Methodological insights from a study using video-ethnography to conduct interdisciplinary research in the study of birth unit design

International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 36-48

  Davis Harte, J ^a   Leap, Nicky ^a   Fenwick, Jennifer ^b   Homer, Caroline S E ^a   Foureur, Maralyn ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Birth unit design; Interdisciplinary research; Intimate settings; Midwifery; Video ethnography; Video reflexive interviewing; Women's experiences of labour and birth

Indexed keywords

EID: 84910056490     PISSN: 18340806     EISSN: 18340814     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5172/mra.2014.8.1.36     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Albers, L. L., & Savitz, D. A. (1991). Hospital setting for birth and use of medical procedures in low-risk women. Journal of Nurse Midwifery, 36(6), 327-333.
2. Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2000). Reflexive methodology:New vistas for qualitative research. London, England: Sage.
3. Browning, C. (2000). Using music during childbirth. Birth, 27(4), 272-276.
4. Byles, J. E., Dobson, A., Bryson, L., & Brown, W. J. (2007). Getting started: 'Preparing the ground' and 'planting the vines' for longitudinal research. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 1(2), 80-91. doi: 10.5172/mra.455.1.2.80
5. Callaghan, H. (2007). Birth dirt. In M. Kirkham (Ed.), Exploring the dirty side of women's health (pp. 8-25.). Oxon, England: Routledge.
6. Carroll, K. (2009). Outsider, insider, alongsider:Examining reflexivity in hospital-based video research. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3(3), 246-263. doi: 10.5172/mra.3.3.246
7. Carroll, K., Iedema, R., & Kerridge, R. (2008). Reshaping ICU ward round practices using videoreflexive ethnography. Qualitative Health Research, 18(3), 380-390.
8. Dictionary.com, Unabridged. (n.d.). Hominess. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hominess
9. Duncan, J. (2011). The effect of colour and design in labour and delivery: A scientific approach. Optics & Laser Technology, 43(2), 420-424.
10. Fahy, K., Foureur, M., & Hastie, C. (Eds.). (2008). Birth territory and midwifery guardianship: Theory for practice, education and research. Oxford, England: Elsevier.
11. Fahy, K., & Hastie, C. (2008). Midwifery guardianship:Reclaiming the sacred in birth. In K. Fahy, M. Foureur, & C. Hastie (Eds.), Birth territory and midwifery guardianship: Theory for practice, education and research (pp. 21-36.). Edinburgh, Scotland:Heinemann/Elsevier.
12. Fahy, K., Parratt, J., Foureur, M., & Hastie, C. (2011). Birth territory: A theory for midwifery practice. In R. Bryar & M. Sinclair (Eds.), Theory of midwifery practice (2nd ed., pp. 215-240.). Basingstoke, England:Palgrave Macmillan.
13. Farrington-Darby, T., & Wilson, J. R. (2009). Understanding social interactions in complex work:A video ethnography. Cognition, Technology & Work, 11(1), 1-15.
14. Fetterman, D. M. (2010). Ethnography: Step-by-step (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
15. Forsyth, R. (2009). Distance versus dialogue: Modes of engagement of two professional groups participating in a hospital-based video ethnographic study. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3(3), 276-289. doi: 10.5172/mra.3.3.276
16. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews. New York, NY: Pantheon.
17. Foureur, M. (2008). Creating birth space to enable undisturbed birth. In K. Fahy, M. Foureur, & C. Hastie (Eds.), Birth territory and midwifery guardianship (pp. 57-78.). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
18. Foureur, M., Davis, D., Fenwick, J., Leap, N., Iedema, R., Forbes, I., & Homer, C. S. E. (2010). The relationship between birth unit design and safe, satisfying birth: Developing a hypothetical model. Midwifery, 26(5), 520-525.
19. Freshwater, D., & Rolfe, G. (2001). Critical reflexivity:A politically and ethically engaged research method for nursing. Journal of Research in Nursing, 6(1), 526-537.
20. Geertz, C. (1988). Work and lives: The anthropologist as author. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
21. Hallgren, A., Kihlgren, M., & Olsson, P. (2005). Ways of relating during childbirth: An ethical responsibility and challenge for midwives. Nursing Ethics, 12(6), 606-621.
22. Hauck, Y., Rivers, C., & Doherty, K. (2008). Women's experiences of using a Snoezelen room during labour in Western Australia. Midwifery, 24(4), 460-470.
23. Haw, K., & Hadfield, M. (2011). Video in social science research: Functions and forms. New York, NY:Routledge.
24. Hodnett, E. D., Downe, S., Walsh, D., & Weston, J. (2012). Alternative versus conventional institutional settings for birth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 8, Art. No.: CD000012. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000012.pub4
25. Hofmeyr, G. J., Nikodem, V. C., Wolman, W.-L., Chalmers, B. E., & Kramer, T. (1991). Companionship to modify the clinical birth environment:Effects on progress and perceptions of labour, and breastfeeding. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 98(8), 756-764.
26. Holm, G. (2008). Visual research methods: Where are we and where are we going? In S. N. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Handbook of emergent methods (pp. 325-341.). New York, NY: The Guildford Press.
27. Homer, C., Brodie, P., & Leap, N. (2008). Midwifery continuity of care: A practical guide. Chatswood, NSW:Churchill Livingstone Elsevier.
28. Iedema, R., Merrick, E. T., Rajbhandari, D., Gardo, A., Stirling, A., & Herkes, R. (2009). Viewing the taken-for-granted from under a different aspect:A video-based method in pursuit of patient safety. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3(3), 290-301. doi: 10.5172/mra.3.3.290
29. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London, England: Arnold.
30. Leap, N., Sandall, J., Grant, J., Bastos, M. H., & Armstrong, P. (2009). Using video in the development and field-testing of a learning package for maternity staff: Supporting women for normal childbirth. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3(3), 302-320. doi: 10.5172/mra.3.3.302
31. Lipp, A. (2007). Developing the reflexive dimension of reflection: A framework for debate. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 1(1), 18-26. doi: 10.5172/mra.455.1.1.18
32. Lynch, M. (2000). Against reflexivity as an academic virtue and source of privileged knowledge. Theory, Culture & Society, 17(3), 26-54.
33. Mackenzie, C. F., Xiao, Y., & Horst, R. (2004). Video task analysis in high performance teams. Cognition, Technology & Work, 6(3), 139-147.
34. McKay, S., & Smith, S. Y. (1993). What are they talking about? Is something wrong? Information sharing during the second stage of labor. Birth, 20(3), 142-147.
35. Morris, T., & McInerney, K. (2010). Media representations of pregnancy and childbirth: An analysis of reality television programs in the United States. Birth, 37(2), 134-140.
36. Newburn, M., & Singh, D. (2003). Creating a better birth environment: Women's views about the design and facilities in maternity units: A national survey. Retrieved from http://www.nctpregnancyandbabycare.com; http://yhhiec.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Creating-a-betterbirth-environment-report_3110031.pdf
37. O'Reilly, M., Parker, N., & Hutchby, I. (2011). Ongoing processes of managing consent: The empirical ethics of using video-recording in clinical practice and research. Clinical Ethics, 6(4), 179-185.
38. Paterson, B. L., Bottorff, J. L., & Hewat, R. (2003). Blending observational methods: Possibilities, strategies, and challenges. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(1), 29-38.
39. Sears, C. A., & Godderis, R. (2011). Roar like a tiger on TV? Constructions of women and childbirth in reality TV. Feminist Media Studies, 11(2), 181-195.
40. Sheehy, A., Foureur, M., Catling-Paull, C., & Homer, C. S. E. (2011). Examining the content validity of the birthing unit design spatial evaluation tool within a woman-centered framework. The Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health, 56(5), 494-502.
41. Shin, J.-H., Maxwell, L. E., & Eshelman, P. (2004). Hospital birthing room design: A study of mothers' perception of hominess. Journal of Interior Design, 30(1), 23-36.
42. Stenglin, M., & Foureur, M. (2013). Designing out the Fear Cascade to increase the likelihood of normal birth. Midwifery. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026661381300123X
43. Stichler, J. F., & Hamilton, D. K. (2008). Evidencebased design: What is it? Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 1(2), 3-4.
44. Symon, A., Paul, J., Butchart, M., Carr, V., & Dugard, P. (2008). Maternity unit design: Background to multisite study in England. British Journal of Midwifery, 16(1), 29-33.
45. Ulrich, R. S., Zimring, C., Joseph, A., Quan, X., & Choudhary, R. (2004). The role of the physical environment in the hospital of the 21st century: A once-ina-lifetime opportunity. The Center for Health Design - Research. Retrieved from http://www.healthdesign.org/chd/research/role-physical-environment-hospital-21st-century?page=show
46. Ulrich, R. S., Zimring, C., Zhu, X., DuBose, J., Seo, H.-B., Choi, Y.-S., ... Joseph, A. (2008). A review of the research literature on evidence-based healthcare design. Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 1(3), 61-125.
47. van Lonkhuijzen, L., Groenewout, M., Schreuder, A., Zeeman, G. G., Scherpbier, A., Aukes, L. C., & van den Berg, P. P. (2011). Perceptions of women, nurses, midwives and doctors about the use of video during birth to improve quality of care: Focus group discussions. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 118(10), 1262-1267.
48. van Nieuw-Amerongen, M. E., Kremers, S. P. J., de Vries, N. K., & Kok, G. (2011). The use of prompts, increased accessibility, visibility, and aesthetics of the stairwell to promote stair use in a university building. Environment & Behavior, 43(1), 131-139.
49. Walsh, D. (2007). Evidence-based care for normal labour and birth: A guide for midwives. London, England: Routledge.
50. Xiao, Y., & Mackenzie, C. F. (2004). Introduction to the special issue on video-based research in high risk settings: Methodology and experience. Cognition, Technology & Work, 6(3), 127-130.