IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0178475.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Parents’ experience of perinatal post-mortem following stillbirth: A mixed methods study

Author

Listed:
  • Jane Henderson
  • Maggie Redshaw

Abstract

Objectives: To analyse quantitative and qualitative data, to describe the experience of parents in relation to post-mortem following stillbirth, looking at offer and uptake of post-mortem, information-giving, the type of post-mortem carried out, receiving the results and any sociodemographic differences in care practices in relation to post-mortem. Design: Secondary analysis of a postal survey which included both open and closed questions allowing for a mixed methods study design. Population: Random sample of women who experienced a stillbirth in 2013. Methods: A sample of women who experienced a stillbirth in 2013 were selected by staff at the Office for National Statistics and sent a letter and information leaflet about the study followed by a postal questionnaire. The questionnaire included questions about pregnancy, labour and birth, the postnatal period, the time at which the baby died, and also asked about the post-mortem process. Results: Completed questionnaires were received from 477 women. Overall, 95% of women were asked for consent to a post-mortem, almost half prior to birth, and half by a consultant. The majority of women received written information and felt sufficiently informed, and agreed to a full post-mortem. A third of women had to wait longer than 12 weeks for the post-mortem result and this was the most common theme in the free text comments. Women also commented on the manner of being asked for consent, and wrote about issues related to communication and support. There were significant differences between sociodemographic groups in many of these factors. Conclusions: The inconsistencies in offer and consent to post-mortem following stillbirth suggest inequality in this area. The amount of time that many parents have to wait for post-mortem results is unacceptable and should be prioritised for improvement.

Suggested Citation

  • Jane Henderson & Maggie Redshaw, 2017. "Parents’ experience of perinatal post-mortem following stillbirth: A mixed methods study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-21, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0178475
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178475
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0178475
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0178475&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0178475?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0178475. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.