Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Research

Overlooked by the obstetric gaze – how women with persistent health problems due to severe perineal trauma experience encounters with healthcare services: a qualitative study

Authors: Katharina Tjernström, Inger Lindberg, Maria Wiklund, Margareta Persson

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

During the first year postpartum, about 25 per cent of Swedish women with severe perineal trauma (SPT), i.e., a third- or fourth-degree perineal laceration at childbirth, are unsatisfied with their healthcare contacts. Further, there is a lack of research on the more long-term experiences of healthcare encounters among women with persistent SPT-related health problems. This study explores how women with self-reported persistent SPT-related health problems experience their contact with healthcare services 18 months to five years after childbirth when the SPT occurred.

Methods

In this descriptive qualitative study, a purposive sample of twelve women with self-reported persistent health problems after SPT were individually interviewed from November 2020 – February 2022. The data was analysed using inductive qualitative content analysis.

Results

Our results showed a paradoxical situation for women with persistent health problems due to SPT. They struggled with their traumatised body, but healthcare professionals rejected their health problems as postpartum normalities. This paradox highlighted the women’s difficulties in accessing postpartum healthcare, rehabilitation, and sick leave, which left them with neglected healthcare needs, diminished emotional well-being, and loss of financial and social status. Our results indicated that these health problems did not diminish over time. Consequently, the women had to search relentlessly for a ‘key person’ in healthcare who acknowledged their persistent problems as legitimate to access needed care, rehabilitation, and sick leave, thus feeling empowered.

Conclusions

Our study revealed that women with persistent SPT-related health problems experienced complex health challenges. Additionally, their needs for medical care, rehabilitation, and sick leave were largely neglected. Thus, the study highlights an inequitable provision of SPT-related healthcare services in Sweden, including regional disparities in access to care. Hence, the authors suggest that Swedish national guidelines for SPT-related care need to be developed and implemented, applying a woman-centered approach, to ensure equitable, effective, and accessible healthcare.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
Leap N. Woman-centred or women-centred care: does it matter? Br J Midwifery. 2009;17(1):12–6.CrossRef
3.
Uustal E. Bristning vid förlossning grad 3 - 4. Årsrapport från GynOp-registret avseende operationer utförda år 2022. [Laceration at childbirth, grade 3 - 4, Annual Report of surgeries 2022]. Umeå: The Swedish National Quality Register of Gynecological Surgery; 2023. Cited 2024 Maj 8. Available from: https://​www.​gynop.​se/​rapporter/​arsrapporter/​.
4.
5.
d’Almeida I. Women’s experiences following obstetric anal sphincter injury. J Pelvic Obstet Gynaecol Physiother. 2020;127:39–50.
6.
Darmody E, Bradshaw C, Atkinson S. Women’s experience of obstetric anal sphincter injury following childbirth: An integrated review. Midwifery. 2020;91:102820.CrossRefPubMed
7.
LaCross A, Groff M, Smaldone A. Obstetric anal sphincter injury and anal incontinence following vaginal birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Midwifery Women’s Health. 2015;60(1):37–47.CrossRef
8.
Samarasekera DN, Bekhit MT, Wright Y, Lowndes RH, Stanley KP, Preston JP, et al. Long-term anal continence and quality of life following postpartum anal sphincter injury. Colorectal Dis. 2008;10(8):793–9.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Andreucci CB, Bussadori JC, Pacagnella RC, Chou D, Filippi V, Say L, et al. Sexual life and dysfunction after maternal morbidity: a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15:307.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Beck CT. Effects of fourth-degree perineal lacerations on women’s physical and mental health. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2021;50(2):133–42.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Keighley MR, Perston Y, Bradshaw E, Hayes J, Keighley DM, Webb S. The social, psychological, emotional morbidity and adjustment techniques for women with anal incontinence following Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury: use of a word picture to identify a hidden syndrome. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016;16(1):275.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Lindqvist M, Lindberg I, Nilsson M, Uustal E, Persson M. “Struggling to settle with a damaged body” - A Swedish qualitative study of women’s experiences one year after obstetric anal sphincter muscle injury (OASIS) at childbirth. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2019;19:36–41.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Shoorab NJ, Taghipour A, Mirteimouri M, Roudsari RL. Social recovery: a neglected dimension of caring for women with perineal trauma in Iran. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2020;25(4):333–40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Jahani Shoorab N, Mirteimouri M, Taghipour A, Latifnejad Roudsari R. Women’s experiences of emotional recovery from childbirth-related perineal trauma: a qualitative content analysis. Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2019;7(3):181–91.PubMed
15.
Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services. Practices to improve detection of perineal tears and women’s views and experiences of healthcare providers following sustained perineal tear. A systematic review. 2021. Report No.: 323.
16.
Persson M, Lindberg I, Ohman A. Regional and clinical guidelines for prevention and care of obstetric anal sphincter injuries - A critical frame analysis. Midwifery. 2023;119:103608.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Huber M, Tunon K, Lindqvist M. “From hell to healed” - A qualitative study on women’s experience of recovery, relationships and sexuality after severe obstetric perineal injury. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2022;33:100736.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Priddis HS, Schmied V, Kettle C, Sneddon A, Dahlen HG. “A patchwork of services”–caring for women who sustain severe perineal trauma in New South Wales–from the perspective of women and midwives. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:236.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
20.
Williams A, Lavender T, Richmond DH, Tincello DG. Women’s experiences after a third-degree obstetric anal sphincter tear: a qualitative study. Birth. 2005;32(2):129–36.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Herron-Marx S, Williams A, Hicks C. A Q methodology study of women’s experience of enduring postnatal perineal and pelvic floor morbidity. Midwifery. 2007;23(3):322–34.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Crookall R, Fowler G, Wood C, Slade P. A systematic mixed studies review of women’s experiences of perineal trauma sustained during childbirth. J Adv Nurs. 2018;74(9):2038–52.
23.
Priddis H, Dahlen H, Schmied V. Women’s experiences following severe perineal trauma: a meta-ethnographic synthesis. J Adv Nurs. 2013;69(4):748–59.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Tjernström K, Lindberg I, Wiklund M, Persson M. Negotiating the ambiguity of an (in)authentic working life: a grounded theory study into severe perineal trauma. BMC Women’s Health. 2023;23(1):47.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Lindqvist M, Persson M, Nilsson M, Uustal E, Lindberg I. “A worse nightmare than expected” - a Swedish qualitative study of women’s experiences two months after obstetric anal sphincter muscle injury. Midwifery. 2018;61:22–8.CrossRefPubMed
26.
27.
Fahy K, Foureur M, Hastie C. Birth territory and midwifery guardianship : theory for practice, education, and research. Edinburgh: Books for Midwives; 2008.
28.
Walsh D, Christianson M, Stewart M. Why midwives should be feminists. Midirs Midwifery Digest. 2015;25(2):154–60.
29.
Buchanan K, Newnham E, Geraghty S, Whitehead L. Navigating midwifery solidarity: a feminist participatory action research framework. Women Birth. 2023;36(1):e169–74.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Benoit B, Goldberg L, Campbell-Yeo M. Infant feeding and maternal guilt: The application of a feminist phenomenological framework to guide clinician practices in breast feeding promotion. Midwifery. 2016;34:58–65.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Westergren A, Edin K, Walsh D, Christianson M. Autonomous and dependent-The dichotomy of birth: a feminist analysis of birth plans in Sweden. Midwifery. 2019;68:56–64.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Alspaugh A, Barroso J, Reibel M, Phillips S. Women’s contraceptive perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes: an integrative review of qualitative research. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2020;65(1):64–84.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Davis DL, Walker K. Re-discovering the material body in midwifery through an exploration of theories of embodiment. Midwifery. 2010;26(4):457–62.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Govender V, Penn-Kekana L. Gender biases and discrimination: a review of health care interpersonal interactions. Global Public Health. 2008;3(sup1):90–103.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24(2):105–12.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Graneheim UH, Lindgren BM, Lundman B. Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: a discussion paper. Nurse Educ Today. 2017;56:29–34.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Lindgren BM, Lundman B, Graneheim UH. Abstraction and interpretation during the qualitative content analysis process. Int J Nurs Stud. 2020;108:103632.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.CrossRefPubMed
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
Kvale S, Brinkmann S. Interviews: learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2009.
47.
Keen S, Lomeli-Rodriguez M, Joffe H. From challenge to opportunity: virtual qualitative research during COVID-19 and beyond. Int J Qual Methods. 2022;21:16094069221105076.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Thunberg S, Arnell L. Pioneering the use of technologies in qualitative research - A research review of the use of digital interviews. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2022;25(6):757–68.CrossRef
49.
50.
51.
Griffin GA. Dictionary of Gender Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2017.CrossRef
52.
Abhyankar P, Uny I, Semple K, Wane S, Hagen S, Wilkinson J, et al. Women’s experiences of receiving care for pelvic organ prolapse: a qualitative study. BMC Womens Health. 2019;19(1):45.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
53.
Scott KD, Hintz EA, Harris TM. “Having pain is normal”: How talk about chronic pelvic and genital pain reflects messages from menarche. Health Commun. 2022;37(3):296–306.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Pettersson A, Bertero CM. How women with endometriosis experience health care encounters. Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle). 2020;1(1):529–42.PubMed
55.
Heitmann K, Svendsen HC, Sporsheim IH, Holst L. Nausea in pregnancy: attitudes among pregnant women and general practitioners on treatment and pregnancy care. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2016;34(1):13–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
56.
Roper JC, Amber N, Wan OYK, Sultan AH, Thakar R. Review of available national guidelines for obstetric anal sphincter injury. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(11):2247–59.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
57.
58.
Foucault M, Sheridan A. The birth of the clinic: an archaeology of medical perception. 3rd ed. London: Routledge; 2003.
59.
Scarf VL, Rossiter C, Vedam S, Dahlen HG, Ellwood D, Forster D, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes by planned place of birth among women with low-risk pregnancies in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Midwifery. 2018;62:240–55.CrossRefPubMed
60.
Offerhaus P, Jans S, Hukkelhoven C, de Vries R, Nieuwenhuijze M. Women’s characteristics and care outcomes of caseload midwifery care in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20(1):517.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
61.
Forster DA, McLachlan HL, Davey MA, Biro MA, Farrell T, Gold L, et al. Continuity of care by a primary midwife (caseload midwifery) increases women’s satisfaction with antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum care: results from the COSMOS randomised controlled trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016;16:28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
62.
Brady S, Lee N, Gibbons K, Bogossian F. Woman-centred care: an integrative review of the empirical literature. Int J Nurs Stud. 2019;94:107–19.CrossRefPubMed
63.
Findlay D. The medical gaze: medical models, power, and women’s health. Atlantis. 1992;18(1&2):104–24.
64.
Samulowitz A, Gremyr I, Eriksson E, Hensing G. “Brave Men” and “Emotional Women”: a theory-guided literature review on gender bias in health care and gendered norms towards patients with chronic pain. Pain Res Manag. 2018;2018:6358624.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
65.
Fielding-Singh P, Dmowska A. Obstetric gaslighting and the denial of mothers’ realities. Soc Sci Med (1982). 2022;301:114938.
66.
Sebring JCH. Towards a sociological understanding of medical gaslighting in western health care. Sociol Health Ill. 2021;43(9):1951–64.CrossRef
67.
Jones CE. Wandering wombs and “female troubles”: the hysterical origins, symptoms, and treatments of endometriosis. Women Stud. 2015;44(8):1083–113.CrossRef
68.
69.
Young K, Fisher J, Kirkman M. “Do mad people get endo or does endo make you mad?”: Clinicians’ discursive constructions of Medicine and women with endometriosis. Fem Psychol. 2019;29(3):337–56.CrossRef
70.
71.
Boddy CR. Sample size for qualitative research. Qual Mark Res. 2016;19(4):426–32.CrossRef
72.
Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD. Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by information power. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(13):1753–60.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Overlooked by the obstetric gaze – how women with persistent health problems due to severe perineal trauma experience encounters with healthcare services: a qualitative study
Authors
Katharina Tjernström
Inger Lindberg
Maria Wiklund
Margareta Persson
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11037-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

BMC Health Services Research 1/2024 Go to the issue

Research

Grace Under Pressure: a mixed methods impact assessment of a verbatim theatre intervention to improve healthcare workplace culture

Research

Workforce strategies during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective online survey at intensive care units in Germany

Research

Validation study of the Amharic version Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) in public hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study

Correction

Correction: Health professionals’ experience and perceived obstacles with managing patients’ medication information in Norway: cross-sectional survey

Research

A qualitative evaluation of stakeholder perspectives on sustainable financing strategies for ‘priority’ adolescent sexual and reproductive health interventions in Ghana

Research

A closer look at the international health regulations capacities in Lebanon: a mixed method study