助产士限制性会阴切开临床决策体验的质性研究

doi:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2022.22.007

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的探讨助产士限制性会阴切开临床决策的体验及影响因素，以期为助产士临床决策提供依据，促进产妇安全分娩。方法采用现象学研究方法，以最大差异抽样策略于2021年10月—12月选取江苏省4所医院的13名助产士进行半结构式深度访谈，运用Colaizzi 7步分析法进行归纳、分析并提炼主题。结果共提炼出3个主题及所属的9个亚主题：临床决策的动机（专业知识的主导、减少分娩损伤的理念、孕产妇的需求及近远期获益、新生儿安全）、决策中的促进因素（同伴的支持与监督、产妇的配合、自我反思成长）、决策中的障碍因素（自主权的受限、创伤事件的干扰）。结论助产士对限制性会阴切开临床决策是一个复杂多样的过程。助产士在临床实践过程中，需发挥健康促进者和保护者的作用，保证助产服务的安全性和有效性。

关键词: 限制性会阴切开, 助产士, 质性研究, 临床决策, 护理

Abstract:

Objective To explore the experience and influencing factors of midwife’s clinical decision-making of episiotomy，in order to provide suggestions and bases for midwives’ clinical decision-making and promote safe delivery. Methods Using phenomenological research method and maximum difference sampling，13 midwives were selected from 4 hospitals in Jiangsu Province to conduct semi-structured in-depth interviews from October to December 2021. Colaizzi 7-step analysis method was adopted for inductive analysis and theme extraction. Results A total of 3 themes and 9 sub-themes were extracted. Theme 1：decision-making motivation（dominance of professional knowledge，concept of reducing trauma in childbirth，maternal needs and short-term & long-term benefits，neonatal safety）. Theme 2：promotion in decision-making（peers’ support and supervision，puerpera’s cooperation and self-reflection）. Theme 3：obstacles in decision-making（limitation of autonomy，interference from traumatic events）. Conclusion Clinical decision-making on episiotomy for midwives is a complex and varied process. In clinical practice，midwives need to play the role of health promoter and protector to ensure the safety and effectiveness of midwifery services.

Key words: Restrictive Episiotomy, Midwife, Qualitative Research, Clinical Decision-Making, Nursing Care

刘华华, 陈志芳, 谷金丽, 李小琴, 李霖, 吴蓉蓉, 张凤. 助产士限制性会阴切开临床决策体验的质性研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(22): 2733-2737.

LIU Huahua, CHEN Zhifang, GU Jinli, LI Xiaoqin, LI Lin, WU Rongrong, ZHANG Feng. A qualitative study on the experience of clinical decision-making for restrictive episiotomy in midwives[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 2022, 57(22): 2733-2737.

图/表 1

参考文献 23

[1]	谢幸, 孔北华, 段涛. 妇产科学[M]. 9版. 北京:人民卫生出版社, 2018.
	Xie X, Kong BH, Duan T. Obstetrics and gynecology[M]. 9th ed. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House,2018.
[2]	Jiang H, Qian X, Carroli G, et al. Selective versus routine use of episiotomy for vaginal birth[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2017, 2:CD000081.
[3]	Corrêa Junior MD, Passini Júnior R. Selective episiotomy:indications,techinique,and association with severe perineal lacerations[J]. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet, 2016, 38(6):301-307. DOI URL
[4]	Amorim M, Coutinho IC, Melo I, et al. Selective episiotomy vs. implementation of a non-episiotomy protocol:a randomized clinical trial[J]. Reprod Health, 2017, 14(1):55. DOI PMID
[5]	杨靖萱, 杨晓宇, 张凤芝, 等. 河南省助产士和产科医生会阴切开术的知信行调查[J]. 中国妇幼卫生杂志, 2021, 12(3):51-55,71.
	Yang JX, Yang XY, Zhang FZ, et al. Knowledge,attitude and experience of episiotomy practice among obstetricians and midwives in Henan Province[J]. Chin J Women Child Heal, 2021, 12(3):51-55,71.
[6]	Ye JF, Chen Y, Yang H, et al. A nationwide cross-sectional survey of episiotomy practice in China[J]. Lancet Reg Health West Pac, 2022, 19:100345.
[7]	Lalonde A. International childbirth initiative:a new paradigm in maternal health care[J]. Afr J Reprod Health, 2019, 23(4):11-15. DOI PMID
[8]	Minooee S, Cummins A, Foureur M, et al. Catastrophic thinking:is it the legacy of traumatic births? Midwives’ experiences of shoulder dystocia complicated births[J]. Women Birth, 2021, 34(1):e38-e46. DOI PMID
[9]	郭琳, 丁焱, 张铮, 等. 分娩时会阴切开决策影响因素预测模型的构建[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2019, 54(10):1469-1474. DOI
	Guo L, Ding Y, Zhang Z, et al. Establishment of predictive model of midwives’ decision on episiotomy during childbirth[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2019, 54(10):1469-1474.
[10]	Butler MM, Fullerton JT, Aman C. Competence for basic midwifery practice:updating the ICM essential competencies[J]. Midwifery, 2018, 66:168-175. DOI URL
[11]	吴东. 临床决策原理及其能力培养[J]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2015, 3(4):235-239.
	Wu D. The principle and method of clinical decision-making[J]. Chin J Diagn Electron Ed, 2015, 3(4):235-239.
[12]	许荣华, 沈佩君, 李灵芳, 等. 基于核心胜任力的助产方向专科护士培训实践[J]. 中华护理教育, 2021(3):222-226.
	Xu RH, Shen PJ, Li LF, et al. The practice of specialty nurse training of midwifery based on core competence[J]. Chin J Nurs Educ, 2021(3):222-226.
[13]	Vieira BDC, Backes MTS, Costa LD, et al. Applying best practices to pregnant women in the obstetric center[J]. Rev Bras Enferm, 2019, 72(suppl 3):191-196. DOI PMID
[14]	Rodrigues DP, Alves VH, Paula CC, et al. Humanized childbirth:the values of health professionals in daily obstetric care[J]. Rev Bras Enferm, 2021, 75(2):e20210052. DOI URL
[15]	Waldman R. ACOG practice bulletin no. 198:prevention and management of obstetric lacerations at vaginal delivery[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2019, 133(1):185.
[16]	Sangkomkamhang U, Kongwattanakul K, Kietpeerakool C, et al. Restrictive versus routine episiotomy among Southeast Asian term pregnancies:a multicentre randomised controlled trial[J]. BJOG, 2020, 127(3):397-403. DOI URL
[17]	Lee S, Holden D, Webb R, et al. Pregnancy related risk perception in pregnant women,midwives & doctors:a cross-sectional survey[J]. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2019, 19(1):335. DOI URL
[18]	McCourt C, Rance S, Rayment J, et al. Organising safe and sustainable care in alongside midwifery units:findings from an organisational ethnographic study[J]. Midwifery, 2018, 65:26-34. DOI URL
[19]	李亚敏, 宋丽莉, 韩翠存, 等. 助产士临床决策意识现状及其影响因素的研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2018, 53(12):1482-1487.
	Li YM, Song LL, Han CC, et al. The level and influencing factors of midwives’ awareness on clinical decision-making[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2018, 53(12):1482-1487.
[20]	Styles C, Kearney L, George K. Implementation and upscaling of midwifery continuity of care:the experience of midwives and obstetricians[J]. Women Birth, 2020, 33(4):343-351. DOI PMID
[21]	代玲, 曾铁英, 张可, 等. 助产士参与创伤性分娩体验质性研究的Meta整合[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2021, 56(11):1728-1735. DOI
	Dai L, Zeng TY, Zhang K, et al. The experience of midwives’ participating in traumatic birth:a meta-synthesis of qualitative research[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2021, 56(11):1728-1735.
[22]	Wahlberg Å, Högberg U, Emmelin M. The erratic pathway to regaining a professional self-image after an obstetric work-related trauma:a grounded theory study[J]. Int J Nurs Stud, 2019, 89:53-61. DOI PMID
[23]	Chan ST, Khong PCB, Wang W. Psychological responses,coping and supporting needs of healthcare professionals as second victims[J]. Int Nurs Rev, 2017, 64(2):242-262. DOI PMID