Unravelling the Interplay Between Primigravida Pregnant Women Health Profile, Catastrophic Thinking, Tokophobia and Childbirth Preferences in a Rural Area.
Heba Saied Ibrahim Ali, Amal Ahmed Abdelhafez, Heba Abdel-Hamid Hammad, Eman Halim AbdElmoneam, Ahmed Abdellah Othman, Mohamed Hussein Ramadan Atta
{"title":"Unravelling the Interplay Between Primigravida Pregnant Women Health Profile, Catastrophic Thinking, Tokophobia and Childbirth Preferences in a Rural Area.","authors":"Heba Saied Ibrahim Ali, Amal Ahmed Abdelhafez, Heba Abdel-Hamid Hammad, Eman Halim AbdElmoneam, Ahmed Abdellah Othman, Mohamed Hussein Ramadan Atta","doi":"10.1111/jan.16635","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To assess the prevalence of tokophobia (fear of childbirth) and evaluate the relationship between catastrophic thinking, tokophobia, childbirth preferences and the health profile of primigravida (first-time pregnant women in rural areas).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A descriptive correlational study.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This study, implemented from January 2024 to March 2024, involved 300 primigravidae. Data collection was carried out using the Socio-Demographic and Clinical Data Sheet, the Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS) and the Fear of Childbirth Scale, which are specific tools chosen for their relevance to the research objectives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean score for catastrophic thinking is 36.13 (SD = 4.2740), which indicates a clinically significant level of pain catastrophising, and Tokophobia's mean is 42.53, which denotes intense Fear of Childbirth. There are strong positive correlations among catastrophic thinking and its subcomponents, positive correlations between tokophobia and devastating thinking and significant correlations between childbirth preferences and catastrophic thinking.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study's findings provide compelling insight into the intricate interplay between catastrophic thinking, tokophobia and childbirth preferences. These insights can pave the way for targeted psychological interventions to address catastrophic thinking in pregnant women, potentially alleviating tokophobia and supporting informed, less fear-driven childbirth decisions. This could lead to a more positive childbirth experience for many birthing people, equipping healthcare professionals with actionable knowledge to improve maternal and child health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>The relevant reporting method, that is, STROBE, has been adhered to.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>This study's findings have significant implications for the healthcare of pregnant women, particularly first-time birthing people deemed high risk. The study suggests that thorough antenatal care can help ease their fear of childbirth, ultimately leading to improved outcomes for both women and babies.</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>Public contribution by females in the community maternal services.</p>","PeriodicalId":54897,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.16635","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: To assess the prevalence of tokophobia (fear of childbirth) and evaluate the relationship between catastrophic thinking, tokophobia, childbirth preferences and the health profile of primigravida (first-time pregnant women in rural areas).
Design: A descriptive correlational study.
Method: This study, implemented from January 2024 to March 2024, involved 300 primigravidae. Data collection was carried out using the Socio-Demographic and Clinical Data Sheet, the Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS) and the Fear of Childbirth Scale, which are specific tools chosen for their relevance to the research objectives.
Results: The mean score for catastrophic thinking is 36.13 (SD = 4.2740), which indicates a clinically significant level of pain catastrophising, and Tokophobia's mean is 42.53, which denotes intense Fear of Childbirth. There are strong positive correlations among catastrophic thinking and its subcomponents, positive correlations between tokophobia and devastating thinking and significant correlations between childbirth preferences and catastrophic thinking.
Conclusion: This study's findings provide compelling insight into the intricate interplay between catastrophic thinking, tokophobia and childbirth preferences. These insights can pave the way for targeted psychological interventions to address catastrophic thinking in pregnant women, potentially alleviating tokophobia and supporting informed, less fear-driven childbirth decisions. This could lead to a more positive childbirth experience for many birthing people, equipping healthcare professionals with actionable knowledge to improve maternal and child health outcomes.
Reporting method: The relevant reporting method, that is, STROBE, has been adhered to.
Impact: This study's findings have significant implications for the healthcare of pregnant women, particularly first-time birthing people deemed high risk. The study suggests that thorough antenatal care can help ease their fear of childbirth, ultimately leading to improved outcomes for both women and babies.
Patient or public contribution: Public contribution by females in the community maternal services.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Advanced Nursing (JAN) contributes to the advancement of evidence-based nursing, midwifery and healthcare by disseminating high quality research and scholarship of contemporary relevance and with potential to advance knowledge for practice, education, management or policy.
All JAN papers are required to have a sound scientific, evidential, theoretical or philosophical base and to be critical, questioning and scholarly in approach. As an international journal, JAN promotes diversity of research and scholarship in terms of culture, paradigm and healthcare context. For JAN’s worldwide readership, authors are expected to make clear the wider international relevance of their work and to demonstrate sensitivity to cultural considerations and differences.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
