Mixed-methods evaluation reveals conflicting perspectives and communication gaps regarding labour induction consent among women, midwives, and obstetricians, highlighting risks to patient safety.
Background/Aims Women often cannot provide informed consent for induction of labour, despite its increasing prevalence. This study's aim was to explore the perspectives of women, midwives and obstetricians regarding consent during induction. Methods This mixed-methods evaluation surveyed three groups; women ( n =36), obstetricians ( n =6) and midwives ( n =30). Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results There were five key themes: lack of choice, insufficient or poorly timed information, time constraints, underused resources and differing professional perspectives. Conclusions There is a trichotomy of views about consent for induction linked to understanding the process of induction and consent itself, hindering effective communication and compromising safety. Implications for practice A comprehensive approach to information delivery is essential, including tools to support informed consent and providing information through multiple formats. Staff training is needed to improve awareness of resources and reduce professional divisions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gruneberg et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: