Search

Women who are deaf experience higher rates of reproductive healthcare barriers and adverse birth outcomes compared with their peers who can hear. This study explores the pregnancy experiences of women who are deaf to better understand their barriers to and facilitators of optimal pregnancy-related health care.Qualitative study using thematic analysis.Semi-structured, individual, remote or in-person interviews conducted in the USA.Forty-five women who are deaf and communicate using American Sign Language (ASL) and gave birth in the USA within the past 5 years participated in the interviews.Semi-structured interviews explored how mothers who are deaf experienced pregnancy and birth, including access to perinatal information and resources, relationships with healthcare providers, communication access and their involvement with the healthcare system throughout pregnancy. A thematic analysis was conducted.Barriers and facilitators related to a positive experience of perinatal care access among women who are deaf.Three major themes emerged: (1) communication accessibility; (2) communication satisfaction; and (3) healthcare provider and team support. Common barriers included choosing healthcare providers, inconsistent communication access and difficulty accessing health information. However, when women who are deaf were able to use ASL interpreters, they had more positive pregnancy and birth experiences. Self-advocacy served as a common facilitator for more positive pregnancy and healthcare experiences.Healthcare providers need to be more aware of the communication and support needs of their patients who are deaf, especially how to communicate effectively. Increased cultural awareness and consistent provision of on-site interpreters can improve pregnancy and birth experiences for women who are deaf.

As recent as the mid-twentieth century, eugenics practices on women with intellectual and developmental disabilities were commonplace. Deinstitutionalization has led to an increasing proportion of women with intellectual and developmental disabilities living in the community and becoming pregnant. Previous research has reported barriers to maternal health care (i.e., perceived provider stigma, inadequate communication, stress surrounding child protective services involvement, and financial strain). Research shows that this population is at increased risk of adverse outcomes including preterm delivery, low birth weight babies, and maternal mortality.This study aimed to explore recommendations from mothers with intellectual and developmental disabilities for other women to potentially improve pregnancy experiences for this population.We conducted semi-structured individual interviews among 16 women with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Data were coded using a content analysis process and iteratively analyzed using inductive and deductive techniques to determine emergent themes.Participants offered recommendations for navigating pregnancy to their peers who are pregnant, or thinking about becoming pregnant. Themes included: (1) planning for birth; (2) advocating at the point-of-care; (3) seeking supports and services; (4) interacting with child protective services; (5) communicating with providers; and (6) exhibiting resilience.Our study highlights recommendations for improving pregnancy experiences of women with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Informed by the lived pregnancy experiences of our participants, these recommendations can inform clinician training, new guidelines, and services to support and improve pregnancy experiences for women with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Women with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) experience disparities in obstetric care access and quality, in addition to communication gaps with healthcare providers. Many obstetric providers are untrained and uneducated about critical aspects of providing care to persons with IDD. OBJECTIVE: The study was conducted to describe obstetric clinicians’ training experiences related to providing obstetric care to women with IDD, to assess the perceived need for formalized training, and to identify recommendations for training content. METHODS: This study involved qualitative individual interviews (n=9) and one focus group (n=8) with obstetric clinicians who self-reported experience caring for women with IDD during pregnancy. Descriptive coding and content analysis techniques were used to develop an iterative codebook related to education and training; codes were applied to the data. Coded data were analyzed for larger themes and relationships. RESULTS: Analysis revealed three main themes: 1. Need for obstetric training and education: No participant reported receiving any training in caring for pregnant women with IDD. Participants expressed a need for formal education. 2. Recommendations for formal training: Participants noted the need for training during residency and beyond, and all healthcare staff should be included in training. 3. Training outcomes should increase knowledge, enhance attitudes, and develop practical skills related to care for pregnant women with IDD. CONCLUSION: Results indicate a need for systematic training efforts regarding obstetric care for women with IDD. Improved training and education may decrease health inequities and improve the quality of care, and thus pregnancy outcomes, for women with IDD. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: VI