ObjectiveTo synthesise qualitative studies on women’s psychological experiences of physiological childbirth.DesignMeta-synthesis.MethodsStudies exploring women’s psychological experiences of physiological birth using qualitative methods were eligible. The research group searched the following databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, SocINDEX and Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection. We contacted the key authors searched reference lists of the collected articles. Quality assessment was done independently using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. Studies were synthesised using techniques of meta-ethnography.ResultsEight studies involving 94 women were included. Three third order interpretations were identified: ‘maintaining self-confidence in early labour’, ‘withdrawing within as labour intensifies’ and ‘the uniqueness of the birth experience’. Using the first, second and third order interpretations, a line of argument developed that demonstrated ‘the empowering journey of giving birth’ encompassing the various emotions, thoughts and behaviours that women experience during birth.ConclusionGiving birth physiologically is an intense and transformative psychological experience that generates a sense of empowerment. The benefits of this process can be maximised through physical, emotional and social support for women, enhancing their belief in their ability to birth and not disturbing physiology unless it is necessary. Healthcare professionals need to take cognisance of the empowering effects of the psychological experience of physiological childbirth. Further research to validate the results from this study is necessary.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016037072.

Background Psychological aspects of labor and birth have received little attention within maternity care service planning or clinical practice. The aim of this paper is to propose a model demonstrating how neurohormonal processes, in particular oxytocinergic mechanisms, not only control the physiological aspects of labor and birth, but also contribute to the subjective psychological experiences of birth. In addition, sensory information from the uterus as well as the external environment might influence these neurohormonal processes thereby influencing the progress of labor and the experience of birth. Methodology In this new model of childbirth, we integrated the findings from two previous systematic reviews, one on maternal plasma levels of oxytocin during physiological childbirth and one meta-synthesis of women´s subjective experiences of physiological childbirth. Findings The neurobiological processes induced by the release of endogenous oxytocin during birth influence maternal behaviour and feelings in connection with birth in order to facilitate birth. The psychological experiences during birth may promote an optimal transition to motherhood. The spontaneous altered state of consciousness, that some women experience, may well be a hallmark of physiological childbirth in humans. The data also highlights the crucial

BackgroundFor most women, participation in decision-making during maternity care has a positive impact on their childbirth experiences. Shared decision-making (SDM) is widely advocated as a way to support people in their healthcare choices. The aim of this study was to identify quality criteria and professional competencies for applying shared decision-making in maternity care. We focused on decision-making in everyday maternity care practice for healthy women.MethodsAn international three-round web-based Delphi study was conducted. The Delphi panel included international experts in SDM and in maternity care: mostly midwives, and additionally obstetricians, educators, researchers, policy makers and representatives of care users. Round 1 contained open-ended questions to explore relevant ingredients for SDM in maternity care and to identify the competencies needed for this. In rounds 2 and 3, experts rated statements on quality criteria and competencies on a 1 to 7 Likert-scale. A priori, positive consensus was defined as 70% or more of the experts scoring ≥6 (70% panel agreement).ResultsConsensus was reached on 45 quality criteria statements and 4 competency statements. SDM in maternity care is a dynamic process that starts in antenatal care and ends after birth. Experts agreed that the regular visits during pregnancy offer opportunities to build a relationship, anticipate situations and revisit complex decisions. Professionals need to prepare women antenatally for unexpected, urgent decisions in birth and revisit these decisions postnatally. Open and respectful communication between women and care professionals is essential; information needs to be accurate, evidence-based and understandable to women. Experts were divided about the contribution of professional advice in shared decision-making and about the partner’s role.ConclusionsSDM in maternity care is a dynamic process that takes into consideration women’s individual needs and the context of the pregnancy or birth. The identified ingredients for good quality SDM will help practitioners to apply SDM in practice and educators to prepare (future) professionals for SDM, contributing to women’s positive birth experience and satisfaction with care.

Objective The purpose of this study was to investigate why lowrisk nulliparae were not willing to participate in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of place of birth.Design Prospective study.Setting The Netherlands.Population All low-risk nulliparous women starting their pregnancy under midwife.Methods A questionnaire for 107 nulliparae who were willing to participate in a cohort study on place of birth, but at an earlier stage in their pregnancy declined to participate in a RCT of place of birth. This questionnaire included 12 items on a 4-point Likert scale but was not subjected to formal validation.Main outcome measure Reasons why nulliparae did not accept randomisation of place of birth. ResultsThe most important reason why women refused participation in the trial was that they had already chosen their place of birth before they were asked to participate at 12 weeks of pregnancy. From their answers, it became clear that pregnant women strongly value their autonomy of choice. The decision not to participate in the trial was not influenced by the information given by the midwife and the additional written information.Conclusions Factors that prevent randomisation for place of birth are difficult to influence. There is a need to explore why there is such certainty of view among women having their first child. Until we have an understanding of why women select information to make these choices and why women are reluctant to participate in trials that challenge choice, it may well be impossible to mount a trial of place of birth.

No abstract