Women's views of their experiences in the CHIPS (control of hypertension in pregnancy study) pilot trial

Hypertension in Pregnancy

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 371-387

  Magee, L A ^a,b,c,n   Von Dadelszen, P ^a,b   Chan, S ^c   Gafni, A ^d   Gruslin, A ^e   Helewa, M ^f   Hewson, S ^c   Kavuma, E ^c   Lee, S K ^g   Logan, A G ^h   McKay, D ^c   Moutquin, J M ⁱ   Ohlsson, A ^c,h,l   Rey, E ^j   Ross, S ^c,k   Singer, J ^a   Willan, A R ^c,l   Hannah, M E ^c,h,m  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^d MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA   (Canada)

^g UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^h UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

ⁱ UNIVERSITÉ DE SHERBROOKE   (Canada)

^j UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^k UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^l HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^m SUNNYBROOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

ⁿ CHILDREN S AND WOMEN S HEALTH CENTRE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

more..

Author keywords

Antihypertensive therapy; Expectations; Hypertension; Pregnancy; Satisfaction; Women's views

Indexed keywords

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT;

ADULT; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE THERAPY; ARTICLE; BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING; CAREGIVER; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL HYPERTENSION; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PILOT STUDY; PREGNANCY; PUERPERIUM; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; WELLBEING;

ADULT; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BLOOD PRESSURE; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING, AMBULATORY; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION, PREGNANCY-INDUCED; MEDICAL RECORDS; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PILOT PROJECTS; PRENATAL CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES; RESEARCH DESIGN; SELF CARE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 36849029925     PISSN: 10641955     EISSN: 15256065     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10641950701547549     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Dunlop L, Umstad M, McGrath G, Reidy K, Brennecke S. Cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction with pregnancy day care for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 43(3):207-212.
2. Leung KY, Sum TK, Tse CY, Law KW, Chan MY. Is in-patient management of diastolic blood pressure between 90 and 100 mm Hg during pregnancy necessary? Hong Kong Med J 1998; 4(2):211-217.
3. Turnbull DA, Wilkinson C, Gerard K, Shanahan M, Ryan P, Griffith EC et al. Clinical, psychosocial, and economic effects of antenatal day care for three medical complications of pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial of 395 women. Lancet 2004; 363(9415):1104-1109.
4. Taylor RS, Freeman L, North RA. Evaluation of ambulatory and self-initiated blood pressure monitors by pregnant and postpartum women. Hypertens Pregnancy 2001; 20(1):25-33.
5. Leeners B, Rath W, Kuse S, Neises M, Neumaier-Wagner P. Satisfaction with medical information in women with hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. J Psychosom Res 2006; 60(1):39-44.
6. Hodnett ED. Pain and women's satisfaction with the experience of childbirth: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186(5 Suppl Nature):S160-S172.
7. Seguin L, Therrien R, Champagne F, Larouche D. The components of women's satisfaction with maternity care. Birth 1989; 16(3):109-113.
8. Magee LA, von Dadelszen P, Chan S, Gafni A, Gruslin A, Helewa ME et al. The CHIPS Pilot Trial (Control of Hypertension In Pregnancy Study). BJOG 2007; 114:770-820.
9. Magee LA, von Dadelszen P, Chan S, Gafni A, Gruslin A, Helewa ME et al. The CHIPS Pilot Trial (Control of Hypertension In Pregnancy Study). Hypertens Pregn 2006; 25(Supplement 1):21.
10. Helewa ME, Burrows RF, Smith J, Williams K, Brain P, Rabkin SW. Report of the Canadian Hypertension Society Consensus Conference: 1. Definitions, evaluation and classification of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. CMAJ 1997; 157(6):715-725.
11. Fitzpatrick R. Surveys of patients satisfaction: I-Important general considerations. BMJ 1991; 302(6781):887-889.
12. Kramer MS, Platt RW, Wen SW, Joseph KS, Allen A, Abrahamowicz M et al. A new and improved population-based Canadian reference for birth weight for gestational age. Pediatrics 2001; 108(2):E35.
13. Heaman M, Robinson MA, Thompson L, Helewa M. Patient satisfaction with an antepartum home-care program. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 1994; 23(8):707-713.
14. Caetano M, Ornstein M, von Dadelszen P, Hannah ME, Logan AG, Gruslin A et al. A survey of Canadian practitioners regarding the management of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Hypertens Pregn 2003; 23(1):61-74.
15. Report of the National High Blood Pressure Education Program Working Group on High Blood Pressure in Pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 183(1):S1-S22.
16. Brown MA, Hague WM, Higgins J, Lowe S, McCowan L, Oats J et al. The detection, investigation and management of hypertension in pregnancy: executive summary. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2000; 40(2):133-138.
17. Bellomo G, Narducci PL, Rondoni F, Pastorelli G, Stangoni G, Angeli G et al. Prognostic value of 24-hour blood pressure in pregnancy. JAMA 1999; 282(15):1447-1452.
18. Peek M, Shennan A, Halligan A, Lambert PC, Taylor DJ, de Swiet M. Hypertension in pregnancy: which method of blood pressure measurement is most predictive of outcome? Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88(6):1030-1033.
19. Penny WJ, Lewis MJ. Nifedipine is excreted in human milk. Eur J Clin Pharm 1989; 36:427-428.
20. Waugh J, Habiba MA, Bosio P, Boyce T, Shennan A, Halligan AW. Patient initiated home blood pressure recordings are accurate in hypertensive pregnant women. Hypertens Pregnancy 2003; 22(1):93-97.
21. Waugh JJ, Halligan AW, Shennan AH. Ambulatory monitoring and self-monitoring of blood pressure during pregnancy. Blood Press Monit 2000; 5(1):3-10.
22. Oppenheim A. Questionnaire design and attitude measurement. London: Heinemann, 1966.
23. Hodnett ED, Hannah ME, Hewson S, Whyte H, Amankwah K, Cheng M et al. Mothers' views of their childbirth experiences 2 years after planned Caesarean versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term, in the international randomized Term Breech Trial. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2005; 27(3):224-231.