Browsing by Subject "Biomedical model"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Open Access
    Comparative study analysing women’s childbirth satisfaction and obstetric outcomes across two different models of maternity care
    (BMJ Publishing Group, 2021-06-21) Conesa Ferrer, María Belén; Canteras Jordana, Manuel; Ballesteros Meseguer, Carmen; Carrillo García, César; Martínez Roche, María Emilia; Enfermería
    Objectives: To describe the differences in obstetrical results and women’s childbirth satisfaction across 2 different models of maternity care (biomedical model and humanised birth). Setting: 2 university hospitals in south-eastern Spain from April to October 2013. Design: A correlational descriptive study. Participants: A convenience sample of 406 women participated in the study, 204 of the biomedical model and 202 of the humanised model. Results: The differences in obstetrical results were (biomedical model/humanised model): onset of labour (spontaneous 66/137, augmentation 70/1, p=0.0005), pain relief (epidural 172/132, no pain relief 9/40, p=0.0005), mode of delivery (normal vaginal 140/165, instrumental 48/23, p=0.004), length of labour (0–4 hours 69/93, >4 hours 133/108, p=0.011), condition of perineum (intact perineum or tear 94/178, episiotomy 100/24, p=0.0005). The total questionnaire score (100) gave a mean (M) of 78.33 and SD of 8.46 in the biomedical model of care and an M of 82.01 and SD of 7.97 in the humanised model of care (p=0.0005). In the analysis of the results per items, statistical differences were found in 8 of the 9 subscales. The highest scores were reached in the humanised model of maternity care. Conclusions: The humanised model of maternity care offers better obstetrical outcomes and women’s satisfaction scores during the labour, birth and immediate postnatal period than does the biomedical model.