JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Archives


MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Archives

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Archives


MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Home

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH Home

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH  February 2007

MIDWIFERY-RESEARCH February 2007

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: length of labour

From:

Chris McCourt <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health research." <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 13:42:11 -0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (94 lines)

good points Billie

there is also the issue of what or how professionals choose to measure
and record and why

Mary Stewarts's doctoral work highlighted, and we noticed the same
phenomenon (and commented on it briefly in an article) that midwives
tend to manipulate records in response to various agenda. Delaying
recording their assessments or amending the observations they record
can, they feel, give them and the woman more time in which to allow
labour to progress. This needs to be taken into account by anyone
researching labour duration using casenote audit. 

If anyone is interested in this further, our article was:

Beake S, McCourt C, Page L. The use of clinical audit in evaluating
maternity services reform: a critical reflection. Journal of Evaluation
in Clinical Practice 1998.


can't remember Mary's title now, but maybe she'll respond!

Chris




-----Original Message-----
From:	A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health
research. on behalf of Hunter, Billie
Sent:	Wed 14-Feb-07 5:34 PM
To:	[log in to unmask]
Cc:	
Subject:	Re: length of labour

Hi Chris and other interested list members 

I've been following this discussion with interest. It seems that another
relevant issue is likely to be how labour duration is measured, in
particular what the start point is considered to be ( the end point
being fairly clear!) This may be something that has shifted over time.
For example, there are new developments which aim to differentiate
between 'active' and 'latent' phases of labour (the All Wales Clinical
Pathway for Normal Labour that I have recently been researching is one
of these). If labour is not considered to have started until a woman is
in active labour ( as defined by her attendants), this will clearly
impact on the length of labour that is officially recorded (though this
may not necessarily reflect the length of labour as experienced by the
woman herself!) This issue could be compounded in units where women are
encouraged to stay at home until they are in established (active)
labour, so that the experiences of the woman prior to admission become
invisible. This would seem to have all sorts of implications for labour
duration norms - and also for the experiences of women. (I am also
interested in how it may affect the work of midwives - so that only
caring women in active labour is seen as 'real work')

Billie 

Billie Hunter 
Professor of Midwifery 
Centre for Midwifery and Gender Studies 
School of Health Science 
Floor 2, Vivian Tower 
University of Wales Swansea 
Swansea SA2 8PP 
01792 518584 
email: [log in to unmask] 


-----Original Message----- 
From: A forum for discussion on midwifery and reproductive health
research. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris
McCourt

Sent: 12 February 2007 17:05 
To: [log in to unmask] 
Subject: length of labour 


dear all 

I'm interested to know whether there is any written or research evidence
on whether norms of the length of labour have changed in the recent
past. I'm aware of the impact of Friedmans work on practices in labour
wards, but am wondering whether there is anything to suggest further
trends in what is seen as a 'normal' length of labour (and by
association, whether this could be related, in either direction, to
rising intervention rates)

all ideas on relevant evidence sources, or personal/professional
observations welcome 

Chris 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager