Seçim, süreklilik ve kontrol: kadınları bakımlarının merkezine koymaya ve normal doğumu desteklemeye yönelik açık bir çağrı
Özet
Bu yazı, Birleşik Krallık, Avustralya ve Yeni Zelanda'daki doğum hizmetlerinde kadın merkezli yaklaşımı, "seçim, süreklilik ve kontrol" (Üç C) kavramları üzerinden incelemektedir. 1993 tarihli "Changing Childbirth" belgesiyle başlayan bu süreç, kadınlara doğum yeri ve tedavi adımlarında özgürlük tanımayı, tanıdıkları ebelerle kendi bedenleri üzerinde söz sahibi olmalarını amaçlamaktadır. Süreklilik, bu modelin temel yapı taşıdır ancak tıbbileşmiş sistemler ve bürokratik yapılar kadın-ebe ilişkisindeki güç dinamiklerini zorlamaktadır. Yeni Zelanda 1990 yasal reformlarıyla ebelere özerklik vererek kadın merkezli sistemi ülke çapında kurumsallaştıran tek örnek iken, Avustralya maaşlı sözleşmelerle esnek ebelik gruplarını desteklemektedir. Dünya genelinde, özellikle özel hastanelerde ve yüksek sosyoekonomik bölgelerde, sezaryen ve epidural gibi medikoteknik müdahalelerin oranlarında yapay bir artış gözlenmektedir. Oysa kanıtlar, gereksiz sezaryenlerin anne ve bebekte kronik hastalık ve morbidite riskini artırdığını göstermektedir. Cochrane incelemelerine göre, ebe liderliğindeki sürekli bakım modelleri müdahale ve erken doğum oranlarını azaltmakta, spontan vajinal doğumu artırmakta ve kamu sağlık harcamalarını düşürerek yüksek memnuniyet sağlamaktadır. Sonuç olarak, ilişki temelli sürekli bakımın risk düzeyi ne olursa olsun güvenliği ve kaliteyi artırdığı, bu modele geçişin etik bir gereklilik olduğu vurgulanmaktadır.
This text examines the woman-centered approach in maternity services in the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand through the concepts of "choice, continuity, and control" (the Three Cs). This process, which began with the 1993 "Changing Childbirth" document, aims to provide women with autonomy regarding their place of birth and treatment steps, allowing them to have control over their own bodies alongside familiar midwives. Continuity is the fundamental building block of this model; however, medicalized systems and bureaucratic structures strain the power dynamics within the midwife-woman relationship. While New Zealand is the only example that institutionalized a woman-centered system nationwide by restoring autonomy to midwives through the 1990 legal reforms, Australia supports flexible midwifery groups through annualized salary contracts. Globally, an artificial increase in the rates of medico-technical interventions such as cesarean sections and epidurals is observed, particularly in private hospitals and high socio-economic regions. Yet, evidence indicates that unnecessary cesareans elevate the risk of chronic diseases and morbidity for both mothers and infants. According to Cochrane reviews, midwife-led continuity of care models reduce intervention and preterm birth rates, increase spontaneous vaginal births, and ensure high satisfaction while lowering public health expenditures. Consequently, it is emphasized that relationship-based continuous care enhances safety and quality regardless of the risk level, making the transition to this model an ethical necessity.
Referanslar
Department of Health. Changing Childbirth: the Report of the Expert Maternity Group. HMSO. London., 1993.
Newnham E, McKellar L, Pincombe J. Towards the Humanisation of Birth: A study of epidural analgesia and hospital birth culture. Australia: Palgrave McMillan, 2018.
Tricia Anderson. The misleading myth of choice: the continuing oppression of women and child birth. In: Mavis Kirkham, ed. Informed Choice in Maternity Care. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004:257-263.
Sandall J. Every woman needs a midwife, and some women need a doctor too. Birth 2012;39(4):323-326.
Finlay S, Sandall J. “Someone’s rooting for you”: continuity, advocacy and street-level bureaucracy in UK maternal healthcare. Soc.Sci.Med 2009;69(8):1228-1235.
NHS. Better Births: Improving outcomes of maternity services in England. London UK: NHS, 2016.
Scottish NHS Forth Valley Scotland. The Best Start: A Five-Year Forward Plan for Maternity and Neonatal Care in Scotland. Scottish NHS 2017.
Sandall J, Soltani H, Gates Set al. Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women. Cochrane Database Syst.Rev 2016;4:CD004667.
Grigg CP, Tracy SK. New Zealand’s unique maternity system. Women Birth 2013;26(1):e59-e64.
Tracy SK, Hartz DL, Tracy MB, Allen J, Welsh A, Kildea S.et al Caseload midwifery care versus standard maternity care for women of any risk: M@NGO, a randomised controlled trial. The Lancet 2013; 382 November 23: 1723-1732
Betran AP, Ye J, Moller ABet al. The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS.One. 2016;11(2):e0148343.
Ye J, Zhang J, Mikolajczyk Ret al. Association between rates of caesarean section and maternal and neonatal mortality in the 21st century: a worldwide population-based ecological study with longitudinal data. BJOG. 2016;123(5):745-753.
Boerma T, Ronsmans C, Melesse DYet al. Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesrean sections. Lancet 2018;392(10155):1341-1348.
Sandall J, Trabe RM, Avery Let al. Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1349-1357.
Visser GH, Campos DA, Barnea ERet al. FIGO position paper: how to stop the caesarean section epidemic. Lancet 2018. Oct 13;392(10155):1286-1287
WHO recommendations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2018.
Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Martin DPet al. Association between method of delivery and maternal rehospitalization. JAMA 2000;283(18):2411-2416.
Deneux-Tharaux C, Carmona E, Bouvier-Colle MHet al. Postpartum maternal mortality and cesarean delivery. Obstet.Gynecol. 2006;108(3 Pt 1):541-548.
Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise JMet al. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am.J Obstet.Gynecol. 2014;210(3):179-193.
Green L, Knight M, Seeney FMet al. The epidemiology and outcomes of women with postpartum haemorrhage requiring massive transfusion with eight or more units of red cells: a national cross-sectional study. BJOG. 2016;123(13):2164-2170.
Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TRet al. Risk of uterine rupture during labor among women with a prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 2001;345(1):3-8.
Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TRet al. First-birth cesarean and placental abruption or previa at second birth(1). Obstet Gynecol 2001;97(5 Pt 1):765-769.
Yang Q, Wen SW, Oppenheimer Let al. Association of caesarean delivery for first birth with placenta praevia and placental abruption in second pregnancy. BJOG. 2007;114(5):609-613.
Gray R, Quigley MA, Hockley Cet al. Caesarean delivery and risk of stillbirth in subsequent pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study in an English population. BJOG. 2007;114(3):264-270.
Jackson S, Fleege L, Fridman Met al. Morbidity following primary cesarean delivery in the Danish National Birth Cohort. Am.J Obstet.Gynecol. 2012;206(2):139-5.
Morrison JJ, Rennie JM, Milton PJ. Neonatal respiratory morbidity and mode of delivery at term: influence of timing of elective caesarean section. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995;102(2):101-106.
Jain L, Dudell GG. Respiratory transition in infants delivered by cesarean section. Semin.Perinatol. 2006;30(5):296-304.
Kolas T, Saugstad OD, Daltveit AKet al. Planned cesarean versus planned vaginal delivery at term: comparison of newborn infant outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;195(6):1538-1543.
Kupari M, Talola N, Luukkaala Tet al. Does an increased cesarean section rate improve neonatal outcome in term pregnancies? Arch.Gynecol.Obstet. 2016;294(1):41-46.
Tracy SK, Tracy MB, Sullivan E. Admission of term infants to neonatal intensive care: a popultion-based study. Birth 2007;34(4):301-307.
Cardwell CR, Stene LC, Joner Get al. Caesarean section is associated with an increased risk of childhood-onset type 1 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Diabetologia 2008;51(5):726-735.
Black M, Bhattacharya S, Philip Set al. Planned Cesarean Delivery at Term and Adverse Outcomes in Childhood Health. JAMA 2015;314(21):2271-2279.
Thavagnanam S, Fleming J, Bromley Aet al. A meta-analysis of the association between Caesarean section and childhood asthma. Clin.Exp.Allergy 2008;38(4):629-633.
Li HT, Zhou YB, Liu JM. The impact of cesarean section on offspring overweight and obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int.J Obes.(Lond) 2013;37(7):893-899.
King JF. A short history of evidence-based obstetric care. Best.Pract Res.Clin.Obstet.Gynaecol. 2005;19(1):3-14.
Roberts CL, Tracy S, Peat B. Rates for obstetric intervention among private and public patients in Australia: population based descriptive study. BMJ 2000;321(7254):137-141.
Dahlen HG, Tracy S, Tracy Met al. Rates of obstetric intervention among low-risk women giving birth in private and public hospitals in NSW: a population-based descriptive study. BMJ Open. 2012;2(5).
Tracy SK, Sullivan EA, Wang YAet al. Birth outcomes associated with interventions in labour amongst low risk women: A population based study. Women and Birth 2007;(2):41-48.
Tracy SK, Tracy MB. Costing the cascade: estimating the cost of increased obstetric intervention in childbirth using population data. BJOG. 2003;110(8):717-724.
Peters L, Thornton C, Anke de Jongeet al. The effect of medical and operative birth interventions on child health outcomes in the first 28 days and up to 5 years of age: A linked data population-based cohort study. Birth 2018;45:347-357.
Souza JP, Betran AP, Dumont Aet al. A global reference for caesarean section rates (C-Model): a multicountry cross-sectional study. BJOG. 2016;123(3):427-436.
Lee Yeun Yi, Roberts CL, Patterson JA et al. Unexplained variation in hospital caesarean section rates. Medical Journal of Australia 2013;doi: 10.5694/mja13.10279(199):348-353.
Macfarlane AJ, Blondel B, Mohangoo ADet al. Wide differences in mode of delivery within Europe: risk- stratified analyses of aggregated routine data from the Euro-Peristat study. BJOG. 2016;123(4):559-568.
Miller S, Abalos E, Chamillard Met al. Beyond too little, too late and too much, too soon: a pathway towards evidence-based, respectful maternity care worldwide. Lancet 2016;388(10056):2176-2192.
Berwick DM. Avoiding overuse-the next quality frontier. Lancet 2017;390(10090):102-104.
Horton R, Astudillo O. The power of midwifery. Lancet 2014;384(9948):1075-1076.
Page L. Women and babies need protection from the dangers of normal birth ideology: AGAINST: Support for normal birth is crucial to safe high-quality maternity care. BJOG. 2017;124(9):1385.
Davis-Floyd R. Consuming Childbirth: The Qualified Consumption of Midwifery Care. In: Janelle S.Taylor, Linda L.Layne, Danielle R Wozniak, eds. Consuming Motherhood. Pp . New Brunswick, NJ : Rutgers University Press , 2004:211-248.
Boston Women’s Health Book Collective. Our Bodies Ourselves. Boston: New England Free Press, 1971.
Markella Rutherford, elina Gallo-Cruz. “Selling the ideal birth: Rationalization and re-enchantment in the marketing of maternity care”. 2015. In Susan M. Chambré, Melinda Goldner (ed.) Patients, Consumers and Civil Society (Advances in Medical Sociology, Volume 10) Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.75 – 98
Matthew Hilton. The Death of a Consumer Society. In: Royal Historical Society, ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal Historical Society, 2008:211-236.
Stiglitz J. Moral Bankruptcy: Why are we letting Wall Street off so easy? 2010. www.motherjones.com/ politics/2010/01/joseph-stiglitz-wall-street-morals
Jordan B. Authoritative Knowledge and Its Construction. In: Robbie Davis-Floyd, Carolyn F.Sargent, eds. Childbirth and Authoritative Knowledge. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1997:55-59.
Bryant J, Porter M, Tracy SKet al. Caesarean birth: consumption, safety, order, and good mothering. Soc.Sci. Med. 2007;65(6):1192-1201.
Stephanie Lee Mudge. The State of the Art: What is neo-liberalism? Socio-Economic Review 2008;6:703-731.
Perkins C.B. The medical delivery business: Health reform, childbirth and the economic order. New
Bragg F, Cromwell DA, Edozien LCet al. Variation in rates of caesarean section among English NHS trusts after accounting for maternal and clinical risk: cross sectional study. BMJ 2010;341:c5065.
Coulm B, Blondel B, Alexander Set al. Potential avoidability of planned cesarean sections in a French national database. Acta Obstet.Gynecol.Scand. 2014;93(9):905-912.
Di Lallo D, Perucci CA, Bertollini Ret al. Cesarean section rates by type of maternity unit and level of obstetric care: an area-based study in central Italy. Prev.Med. 1996;25(2):178-185.
Lutomski JE, Morrison JJ, Lydon-Rochelle MT. Regional variation in obstetrical intervention for hospital birth in the Republic of Ireland, 2005-2009. BMC.Pregnancy.Childbirth. 2012;12:123.
Paranjothy S, Frost C, Thomas J. How much variation in CS rates can be explained by case mix differences? BJOG. 2005;112(5):658-666.
Betran AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JAet al. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatr.Perinat.Epidemiol. 2007;21(2):98-113.
Glantz JC. Obstetric variation, intervention, and outcomes: doing more but accomplishing less. Birth 2012;39(4):286-290.
Grytten J, Monkerud L, Hagen TPet al. The impact of hospital revenue on the increase in Caesarean sections in Norway. A panel data analysis of hospitals 1976-2005. BMC.Health Serv.Res. 2011;11:267.
Hoxha I, Syrogiannouli L, Luta Xet al. Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2017;7(2):e013670.
Lutomski JE, Murphy M, Devane Det al. Private health care coverage and increased risk of obstetric intervention. BMC.Pregnancy.Childbirth. 2014;14:13.
Donnellan-Fernandez R, Newman L, Reiger K. Identifying better systems design in Australian maternity care: a Boundary Critique analysis. Health Systems 2013;2:213-225.
De Vries R, Benoit C, Van Teijlingen Eet al. Birth by Design: Pregnancy, Maternity Care and Midwifery in North America and Northern Europe. New York: Routledge, 2001.
Wilbanks JT, Topol EJ. Stop the privatization of health data. Nature 2016;535(7612):345-348.
Kate Rayworth. Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st Century Economist. London: Random House, 2017.
Guilliland K, Pairman S. The Midwifery Partnership: A model for practice. In: Victoria University of Wellington, NZ , 1995.
Page L. One-to-one midwifery: restoring the “with woman” relationship in midwifery. J Midwifery Womens Health 2003;48(2):119-125.
Stenglin M, Foureur M. Designing out the Fear Cascade to increase the likelihood of normal birth. Midwifery 2013;29(8):819-825.
The Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE). Public and provider views– Supporting document for the Extended Medicare Safety Net Review Report 2009. In: Australia: Commonwealth of Australia, 2009.
New Zealand Ministry of Health (MOH). Maternity Services. Notice Pursuant to Section 88 of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act 2000 . In: 2000.
Page L, McCourt C, Beake Set al. Clinical interventions and outcomes of One-to-One midwifery practice. J Public Health Med. 1999;21(3):243-248.
Beasley S, Ford N, Tracy SKet al. Collaboration in Maternity Care is achievable and practical. Aust.N.Z.J.Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;52:576-581.
Braithwaite J, Runciman WB, Merry AF. Towards safer, better healthcare: harnessing the natural properties of complex sociotechnical systems. Qual.Saf Health Care 2009;18(1):37-41.
UK MRC. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: new guidance. In: London UK: Medical Research Council, 2008.
Macfarlane F, Greenhalgh T, Humphrey Cet al. A new workforce in the making? A case study of strategic human resource management in a whole-system change effort in healthcare. J Health Organ Manag. 2011;25(1):55-72.
Redshaw M, Henderson J. Safely Delivered: a national survey of women’s experience of maternity care, 2014. Oxford UK : NPEU, 2015.
McCourt C, Page L. Report on the evaluation of One-to-One midwifery. London: Thames Valley University, 1996.
Tracy SK, Welsh A, Hall Bet al. Caseload midwifery compared to standard or private obstetric care for first time mothers in a public teaching hospital in Australia: a cross sectional study of cost and birth outcomes. BMC. Pregnancy.Childbirth. 2014;14:46.
Sandall J, Coxon K, Mackintosh N, et al. Relationships: the pathway to safe, high-quality maternity care. Report from the Sheila Kitzinger symposium at Green Templeton College October 2015. Oxford UK: Green Templeton College, Oxford., 2016.
