Abstract
ObjectiveTo explore the needs of women during decision-making about treatment for miscarriage. DesignDescriptive qualitative design. SettingsUniversity and teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. ParticipantsWe selected a purposive sample of 16 women who needed treatment for miscarriage from an electronic patient file system. We ensured maximum variation by sampling in different hospitals and selecting women with different ages, numbers of children, miscarriage histories, treatment types, and educational levels. MethodsWe conducted face-to-face individual, semistructured interviews and used thematic analysis to identify, analyze, and describe themes. ResultsWe identified one overarching theme, Decision Based on Reason and Emotion, and three related subthemes: Certainty, Information, and SupportFrom Environment. ConclusionHealth care professionals should be aware of how women’s decision-making is structured in the context of treatment choices for miscarriage, and discussion regarding treatment should address reason and emotion.
Highlights
We reported our study based on the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (Tong et al, 2007)
We explored the needs of women during decision-making about treatment for miscarriage
We found no comparable themes in previous research about miscarriage experiences, but findings in the literature on decisionmaking in general support these findings
Summary
Design We chose a descriptive qualitative design because the research aim did not suggest the need for a design with a special philosophical assumption (Percy et al, 2015). A descriptive qualitative design focuses on meanings, perceptions, interpretations, and views of participants wherein experiences of participants are described in detail (Moser & Korstjens, 2017; Percy et al, 2015). We reported our study based on the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (Tong et al, 2007). We conducted this study in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, 2018). The Medical Research Ethics Committee of the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMCU) approved the study (protocol 18-806/C) and affirmed that it was not subject to the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act. The science committee of the Gelre Hospitals, Zutphen, approved the study
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
