response rate, 30.5%). Midwifery staff responses generally favored a physiologic approach to birth, versus beliefs more in favor of intervention (particularly cesarean birth) among medical staff. There was interprofessional discrepancy on most items, particularly regarding safety of mode or place of birth and approaches to decrease cesarean birth rates. Within disciplines, there was more variation in medical staff attitudes than within the midwifery staff. No clinically important differences in beliefs by years of experience were noted.

DISCUSSION

Clinicians need to be aware of their own beliefs and preferences about birth as a potential source of bias when counselling women, particularly when there are a range of treatment options and the evidence may not strongly favor one option over another. As both groups had similar perceptions about the importance of women's autonomy, shared decision-making training could help bridge belief gaps and improve care around birth decisions.

Women's experiences of decision-making and beliefs in relation to planned caesarean section: A survey study

BACKGROUND

The caesarean section (CS) rate is over 25% in many high-income countries, with a substantial minority of CSs occurring in women with low-risk pregnancies. CS decision-making is influenced by clinician and patient beliefs and preferences, and clinical guidelines increasingly stipulate the importance of shared decision-making (SDM). To what extent SDM occurs in practice is unclear.

AIMS

To identify women's birth preferences and SDM experience regarding planned CS.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Survey of women at eight Sydney hospitals booked for planned CS. Demographic data, initial mode of birth preferences, reason for CS, and experiences of SDM were elicited using questions with multiple choice lists, Likert scales, and open-ended responses. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data using content analysis. Responses of women who perceived their CS as 'requested' vs 'recommended' were compared.

RESULTS

Of 151 respondents, repeat CS (48%) and breech presentation (14%) were the most common indications. Only 32% stated that at the beginning of pregnancy they had a definite preference for spontaneous labour and birth. Key reasons for wanting planned CS were to avoid another emergency CS, prior positive CS experience, and logistical planning. Although 15% of women felt pressured (or were unsure) about their CS decision, the majority reported positive experiences, with over 90% indicating they were informed about CS benefits and risks, had adequate information, and understood information provided.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority (85%) of women appeared satisfied with the decision-making process, regardless of whether they perceived their CS as requested or recommended.

What are women's mode of birth preferences and why? A systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

The optimal caesarean section rate is estimated to be between 10-15%; however, it is much higher in high and many middle-income countries and continues to be lower in some middle and low-income countries. While a range of factors influence caesarean section rates, women's mode of birth preferences also play a role. The aim of this study was to map the literature in relation to women's mode of birth preferences, and identify underlying reasons for, and factors associated with, these preferences.

METHOD

Using a scoping review methodology, quantitative and qualitative evidence was systematically considered. To identify studies, PubMed, Maternity and Infant Care, MEDLINE, and Web of Science were searched for the period from 2008 to 2018, and reference lists of included studies were examined.

FINDINGS

A total of 65 studies were included. While the majority of women prefer a vaginal birth, between 5-20% in high-income countries and 1.4 to 50% in low-middle-income countries prefer a caesarean section. The six main reasons or factors associated with a mode of birth preference were: (1) perceptions of safety; (2) fear of pain; (3) previous birth experience; (4) encouragement and dissuasion from health professionals; (5) social and cultural influences; and (6) access to information and educational levels.

CONCLUSION

To help ensure women receive the required care that is aligned with their preferences, processes of shared decision-making should be implemented. Shared decision-making has the potential to reduce the rate of unnecessary interventions, and also improve the willingness of women to accept a medically-indicated caesarean section in low-income countries.

Women's experiences and satisfaction with having a cesarean birth: An integrative review

BACKGROUND

With around one third of woman having a cesarean birth, better understanding of women's experiences of having a cesarean is vital to improve women's experiences of care. The aim of this review was to gain insight into women's experiences of and satisfaction with cesarean and to identify factors that contribute to women's poor experiences of care.

METHODS

Using an integrative methodology, evidence was systematically considered in relation to women's experiences of cesarean birth and whether they were satisfied with their experience of care. To identify studies, PubMed, Maternity and Infant Care, MEDLINE, and Web of Science were searched for the period from 2008 to 2018, and reference lists of included studies were examined.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included. Although the majority of women were satisfied with their cesarean, a large minority of women were dissatisfied and reported a negative experience. In particular, women who had an emergency cesarean were less satisfied than women who had a vaginal birth. Nonmedical factors or experiences that appear associated with dissatisfaction include (a) feeling ignored and disempowered; (b) experiencing a loss of control; (c) not being informed; and (d) birth values that favor vaginal birth.

CONCLUSIONS

Women's experiences of cesarean birth appear influenced by the circumstances (emergency vs planned), the extent to which they felt involved in decision-making and in control of their experience, and their birth values and beliefs. Increasing antenatal, intrapartum, and postpartum communication and shared decision-making may help engage women as an active participant in their own birth.

Making shared decisions in relation to planned caesarean sections: What are we up to?

OBJECTIVE

To map the literature in relation to shared decision making (SDM) for planned caesarean section (CS), particularly women's experiences in receiving the information they need to make informed decisions, their knowledge of the risks and benefits of CS, the experiences and attitudes of clinicians in relation to SDM, and interventions that support women to make informed decisions.

METHODS

Using a scoping review methodology, quantitative and qualitative evidence was systematically considered. To identify studies, PubMed, Maternity and Infant Care, MEDLINE, and Web of Science were searched for the period from 2008 to 2018.

RESULTS

34 studies were included, with 9750 women and 3313 clinicians. Overall women reported limited SDM, and many did not have the information required to make informed decisions. Clinicians generally agreed with SDM, while recognising it often does not occur. Decision aids and educational interventions were viewed positively by women.

CONCLUSION

Many women were not actively involved in decision-making. Decision aids show promise as a SDM-enhancing tool. Studies that included clinicians suggest uncertainty regarding SDM, although willingness to engage.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Moving from clinician-led decision-making to SDM for CS has potential to improve patient experiences, however this will require considerable clinician training, and implementation of SDM interventions.

"I guess baby was just too comfy in there…": A qualitative study of women's experiences of elective late-term induction of labour

BACKGROUND

The frequency of induction of labour (IOL) in late-term pregnancy has increased significantly, but little is known about how women with uncomplicated pregnancies experience IOL for late-term indication alone.

AIM

To explore how women with uncomplicated pregnancies experienced late-term IOL.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were conducted with 23 women who all had labour induced on late-term indication only. Participants were recruited from two Danish hospitals who offered an outpatient induction regime. The women were interviewed 4-8 weeks after birth. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

All women had hoped for a spontaneous birth. Prolonged pregnancy was understood as the body/baby "not being ready", but generally, the women were not worried at that point. Most women felt adequately informed about the reasons for IOL, but some requested more information and time to consider their options. The majority considered IOL to be both an offer and a recommendation. One-third of the participants were initially hesitant but chose/accepted IOL because of weariness from pregnancy and the impatience to deliver a healthy child. The opportunity of outpatient induction was generally appreciated as it allowed the women to continue everyday activities while waiting for labour to begin. Nineteen women reported having a good birthing experience. Two women felt that negative birthing experiences were partly related to IOL.

CONCLUSIONS

Most women considered the late-term IOL to be a positive experience. Some women requested more information and time to consider alternatives. These women should be provided with supported opportunities to consider the options.

Women's experiences of decision-making and attitudes in relation to induction of labour: A survey study

BACKGROUND

Rates of induction of labour have been increasing globally to up to one in three pregnancies in many high-income countries. Although guidelines around induction, and strength of the underlying evidence, vary considerably by indication, shared decision-making is increasingly recognised as key. The aim of this study was to identify women's mode of birth preferences and experiences of shared decision-making for induction of labour.

METHOD

An antenatal survey of women booked for an induction at eight Sydney hospitals was conducted. A bespoke questionnaire was created assessing women's demographics, indication for induction, pregnancy model of care, initial birth preferences, and their experience of the decision-making process.

RESULTS

Of 189 survey respondents (58% nulliparous), major reported reasons for induction included prolonged pregnancy (38%), diabetes (25%), and suspected fetal growth restriction (8%). Most respondents (72%) had hoped to labour spontaneously. Major findings included 19% of women not feeling like they had a choice about induction of labour, 26% not feeling adequately informed (or uncertain if informed), 17% not being given alternatives, and 30% not receiving any written information on induction of labour. Qualitative responses highlight a desire of women to be more actively involved in decision-making.

CONCLUSION

A substantial minority of women did not feel adequately informed or prepared, and indicated they were not given alternatives to induction. Suggested improvements include for face-to-face discussions to be supplemented with written information, and for shared decision-making interventions, such as the introduction of decision aids and training, to be implemented and evaluated.

Contributing to Global Health: Development of a Consensus-Based Whole Systems Research Strategy for Anthroposophic Medicine

Background

Whole medicine and health systems like traditional and complementary medicine systems (T&CM) are part of healthcare around the world. One key feature of T&CM is its focus on patient-centered and multimodal care and the integration of intercultural perspectives in a wide range of settings. It may contribute to good health and well being for people as part of the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. The authentic, rigorous, and fair evaluation of such a medical system, with its inherent complexity and individualization, imposes methodological challenges. Hence, we propose a broad research strategy to test and characterize its possible contribution to health.

Methods

To develop a research strategy for a specific T&CM system, Anthroposophic Medicine (AM), applying multimodal integrative healthcare based on a four-level concept of man, we used a three-phase consensus process with experts and key stakeholders, consisting of (1) premeeting methodological literature and AM research review and interviews to supplement or revise items of the research strategy and tailor them to AM research, (2) face-to-face consensus meetings further developing and tailoring the strategy, and (3) postmeeting feedback and review, followed by finalization.

Results

Currently, AM covers many fields of medical specialties in varied levels of healthcare settings, such as outpatient and inpatient; primary, secondary, and tertiary care; and health education and pedagogy. It is by definition integrated with conventional medicine in the public healthcare system. It applies specific medicines, nursing techniques, arts therapies, eurythmy therapy, rhythmical massage, counseling, and psychotherapy, and it is provided by medical doctors, nurses, therapists, midwives, and nutritionists. A research strategy authentic to this level of complexity should comprise items with a focus on (I) efficacy and effectiveness, divided into (a) evaluation of the multimodal and multidisciplinary medical system as a whole, or of complex multimodal therapy concept, (b) a reasonable amount of methodologically rigorous, confirmatory randomized controlled trials on exemplary pharmacological and nonpharmacological therapies and indications, (c) a wide range of interventions and patient-centered care strategies with less extensive formats like well-conducted small trails, observational studies, and high-quality case reports and series, or subgroup analyses from whole-system studies, or health service research; (II) safety; (III) economics; (IV) evidence synthesis; (V) methodologic issues; (VI) biomedical, physiological, pharmacological, pharmaceutical, psychological, anthropological, and nosological issues as well as innovation and development; (VI) patient perspective and involvement, public needs, and ethics; (VII) educational matters and professionalism; and (IX) disease prevention, health promotion, and public health.

Conclusion

The research strategy extends to and complements the prevailing hierarchical system by introducing a broad “evidence house” approach to evaluation, something many health technology assessment boards today support. It may provide transparent and comprehensive insight into potential benefits or risks of AM. It can serve as a framework for an evidence-informed approach to AM for a variety of stakeholders and collaborating networks with the aim of improving global health.

Women's experiences of postterm induction of labor: A systematic review of qualitative studies

BACKGROUND

Over the last decade, induction of labor (IOL) in postterm pregnancies has increased. Studies have shown the medical advantages of postterm IOL, but less is known about the perspectives of the pregnant women. This review aimed to summarize the current qualitative evidence on women's experience of postterm IOL.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in three databases. A total of 3193 publications were identified, but only eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis guided the data extraction and synthesis. The Confidence in the Evidence for Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) approach was used to assess confidence in the findings.

RESULTS

Three major findings were identified. First, for some women, IOL required a shift in expectations because the hope of spontaneous labor had to be given up. Second, the IOL decision was considered a recommendation from health care professionals and was experienced as a nondecision. Finally, the induction process was experienced as a sequential set of steps where the women were expected to fit into the existing hospital organization. The CERQual assessment suggested moderate confidence in all findings.

DISCUSSION

The negative experiences identified in this review can be greatly reduced by a communicative and patient-centered approach. To support informed choice and shared decision making, women need high-quality, unbiased information about IOL, alternative options, and potential outcomes, in addition to time for reflection on their personal values and preferences. Women may need a professionally initiated and supported opportunity to re-evaluate their hopes and expectations before IOL.

Indications for, and timing of, planned caesarean section: A systematic analysis of clinical guidelines

BACKGROUND

There has been a worldwide rise in planned caesarean sections over recent decades, with significant variations in practice between hospitals and countries. Guidelines are known to influence clinical decision-making and, potentially, unwarranted clinical variation. The aim of this study was to review guidelines for recommendations in relation to the timing and indications for planned caesarean section as well as recommendations around the process of decision-making.

METHOD

A systematic search of national and international English-language guidelines published between 2008 and 2018 was undertaken. Guidelines were reviewed, assessed in terms of quality and extracted independently by two reviewers.

FINDINGS

In total, 49 guidelines of varying quality were included. There was consistency between the guidelines in potential indications for caesarean section, although guidelines vary in terms of the level of detail. There was substantial variation in timing of birth, for example recommended timing of caesarean section for women with uncomplicated placenta praevia is between 36 and 39weeks depending on the guideline. Only 11 guidelines provided detailed guidance on shared decision-making. In general, national-level guidelines from Australia, and overseas, received higher quality ratings than regional guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The majority of guidelines, regardless of their quality, provide very limited information to guide shared decision-making or the timing of planned caesarean section, two of the most vital aspects of guidance. National guidelines were generally of better quality than regional ones, suggesting these should be used as a template where possible and emphasis placed on improving national guidelines and minimising intra-country, regional, variability of guidelines.

Induction of labour: Experiences of care and decision-making of women and clinicians

BACKGROUND

There has been a rise in induction of labour over recent decades. There is some tension in the literature in relation to when induction is warranted and when not, with variability between guidelines and practice. Given these tensions, the importance of shared decision-making between clinicians and women is increasingly highlighted as paramount, but it remains unclear to what extent this occurs in routine care.

METHOD

Using a scoping review methodology, quantitative and qualitative evidence were considered to answer the research question "What are the views, preferences and experiences of women and clinicians in relation to induction of labour more broadly, and practices of decision-making specifically?" To identify studies, the databases PubMed, Maternity and Infant Care, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched from 2008 to 2018, and reference lists of included studies were examined.

FINDINGS

20 papers met inclusion criteria, in relation to (a) women's preferences, experiences and satisfaction with IOL; (b) women's experience of shared-decision making in relation to induction; (c) interventions that improve shared decision-making and (d) factors that influence decision-making from the perspective of clinicians. Synthesis of the included studies indicates that decision-making in relation to induction of labour is largely informed by medical considerations. Women are not routinely engaged in the decision making process with expectations and preferences largely unmet.

CONCLUSION

There is a need to develop strategies such as decision aids, the redesign of antenatal classes, and clinician communication training to improve the quality of information available to women and their capacity for informed decision-making.

Women's experiences of induction of labour: Qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis

OBJECTIVES

To explore and synthesise evidence of women's experiences of induction of labour (IoL).

DESIGN

Systematic review and thematic synthesis of peer-reviewed qualitative evidence. Relevant databases were searched from inception to the present day. Study quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) qualitative research appraisal tool.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Low and high risk women who had experienced IoL in an inpatient or outpatient setting.

FINDINGS

Eleven papers (representing 10 original studies) published between 2010 and 2018 were included for thematic synthesis. Four key analytical themes were identified: ways in which decisions regarding induction were made; women's ownership of the process; women's social needs when undergoing IoL; and the importance of place in the induction process. The review indicates that IoL is a challenging experience for women, which can be understood in terms of the gap between women's needs and the reality of their experience concerning information and decision-making, support, and environment.

KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Providing good quality appropriately timed information and supporting women's self-efficacy to be involved in decision-making around IoL may benefit women by facilitating a sense of ownership or control of labour. Compassionate support from significant others and healthcare professionals in a comfortable, private and safe environment should be available to all women.