Emergency Verbal Consent for Intrapartum Research: A Grounded Theory Study

IF 4.7 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Pub Date : 2024-11-07 DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.17997
Carol Bedwell, Wendy Taylor, Caroline Cunningham, Andrew D. Weeks, Dame Tina Lavender
{"title":"Emergency Verbal Consent for Intrapartum Research: A Grounded Theory Study","authors":"Carol Bedwell,&nbsp;Wendy Taylor,&nbsp;Caroline Cunningham,&nbsp;Andrew D. Weeks,&nbsp;Dame Tina Lavender","doi":"10.1111/1471-0528.17997","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To understand the experiences of women, birth partners and health professionals of verbal followed by retrospective written consent in a prospective cohort study of a device to manage postpartum haemorrhage (PPH).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Grounded Theory.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Setting</h3>\n \n <p>Tertiary facility in North-West England, UK.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Sample</h3>\n \n <p>We used purposive and theoretical sampling to recruit 51 participants; 12 women, 12 birth partners, 16 obstetricians and 11 midwives.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Semi-structured interviews were conducted, using a topic guide for focus, until data saturation was achieved. Data were analysed using framework analysis technique.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Most women wanted sufficient information to make a decision at the time of the event, rather than in advance, and preferred not to be overwhelmed with detail. A key factor in making the decision to participate was a positive and trusting relationship with the attending obstetrician. Obtaining consent for research in emergencies was viewed by obstetricians as requiring a different approach and more challenging than consent for standard procedures in an emergency.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This is one of the first studies to explore verbal followed by retrospective written consent processes with women, clinicians and observers. This was acceptable to all, however information needs to be appropriate, and those discussing consent require adequate training (199/200).</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50729,"journal":{"name":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","volume":"132 4","pages":"446-453"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1471-0528.17997","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-0528.17997","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To understand the experiences of women, birth partners and health professionals of verbal followed by retrospective written consent in a prospective cohort study of a device to manage postpartum haemorrhage (PPH).

Design

Grounded Theory.

Setting

Tertiary facility in North-West England, UK.

Sample

We used purposive and theoretical sampling to recruit 51 participants; 12 women, 12 birth partners, 16 obstetricians and 11 midwives.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted, using a topic guide for focus, until data saturation was achieved. Data were analysed using framework analysis technique.

Results

Most women wanted sufficient information to make a decision at the time of the event, rather than in advance, and preferred not to be overwhelmed with detail. A key factor in making the decision to participate was a positive and trusting relationship with the attending obstetrician. Obtaining consent for research in emergencies was viewed by obstetricians as requiring a different approach and more challenging than consent for standard procedures in an emergency.

Conclusions

This is one of the first studies to explore verbal followed by retrospective written consent processes with women, clinicians and observers. This was acceptable to all, however information needs to be appropriate, and those discussing consent require adequate training (199/200).

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
产前研究的紧急口头同意:基础理论研究
目的在一项关于产后出血(PPH)处理设备的前瞻性队列研究中,了解妇女、分娩伴侣和医疗专业人员在获得追溯书面同意后的口头体验。方法采用主题指南进行半结构化访谈,直到数据达到饱和。结果大多数妇女希望在分娩时就能获得足够的信息以做出决定,而不是提前做出决定,并且不希望被过多的细节所淹没。决定是否参与的一个关键因素是与主治产科医生之间积极的信任关系。产科医生认为,在紧急情况下获得研究同意需要采取不同的方法,与在紧急情况下获得标准程序的同意相比更具挑战性。所有人都能接受这种方式,但信息必须适当,讨论同意的人需要接受适当的培训 (199/200)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
5.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BJOG is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). The Journal publishes original, peer-reviewed work in all areas of obstetrics and gynaecology, including contraception, urogynaecology, fertility, oncology and clinical practice. Its aim is to publish the highest quality medical research in women''s health, worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Evaluating the Effectiveness of Assisted Oocyte Activation in ICSI: Pairwise Meta-Analyses and Systematic Evidence Evaluation. Factors Influencing Pregnant Women's Participation in Randomised Clinical Trials in India: A Qualitative Study. Author Reply. Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1