Umeå universitets logga

umu.sePublikationer
Ändra sökning
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Ultrasound's 'window on the womb' brings ethical challenges for balancing maternal and fetal health interests: obstetricians' experiences in Australia
Umeå universitet, Medicinska fakulteten, Institutionen för klinisk vetenskap, Obstetrik och gynekologi. Judith Lumley Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Judith Lumley Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia . .
Umeå universitet, Medicinska fakulteten, Institutionen för klinisk vetenskap, Obstetrik och gynekologi.
Umeå universitet, Medicinska fakulteten, Institutionen för omvårdnad.
Visa övriga samt affilieringar
2015 (Engelska)Ingår i: BMC Medical Ethics, E-ISSN 1472-6939, Vol. 16, artikel-id 31Artikel i tidskrift (Refereegranskat) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Obstetric ultrasound has become a significant tool in obstetric practice, however, it has been argued that its increasing use may have adverse implications for women's reproductive freedom. This study aimed to explore Australian obstetricians' experiences and views of the use of obstetric ultrasound both in relation to clinical management of complicated pregnancy, and in situations where maternal and fetal health interests conflict.

METHODS: A qualitative study was undertaken as part of the CROss-Country Ultrasound Study (CROCUS). Interviews were held in November 2012 with 14 obstetricians working in obstetric care in Victoria, Australia. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS: One overall theme emerged from the analyses: The ethical challenge of balancing maternal and fetal health interests, built on four categories: First, Encountering maternal altruism' described how pregnant women's often 'altruistic' position in relation to the health and wellbeing of the fetus could create ethical challenges in obstetric management, particularly with an increasing imbalance between fetal benefits and maternal harms. Second, 'Facing shifting attitudes due to visualisation and medico-technical advances' illuminated views that ultrasound and other advances in care have contributed to a shift in what weight to give maternal versus fetal welfare, with increasing attention directed to the fetus. Third, 'Guiding expectant parents in decision-making' described the difficult task of facilitating informed decision-making in situations where maternal and fetal health interests were not aligned, or in situations characterised by uncertainty. Fourth, 'Separating private from professional views' illuminated divergent views on when the fetus can be regarded as a person. The narratives indicated that the fetus acquired more consideration in decision-making the further the gestation progressed. However, there was universal agreement that obstetricians could never act on fetal grounds without the pregnant woman's consent.

CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that medico-technical advances such as ultrasound have set the scene for increasing ethical dilemmas in obstetric practice. The obstetricians interviewed had experienced a shift in previously accepted views about what weight to give maternal versus fetal welfare. As fetal diagnostics and treatment continue to advance, how best to protect pregnant women's right to autonomy requires careful consideration and further investigation.

Ort, förlag, år, upplaga, sidor
2015. Vol. 16, artikel-id 31
Nyckelord [en]
Australia, clinical experiences, clinical management, counselling, obstetric ultrasound, obstetricians, obstetrics, perspectives, pregnancy complications, qualitative study
Nationell ämneskategori
Gynekologi, obstetrik och reproduktionsmedicin Omvårdnad
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-103708DOI: 10.1186/s12910-015-0023-yISI: 000359414600001PubMedID: 25953252Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84947650520OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-103708DiVA, id: diva2:814846
Tillgänglig från: 2015-05-28 Skapad: 2015-05-28 Senast uppdaterad: 2025-02-11Bibliografiskt granskad

Open Access i DiVA

fulltext(437 kB)416 nedladdningar
Filinformation
Filnamn FULLTEXT01.pdfFilstorlek 437 kBChecksumma SHA-512
0ddce3baa35cf1d28a1070aeebaa7af934d4b66e2e690f2186bfde5977ad6a790dfc523355994ba1d8240c63bd66d6bb7ca91403caf5ca0b29acf1391aff1b13
Typ fulltextMimetyp application/pdf

Övriga länkar

Förlagets fulltextPubMedScopus

Person

Edvardsson, KristinaLalos, AnnPersson, MargaretaMogren, Ingrid

Sök vidare i DiVA

Av författaren/redaktören
Edvardsson, KristinaLalos, AnnPersson, MargaretaMogren, Ingrid
Av organisationen
Obstetrik och gynekologiInstitutionen för omvårdnad
I samma tidskrift
BMC Medical Ethics
Gynekologi, obstetrik och reproduktionsmedicinOmvårdnad

Sök vidare utanför DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Totalt: 417 nedladdningar
Antalet nedladdningar är summan av nedladdningar för alla fulltexter. Det kan inkludera t.ex tidigare versioner som nu inte längre är tillgängliga.

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetricpoäng

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 678 träffar
RefereraExporteraLänk till posten
Permanent länk

Direktlänk
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Annat format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annat språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf