Changes in midwives' attitudes to their professional role following the implementation of the midwifery development unit

Midwife continuity of care models versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women globally and there is a need to establish whether there are differences in effectiveness between midwife continuity of care models and other models of care. This is an update of a review published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of midwife continuity of care models with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (17 August 2022), as well as the reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife continuity of care models or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion criteria, scientific integrity, and risk of bias, and carried out data extraction and entry. Primary outcomes were spontaneous vaginal birth, caesarean section, regional anaesthesia, intact perineum, fetal loss after 24 weeks gestation, preterm birth, and neonatal death. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies involving 18,533 randomised women. We assessed all studies as being at low risk of scientific integrity/trustworthiness concerns. Studies were conducted in Australia, Canada, China, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. The majority of the included studies did not include women at high risk of complications. There are three ongoing studies targeting disadvantaged women. Primary outcomes Based on control group risks observed in the studies, midwife continuity of care models, as compared to other models of care, likely increase spontaneous vaginal birth from 66% to 70% (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.07; 15 studies, 17,864 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), likelyreduce caesarean sections from 16% to 15% (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99; 16 studies, 18,037 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and likely result in little to no difference in intact perineum (29% in other care models and 31% in midwife continuity of care models, average RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.12; 12 studies, 14,268 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may belittle or no difference in preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (6% under both care models, average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.16; 10 studies, 13,850 participants; low-certainty evidence). We arevery uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models on regional analgesia (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.92; 15 studies, 17,754 participants, very low-certainty evidence), fetal loss at or after 24 weeks gestation (average RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.13; 12 studies, 16,122 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and neonatal death (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.71; 10 studies, 14,718 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likely reduce instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum) from 14% to 13% (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.96; 14 studies, 17,769 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduceepisiotomy 23% to 19% (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91; 15 studies, 17,839 participants; low-certainty evidence). When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likelyresult in little to no difference inpostpartum haemorrhage (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.03; 11 studies, 14,407 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and admission to special care nursery/neonatal intensive care unit (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 13 studies, 16,260 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in induction of labour (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; 14 studies, 17,666 participants; low-certainty evidence), breastfeeding initiation (average RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12; 8 studies, 8575 participants; low-certainty evidence), and birth weight less than 2500 g (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 9 studies, 12,420 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models compared to other models of care onthird or fourth-degree tear (average RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.49; 7 studies, 9437 participants; very low-certainty evidence), maternal readmission within 28 days (average RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.96; 1 study, 1195 participants; very low-certainty evidence), attendance at birth by a known midwife (average RR 9.13, 95% CI 5.87 to 14.21; 11 studies, 9273 participants; very low-certainty evidence), Apgar score less than or equal to seven at five minutes (average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24; 13 studies, 12,806 participants; very low-certainty evidence) andfetal loss before 24 weeks gestation (average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.01; 12 studies, 15,913 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No maternal deaths were reported across three studies. Although the observed risk of adverse events was similar between midwifery continuity of care models and other models, our confidence in the findings was limited. Our confidence in the findings was lowered by possible risks of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision of some estimates. There were no available data for the outcomes: maternal health status, neonatal readmission within 28 days, infant health status, and birth weight of 4000 g or more. Maternal experiences and cost implications are described narratively. Women receiving care from midwife continuity of care models, as opposed to other care models, generally reported more positive experiences during pregnancy, labour, and postpartum. Cost savings were noted in the antenatal and intrapartum periods in midwife continuity of care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Women receiving midwife continuity of care models were less likely to experience a caesarean section and instrumental birth, and may be less likely to experience episiotomy. They were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth and report a positive experience. The certainty of some findings varies due to possible risks of bias, inconsistencies, and imprecision of some estimates. Future research should focus on the impact on women with social risk factors, and those at higher risk of complications, and implementation and scaling up of midwife continuity of care models, with emphasis on low- and middle-income countries.

Comparing the views of caseload midwives working with First Nations families in an all-risk, culturally responsive model with midwives working in standard caseload models, using a cross-sectional survey design

PROBLEM

Little is known about midwives' views and wellbeing when working in an all-risk caseload model.

BACKGROUND

Between March 2017 and December 2020 three maternity services in Victoria, Australia implemented culturally responsive caseload models for women having a First Nations baby.

AIM

Explore the views, experiences and wellbeing of midwives working in an all-risk culturally responsive model for First Nations families compared to midwives in standard caseload models in the same services.

METHODS

A survey was sent to all midwives in the culturally responsive (CR) model six-months and two years after commencement (or on exit), and to standard caseload (SC) midwives two years after the culturally responsive model commenced. Measures used included the Midwifery Process Questionnaire and Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI).

FINDINGS

35 caseload midwives (19 CR, 16 SC) participated. Both groups reported positive attitudes towards their professional role, trending towards higher median levels of satisfaction for the culturally responsive midwives. Midwives valued building close relationships with women and providing continuity of care. Around half reported difficulty maintaining work-life balance, however almost all preferred the flexible hours to shift work. All agreed that a reduced caseload is needed for an all-risk model and that supports around the model (e.g. nominated social workers, obstetricians) are important. Mean CBI scores showed no burnout in either group, with small numbers of individuals having burnout in both groups.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Midwives were highly satisfied working in both caseload models, but decreased caseloads and more organisational supports are needed in all-risk models.

Development and validation of a tool for advising primiparous women during early labour: study protocol for the GebStart Study

INTRODUCTION

Pregnant women experience early labour with different physical and emotional symptoms. Early admission to hospital has been found to be associated with increased intervention and caesarean section rates. However, primiparous women often contact the hospital before labour progresses because they encounter difficulties coping with symptoms of onset of labour on their own. An evidence-based instrument for assessing the individual needs to advise primiparous women during early labour is currently missing. The study aims to develop and validate a tool to inform the joint decision for or against hospital admission.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A scale development and validation study will be conducted including following steps: (1) Generation of a pool with 99 items based on a scoping review and focus group discussions with primiparous women, (2) Assessment of content and face validity by an expert panel and item reduction to 32 items, (3) Multicentre data collection in six study sites in Switzerland, with application of the preliminary tool and the validation items with a target sample size of approximately n=400 women and (4), item reduction using exploratory factor analysis, factor loading and item-to-item correlation. Internal consistency of the tool will be assessed using Cronbach's alpha and convergent validity computing correlations of items of the tool with the German versions of the Childbirth Self-Efficacy Inventory and the Cambridge-Worry Scale. Analyses will be performed using Stata V.17.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained by the Ethics Committees Zurich and Northwestern and Central Switzerland (BASEC-Nr. 2021-00687). Results will be disseminated at the final study conference, at national and international congresses and by peer reviewed and not peer-reviewed articles in scientific and professional journals. Approved and anonymised data will be shared. The dissemination of the findings will have a contributable impact on clinical practice, scientific discussions and future research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00025572, SNCTP000004555.

Job satisfaction of midwives working in a labor ward: A repeat measure mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

Job satisfaction of midwives is important to prevent skill shortage. Those working in midwife-led models of care work more independently and have more responsibility. No previous study investigated if a self-initiated and self-responsible project could enhance job satisfaction of midwives working in a medicalled maternity unit. The aim of this study was therefore to assess job satisfaction before and after the implementation of such a project.

METHODS

This is longitudinal observational study at three time points using quantitative and qualitative methods. A total of 43 midwives working in a Swiss labor ward participated in the online surveys and in the focus group discussions. The surveys comprised questions from validated instruments to assess job satisfaction. Descriptive and multivariable time series analysis were used for quantitative and content analysis for qualitative data.

RESULTS

Adjusted predicted scores decreased between t₀ and t₁, and subsequently increased at t₂ without reaching baseline values (e.g. ‘professional support subscales’ between t₀ and t₁: (0.65; 95% CI: 0.45–0.86 vs 0.26; 95% CI: 0.08–0.45, p=0.005) and between t₀ and t₂ (0.65; 95% CI: 0.45–0.86 vs 0.29; 95% CI: 0.12–0.47, p=0.004). Focus group discussions revealed four themes: ‘general job satisfaction’, ‘challenges with the implementation’, ‘continuity of care’ and ‘meaning for the mothers’. Midwives perceived the additional tasks as stressors.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of new projects might enhance work-related stress and consequently have negative impacts on job satisfaction in an early phase. Heads of institutions and policy makers should recognize the needs of support and additional resources for staff when implementing new projects.

A scoping review of maternity care providers experience of primary trauma within their childbirthing journey

OBJECTIVE

To examine and summarise available literature on maternity care practitioners having experienced primary trauma during their childbirthing journey and whether this impacts their mental well-being and/or care provision when subsequently caring for childbearing women.

BACKGROUND

Birth trauma affects 1 in 3 women; 1 in 20 women show post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms by 12 weeks after birth. However, what is not known is what percentage of these women are maternity care providers experiencing or having experienced personal trauma during their child birthing journey. This scoping review aims to examine and summarise available literature on maternity care practitioners having experienced primary trauma during their childbirthing journey and whether this impacts their mental well-being and/or care provision when subsequently caring for childbearing women.

METHODS

Arksey and O'Malley (2005) six-stage scoping review framework was revised and utilised. A search of the relevant databases (MEDLINE Embase, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, Scopus) was undertaken with several keywords related to trauma and personal experience. Reference lists were also searched of studies identified for reading the full text.

FINDINGS

The search strategy identified 2983 articles. The studies excluded were considered to be unrelated to the topic directly. A total of 352 articles were reviewed by abstract, and 29 additional studies were identified from reference lists; 32 were reviewed by full text. A total of 0 studies met the inclusion criteria for the scoping review.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The scoping review identified a gap in the literature as maternity care practitioners personal experience of trauma during the child birthing journey has not been researched. Research is needed to explore and conceptualise the experiences of maternity care practitioners having experienced trauma and the ongoing implications this may have on their personal and professional lives.

Factors associated with midwives' job satisfaction and experience of work: a cross-sectional survey of midwives in a tertiary maternity hospital in Melbourne, Australia

BACKGROUND

Significant factors affecting the Australian maternity care context include an ageing, predominantly part-time midwifery workforce, increasingly medicalised maternity care, and women with more complex health/social needs. This results in challenges for the maternity care system. There is a lack of understanding of midwives' experiences and job satisfaction in this context.

AIM

To explore factors affecting Australian midwives' job satisfaction and experience of work.

METHODS

In 2017 an online cross-sectional questionnaire was used to survey midwives employed in a tertiary hospital. Data collected included characteristics, work roles, hours, midwives' views and experiences of their job. The Midwifery Process Questionnaire was used to measure midwives' satisfaction in four domains: Professional Satisfaction, Professional Support, Client Interaction and Professional Development. Data were analysed as a whole, then univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses conducted to explore any associations between each domain, participant characteristics and other relevant factors.

FINDINGS

The overall survey response rate was 73% (302/411), with 96% (255/266) of permanently employed midwives responding. About half (53%) had a negative attitude about their Professional Support and Client Interaction (49%), and 21% felt negatively about Professional Development. The majority felt positively regarding Professional Satisfaction (85%). The main factors that impacted midwives' satisfaction was inadequate acknowledgment from the organisation and needing more support to fulfil their current role.

CONCLUSION

Focus on leadership and mentorship around appropriate acknowledgement and support may impact positively on midwives' satisfaction and experiences of work. A larger study could explore how widespread these findings are in the Australian maternity care setting.

Evaluation of a midwifery network to guarantee outpatient postpartum care: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

The necessity of outpatient postpartum care has increased due to shorter hospital stays. In a health care system, where postpartum care after hospital discharge must be arranged by families themselves, this can be challenging for those experiencing psychosocial disadvantages. Therefore, we compared characteristics of users of a midwifery network which referred women to outpatient postpartum care providers with those of women organising care themselves. Additionally, we investigated benefits of the network for women and health professionals.

METHODS

Evaluation of the services of a midwifery network in Switzerland. We combined quantitative secondary analysis of routine data of independent midwives with qualitative telephone interviews with users and a focus group with midwives and nurses. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression modelling were done using Stata 13. Content analysis was applied for qualitative data.

RESULTS

Users of the network were more likely to be: primiparas (OR 1.52, 95% CI [1.31-1.75, p < 0.001]); of foreign nationality (OR 2.36, 95% CI [2.04-2.73], p < 0.001); without professional education (OR 1.89, 95% CI [1.56-2.29] p < 0.001); unemployed (OR 1.28, 95% CI [1.09-1.51], p = 0.002) and have given birth by caesarean section (OR 1.38, 95% CI [1.20-1.59], p < 0.001) compared to women organising care themselves. Furthermore, users had cumulative risk factors for vulnerable transition into parenthood more often (≥ three risk factors: 4.2% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001). Women appreciate the services provided. The collaboration within the network facilitated work scheduling and the better use of resources for health professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

The network enabled midwives and nurses to reach families who might have struggled to organise postpartum care themselves. It also facilitated the work organisation of health professionals. Networks therefore provide benefits for families and health professionals.

Work-related post-traumatic stress symptoms in obstetricians and gynaecologists: findings from INDIGO, a mixed-methods study with a cross-sectional survey and in-depth interviews

OBJECTIVES

To explore obstetricians' and gynaecologists' experiences of work-related traumatic events, to measure the prevalence and predictors of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), any impacts on personal and professional lives, and any support needs.

DESIGN

Mixed methods: cross-sectional survey and in-depth interviews.

SAMPLE AND SETTING

Fellows, members and trainees of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG).

METHODS

A survey was sent to 6300 fellows, members and trainees of RCOG. 1095 people responded. Then 43 in-depth interviews with trauma-exposed participants were completed and analysed by template analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Exposure to traumatic work-related events and PTSD, personal and professional impacts, and whether there was any need for support. Interviews explored the impact of trauma, what helped or hindered psychological recovery, and any assistance wanted.

RESULTS

Two-thirds reported exposure to traumatic work-related events. Of these, 18% of both consultants and trainees reported clinically significant PTSD symptoms. Staff of black or minority ethnicity were at increased risk of PTSD. Clinically significant PTSD symptoms were associated with lower job satisfaction, emotional exhaustion and depersonalisation. Organisational impacts included sick leave, and 'seriously considering leaving the profession'. 91% wanted a system of care. The culture in obstetrics and gynaecology was identified as a barrier to trauma support. A strategy to manage the impact of work-place trauma is proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to work-related trauma is a feature of the experience of obstetricians and gynaecologists. Some will suffer PTSD with high personal, professional and organisational impacts. A system of care is needed.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

18% of obstetrics and gynaecology doctors experience post-traumatic stress disorder after traumatic events at work.

Midwives' perspectives of continuity based working in the UK: A cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

UK policy is advocating continuity of midwife throughout the antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal period in order to improve outcomes. We explored the working patterns that midwives are willing and able to adopt, barriers to change, and what would help midwives to work in continuity models of care.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

27 English maternity providers in the seven geographically-based 'Early Adopter' sites, which have been chosen to fast-track national policy implementation.

PARTICIPANTS

All midwives working in the 'Early Adopter' sites were eligible to take part.

METHOD

Anonymous online survey disseminated by local and national leaders, and social media, in October 2017. Descriptive statistics were calculated for quantitative survey responses. Qualitative free text responses were analysed thematically.

FINDINGS

798 midwives participated (estimated response rate 20% calculated using local and national NHS workforce headcount data for participating sites). Being willing or able to work in a continuity model (caseloading and/or team) was lowest where this included intrapartum care in both hospital and home settings (35%, n = 279). Willingness to work in a continuity model of care increased as the range of intrapartum care settings covered decreased (home births only 45%, n = 359; no intrapartum care at all 54%, n = 426). A need to work on the same day each week was reported by 24% (n = 188). 31% (n = 246) were currently working 12 h shifts only, while 37% (n = 295) reported being unable to work any on-calls and/or nights. Qualitative analysis revealed multiple barriers to working in continuity models: the most prominent was caring responsibilities for children and others. Midwives suggested a range of approaches to facilitate working differently including concessions in the way midwife roles are organised, such as greater autonomy and choice in working patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that many midwives are not currently able or willing to work in continuity models, which includes care across antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal periods as recommended by UK policy.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

A range of approaches to providing continuity models should be explored as the implementation of 'Better Births' takes place across England. This should include studies of the impact of the different models on women, babies and midwives, along with their practical scalability and cost.

A programme for the prevention of post-traumatic stress disorder in midwifery (POPPY): indications of effectiveness from a feasibility study

Background: Midwives can experience events they perceive as traumatic when providingcare. As a result, some will develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), with adverse implications for their mental health, the quality of care provided for women and the employing organizations. POPPY (Programme for the prevention of PTSD in midwifery) is a package of educational and supportive resources comprising an educational workshop, information leaflet, peer support and access to trauma-focused clinical psychology intervention. A feasibility study of POPPY implementation was completed. Objective: This study aimed to identify potential impacts of POPPY on midwives' understandingof trauma, their psychological well-being and job satisfaction. Method: POPPY was implemented in one hospital site. Before taking part in the POPPY workshop (T1) midwives (N = 153) completed self-report questionnaires, which measured exposure to work-related trauma, knowledge and confidence of managing trauma responses, professional impacts, symptoms of PTSD, burnout and job satisfaction. Measures were repeated (T2) approximately 6 months after training (n = 91, 62%). Results: Midwives' confidence in recognizing (p = .001) and managing early traumaresponses in themselves and their colleagues significantly improved (both p < .001). There was a trend towards reduced levels of PTSD symptomatology, and fewer midwives reported sub clinical levels of PTSD (from 10% at T1 to 7% at T2). The proportion of midwives reporting high and moderate levels of depersonalization towards care was reduced (33% to 20%) and midwives reported significantly higher levels of job satisfaction at T2 (p < .001). Reductions in self-reported stress-related absenteeism (12% to 5%), long-term changes to clinical allocation (10% to 5%) and considerations about leaving midwifery (34% to 27%) were identified. Conclusions: In conclusion, POPPY  shows very positive potential to improve midwives' mental health and the sensitivity of care they provide, and reduce service disruption and costs for trusts. Large-scale longitudinal evaluation is required.

Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are differences in morbidity and mortality, effectiveness and psychosocial outcomes between midwife-led continuity models and other models of care.

OBJECTIVES

To compare midwife-led continuity models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (25 January 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led continuity models of care or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials involving 17,674 women. We assessed the quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes (i.e. regional analgesia (epidural/spinal), caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum), spontaneous vaginal birth, intact perineum, preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) and all fetal loss before and after 24 weeks plus neonatal death using the GRADE methodology: all primary outcomes were graded as of high quality.For the primary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience regional analgesia (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14; high quality), instrumental vaginal birth (average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.97; participants = 17,501; studies = 13; high quality), preterm birth less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91; participants = 13,238; studies = eight; high quality) and less all fetal loss before and after 24 weeks plus neonatal death (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; participants = 17,561; studies = 13; high quality evidence). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.07; participants = 16,687; studies = 12; high quality). There were no differences between groups for caesarean births or intact perineum.For the secondary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience amniotomy (average RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 3253; studies = four), episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14) and fetal loss less than 24 weeks and neonatal death (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98; participants = 15,645; studies = 11). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (average RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.37; participants = 10,499; studies = seven), have a longer mean length of labour (hours) (mean difference (MD) 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; participants = 3328; studies = three) and more likely to be attended at birth by a known midwife (average RR 7.04, 95% CI 4.48 to 11.08; participants = 6917; studies = seven). There were no differences between groups for fetal loss equal to/after 24 weeks and neonatal death, induction of labour, antenatal hospitalisation, antepartum haemorrhage, augmentation/artificial oxytocin during labour, opiate analgesia, perineal laceration requiring suturing, postpartum haemorrhage, breastfeeding initiation, low birthweight infant, five-minute Apgar score less than or equal to seven, neonatal convulsions, admission of infant to special care or neonatal intensive care unit(s) or in mean length of neonatal hospital stay (days).Due to a lack of consistency in measuring women's satisfaction and assessing the cost of various maternity models, these outcomes were reported narratively. The majority of included studies reported a higher rate of maternal satisfaction in midwife-led continuity models of care. Similarly, there was a trend towards a cost-saving effect for midwife-led continuity care compared to other care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that women who received midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience intervention and more likely to be satisfied with their care with at least comparable adverse outcomes for women or their infants than women who received other models of care.Further research is needed to explore findings of fewer preterm births and fewer fetal deaths less than 24 weeks, and all fetal loss/neonatal death associated with midwife-led continuity models of care.

Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are differences in morbidity and mortality, effectiveness and psychosocial outcomes between midwife-led continuity models and other models of care.

OBJECTIVES

To compare midwife-led continuity models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led continuity models of care or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials involving 17,674 women. We assessed the quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes (i.e., regional analgesia (epidural/spinal), caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum), spontaneous vaginal birth, intact perineum, preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) and overall fetal loss and neonatal death (fetal loss was assessed by gestation using 24 weeks as the cut-off for viability in many countries) using the GRADE methodology: All primary outcomes were graded as of high quality.For the primary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience regional analgesia (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14; high quality), instrumental vaginal birth (average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.97; participants = 17,501; studies = 13; high quality), preterm birth less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91; participants = 13,238; studies = 8; high quality) and less overall fetal/neonatal death (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; participants = 17,561; studies = 13; high quality evidence). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.07; participants = 16,687; studies = 12; high quality). There were no differences between groups for caesarean births or intact perineum.For the secondary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience amniotomy (average RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 3253; studies = 4), episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14) and fetal loss/neonatal death before 24 weeks (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98; participants = 15,645; studies = 11). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (average RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.37; participants = 10,499; studies = 7), have a longer mean length of labour (hours) (mean difference (MD) 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; participants = 3328; studies = 3) and more likely to be attended at birth by a known midwife (average RR 7.04, 95% CI 4.48 to 11.08; participants = 6917; studies = 7). There were no differences between groups for fetal loss or neonatal death more than or equal to 24 weeks, induction of labour, antenatal hospitalisation, antepartum haemorrhage, augmentation/artificial oxytocin during labour, opiate analgesia, perineal laceration requiring suturing, postpartum haemorrhage, breastfeeding initiation, low birthweight infant, five-minute Apgar score less than or equal to seven, neonatal convulsions, admission of infant to special care or neonatal intensive care unit(s) or in mean length of neonatal hospital stay (days).Due to a lack of consistency in measuring women's satisfaction and assessing the cost of various maternity models, these outcomes were reported narratively. The majority of included studies reported a higher rate of maternal satisfaction in midwife-led continuity models of care. Similarly, there was a trend towards a cost-saving effect for midwife-led continuity care compared to other care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that women who received midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience intervention and more likely to be satisfied with their care with at least comparable adverse outcomes for women or their infants than women who received other models of care.Further research is needed to explore findings of fewer preterm births and fewer fetal deaths less than 24 weeks, and overall fetal loss/neonatal death associated with midwife-led continuity models of care.

Comparing satisfaction and burnout between caseload and standard care midwives: findings from two cross-sectional surveys conducted in Victoria, Australia

Background

Caseload midwifery reduces childbirth interventions and increases women’s satisfaction with care. It is therefore important to understand the impact of caseload midwifery on midwives working in and alongside the model. While some studies have reported higher satisfaction for caseload compared with standard care midwives, others have suggested a need to explore midwives’ work-life balance as well as potential for stress and burnout. This study explored midwives’ attitudes to their professional role, and also measured burnout in caseload midwives compared to standard care midwives at two sites in Victoria, Australia with newly introduced caseload midwifery models.

Methods

All midwives providing maternity care at the study sites were sent questionnaires at the commencement of the caseload midwifery model and two years later. Data items included the Midwifery Process Questionnaire (MPQ) to examine midwives’ attitude to their professional role, the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) to measure burnout, and questions about midwives’ views of caseload work. Data were pooled for the two sites and comparisons made between caseload and standard care midwives. The MPQ and CBI data were summarised as individual and group means.

Results

Twenty caseload midwives (88%) and 130 standard care midwives (41%) responded at baseline and 22 caseload midwives (95%) and 133 standard care midwives (45%) at two years. Caseload and standard care midwives were initially similar across all measures except client-related burnout, which was lower for caseload midwives (12.3 vs 22.4, p = 0.02). After two years, compared to midwives in standard care, caseload midwives had higher mean scores in professional satisfaction (1.08 vs 0.76, p = 0.01), professional support (1.06 vs 0.11, p <0.01) and client interaction (1.4 vs 0.09, p <0.01) and lower scores for personal burnout (35.7 vs 47.7, p < 0.01), work-related burnout (27.3 vs 42.7, p <0.01), and client-related burnout (11.3 vs 21.4, p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Caseload midwifery was associated with lower burnout scores and higher professional satisfaction. Further research should focus on understanding the key features of the caseload model that are related to these outcomes to help build a picture of what is required to ensure the long-term sustainability of the model.

Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are differences in morbidity and mortality, effectiveness and psychosocial outcomes between midwife-led continuity models and other models of care.

OBJECTIVES

To compare midwife-led continuity models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (28 January 2013) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led continuity models of care or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All review authors evaluated methodological quality. Two review authors checked data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials involving 16,242 women. Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience regional analgesia (average risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.90), episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.92), and instrumental birth (average RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.96), and were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (average RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.31), spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.08), attendance at birth by a known midwife (average RR 7.83, 95% CI 4.15 to 14.80), and a longer mean length of labour (hours) (mean difference (hours) 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74). There were no differences between groups for caesarean births (average RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.02).Women who were randomised to receive midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience preterm birth (average RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.94) and fetal loss before 24 weeks' gestation (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99), although there were no differences in fetal loss/neonatal death of at least 24 weeks (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.51) or in overall fetal/neonatal death (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.00).Due to a lack of consistency in measuring women's satisfaction and assessing the cost of various maternity models, these outcomes were reported narratively. The majority of included studies reported a higher rate of maternal satisfaction in the midwifery-led continuity care model. Similarly there was a trend towards a cost-saving effect for midwife-led continuity care compared to other care models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most women should be offered midwife-led continuity models of care and women should be encouraged to ask for this option although caution should be exercised in applying this advice to women with substantial medical or obstetric complications.

Challenges in conducting prospective research of developmentally directed care in surgical neonates: a case study

BACKGROUND

Evaluation is fundamental to evidence-based practice. Due to practical constraints inherent in real-world clinical environments, however, innovations in clinical practice are often implemented without rigorous research. We set out to evaluate the effectiveness of developmentally directed care in surgical neonates using a randomised controlled trial with a Newborn Individualized Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP) intervention.

AIM

The aim of this paper is to inform future studies by sharing lessons learnt in conducting prospective research of a practice-intervention in a critical care setting.

METHOD

Three intervention components were used to assess implementation: number of NIDCAP observations; infant allocation to project nurses, and consistency of care. Barriers to implementation were identified through discussions with nurses who had key roles.

RESULTS

Insufficient episodes of NIDCAP observation and infant allocation to project nurses, and lack of consistency of care indicated that the intervention had not been successfully implemented. Barriers to implementation (fast 'turnover' of patients, unpredictable changes in medical status, staff/skill shortages, and inconsistent care) were attributed to the competing demands between service provision and research in a busy critical care context.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings regarding barriers to successful implementation of NIDCAP in this case study are relevant to any critical care setting where complex interventions are under consideration, as similar challenges are plausible across a range of clinical contexts. Adopting a critical methodologically-informed approach to appraise implementation and evaluate complex interventions is essential.

The impact of birthplace on women's birth experiences and perceptions of care

Overall birth experience is an important outcome of birth, and studies of psycho-social birth outcomes and women's perspectives on care are increasingly used to evaluate and develop maternity care services. We examined the influence of birthplace on women's birth experiences and perceptions of care in two freestanding midwifery units (FMU) and two obstetric units (OU) in north Denmark, all pursuing an ideal of high-quality, humanistic and patient-centred care. As part of a matched cohort study, a postal questionnaire survey was undertaken. Two hundred and eighteen low-risk women in FMU care, admitted between January-October 2006, and an obstetrically/socio-demographically matched control group of 218 low-risk women admitted to an OU were invited to participate. Three hundred and seventy-five women (86%) responded. Birth experience and satisfaction with care were rated significantly more positively by FMU than by OU women. Significantly better results for FMU care were also found for specific patient-centred care elements (support, participation in decision-making, attentiveness to psychological needs and to wishes for birth, information, and for women's feeling of being listened to). Adjustment for medical birth factors slightly increased the positive effect of FMU care. Subgroup analysis showed that a significant, negative effect of low education and employment level on birth experience was found only for the OU group. Our results provide strong support of FMU care and underline the big challenges in providing individual and supportive care for all women, especially in OUs. Policy-makers and professionals need to consider how the advantages provided by FMU care can support the effort to improve women's birth experience and possibly also the combat of the negative effect of social disadvantage on health.

Exploring implementation and sustainability of models of care: can theory help?

OBJECTIVE

Research on new models of care in health service provision is complex, as is the introduction and embedding of such models, and positive research findings are only one factor in whether a new model of care will be implemented. In order to understand why this is the case, research design must not only take account of proposed changes in the clinical encounter, but the organisational context that must sustain and normalise any changed practices. We use two case studies where new models of maternity care were implemented and evaluated via randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to discuss how (or whether) the use of theory might inform implementation and sustainability strategies. The Normalisation Process Model is proposed as a suitable theoretical framework, and a comparison made using the two case studies - one where a theoretical framework was used, the other where it was not. CONTEXT AND APPROACH: In the maternity sector there is considerable debate about which model of care provides the best outcomes for women, while being sustainable in the organisational setting. We explore why a model of maternity care--team midwifery (where women have a small group of midwives providing their care)-- that was implemented and tested in an RCT was not continued after the RCT's conclusion, despite showing the same or better outcomes for women in the intervention group compared with women allocated to usual care. We then discuss the conceptualisation and rationale leading to the use of the 'Normalisation Process Model' as an aid to exploring aspects of implementation of a caseload midwifery model (where women are allocated a primary midwife for their care) that has recently been evaluated by RCT.

DISCUSSION

We demonstrate how the Normalisation Process Model was applied in planning of the evaluation phases of the RCT as a means of exploring the implementation of the caseload model of care. We argue that a theoretical understanding of issues related to implementation and sustainability can make a valuable contribution when researching complex interventions in complex settings such as hospitals.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Application of a theoretical model in the research of a complex intervention enables a greater understanding of the organisational context into which new models of care are introduced and identification of factors that promote or challenge implementation of these models of care.

Midwife-led versus other models of care for childbearing women

BACKGROUND

Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are differences in morbidity and mortality, effectiveness and psychosocial outcomes between midwife-led and other models of care.

OBJECTIVES

To compare midwife-led models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (January 2008), Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group's Trials Register (January 2008), Current Contents (1994 to January 2008), CINAHL (1982 to August 2006), Web of Science, BIOSIS Previews, ISI Proceedings, (1990 to 2008), and the WHO Reproductive Health Library, No. 9.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led or other models of care during pregnancy, and where care is provided during the ante- and intrapartum period in the midwife-led model.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All authors evaluated methodological quality. Two authors independently checked the data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 trials (12,276 women). Women who had midwife-led models of care were less likely to experience antenatal hospitalisation, risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 0.99), the use of regional analgesia (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.91), episiotomy (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.88), and instrumental delivery (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.96) and were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.29), spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.06), to feel in control during labour and childbirth (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.30), attendance at birth by a known midwife (RR 7.84, 95% CI 4.15 to 14.81) and initiate breastfeeding (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.76). In addition, women who were randomised to receive midwife-led care were less likely to experience fetal loss before 24 weeks' gestation (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97), and their babies were more likely to have a shorter length of hospital stay (mean difference -2.00, 95% CI -2.15 to -1.85). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for overall fetal loss/neonatal death (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.00), or fetal loss/neonatal death of at least 24 weeks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.53).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

All women should be offered midwife-led models of care and women should be encouraged to ask for this option.

COSMOS: COmparing Standard Maternity care with one-to-one midwifery support: a randomised controlled trial

Background

In Australia and internationally, there is concern about the growing proportion of women giving birth by caesarean section. There is evidence of increased risk of placenta accreta and percreta in subsequent pregnancies as well as decreased fertility; and significant resource implications. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of continuity of midwifery care have reported reduced caesareans and other interventions in labour, as well as increased maternal satisfaction, with no statistically significant differences in perinatal morbidity or mortality. RCTs conducted in the UK and in Australia have largely measured the effect of teams of care providers (commonly 6–12 midwives) with very few testing caseload (one-to-one) midwifery care. This study aims to determine whether caseload (one-to-one) midwifery care for women at low risk of medical complications decreases the proportion of women delivering by caesarean section compared with women receiving 'standard' care. This paper presents the trial protocol in detail.

Methods/design

A two-arm RCT design will be used. Women who are identified at low medical risk will be recruited from the antenatal booking clinics of a tertiary women's hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Baseline data will be collected, then women randomised to caseload midwifery or standard low risk care. Women allocated to the caseload intervention will receive antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum care from a designated primary midwife with one or two antenatal visits conducted by a 'back-up' midwife. The midwives will collaborate with obstetricians and other health professionals as necessary. If the woman has an extended labour, or if the primary midwife is unavailable, care will be provided by the back-up midwife. For women allocated to standard care, options include midwifery-led care with varying levels of continuity, junior obstetric care and community based general medical practitioner care. Data will be collected at recruitment (self administered survey) and at 2 and 6 months postpartum by postal survey. Medical/obstetric outcomes will be abstracted from the medical record. The sample size of 2008 was calculated to identify a decrease in caesarean birth from 19 to 14% and detect a range of other significant clinical differences. Comprehensive process and economic evaluations will be conducted.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012607000073404.

Midwives’ experience of organisational and professional change

OBJECTIVE

to describe midwives' experiences of changes in their caring role and professional function in postpartum wards in the northern part of Sweden. In this part of the country, three out of eight maternity departments have been closed over the last 5 years. During the same period, hospital stays have reduced in length, and an early discharge model has been introduced.

DESIGN

focus-group discussions.

SETTING

four focus groups at two hospitals in northern Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

21 midwives experienced in midwifery practice in maternity wards.

FINDINGS

the analysis revealed four categories of comments: 'to have limited time when caring for the mother and the baby'; 'no longer being valued as the expert'; 'a wish to have responsibility for childbirth in its entirety'; 'to see future possibilities in the development of the profession'. The theme identified is 'being ahead in ideas about caring but still partly caught up in the past'.

KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

the identified theme of being ahead in ideas about caring but still partly caught up in the past can be understood as representing a transition. The midwives experienced loss and grief over their former midwifery practice, but had ideas and visions for developing and expanding their future professional role. A healthy transition requires support, participation and skilled management.

An exploration of midwives’ views of the current system of maternity care in England

OBJECTIVE

to explore, in-depth, the views of midwives working in maternity services about birth setting, models of care and philosophy of care.

DESIGN

an Appreciative Inquiry approach was adopted utilising focus group interviews as the method of data collection.

SETTING

15 focus group interviews were conducted at 14 sites in England.

PARTICIPANTS

a purposive sample of 120 midwives and six student midwives who were serving women in different birth settings (home, free-standing maternity units, midwife-led units, and traditional obstetric units) participated, in 2001/2002.

FINDINGS

the main themes generated by the midwives were: cultural changes; midwifery leadership; appropriate role models; training in normality; appropriate responsibility of care divisions; choice for women; equity of care provision between women considered to be at high or low risk; and staff morale.

KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

this study highlighted the consistency of views amongst midwives working in different settings. Midwives wanted support to practice autonomously in an environment that facilitated equity of care for women and job satisfaction for midwives. Suggestions were put forward by midwives on how to improve maternity services. A unified approach is required to develop these suggestions into strategies, that will remove the identified barriers and promote normality.

Single room maternity care: the nursing response

BACKGROUND

The introduction of single room maternity care in the 1990s necessitated a new approach to nursing education and practice. A focus on perinatal nursing requires competence across the spectrum of labor, delivery, postpartum and newborn care. We sought to evaluate the nursing response to this change by comparing satisfaction with the workplace environment among single room maternity care nurses before and after they worked in the setting and among nurses working in traditional birth settings.

METHODS

Six months before the opening of a pilot seven-bed single room maternity care unit, nurses who planned to work in the new unit completed a survey about their satisfaction with aspects of their work environment. Three months after the new unit opened the survey was repeated with this study group and also by a sample of nurses working in the delivery and postpartum areas.

RESULTS

Responses indicated that single room maternity care nurses before and after working in the unit were significantly more satisfied with the physical setting, their ability to respond to patients' needs, their opportunity for teaching families, the nursing practice environment, peer support, and their perceived level of competency. They rated their satisfaction significantly higher than that of their colleagues in the traditional delivery and postpartum settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The positive transition to single room maternity care by obstetrical nurses was demonstrated by their improved overall satisfaction with the work environment. Evaluation of the nurses' responses to changes in health care delivery has important implications for justifying new clinical approaches and planning for future changes.

Continuity of carer: what matters to women? A review of the evidence

OBJECTIVES

To consider how 'continuity of carer' has been defined in the literature and to review the literature on what aspects of continuity matter to women.

DESIGN

Structured literature review.

SETTING

The first objective was addressed within the context of a review of the organisation of midwifery services in the UK; for the second objective a wider literature was drawn on.

MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS

Data were systematically extracted from the identified 'core' studies on the methods used for assessing continuity of carer and on women's satisfaction with periods of care. Continuity of carer was found to be defined in these studies as fewer caregivers, either overall or during pregnancy, or as a known caregiver in labour. Little attention was paid to other possible interpretations of continuity of carer. The literature on what is important to women was found to have used four distinct methods and findings were consistent within methods. Studies comparing women who had and had not had a known carer in labour found no significant differences in satisfaction; those using rankings or ratings found that a known intrapartum carer was a relatively low priority and most of those using open-ended questions found that few women mentioned continuity. In contrast, all studies which asked postnatal women whether a known intrapartum carer was important reported that those who had experienced it said 'yes', while those who had not, generally thought it unimportant.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

There has been an emphasis in existing literature on continuity of carer but little attempt to assess continuity or quality of care. Limited definitions of continuity of carer have been used. There is no evidence that women who were cared for in labour by a midwife that they had already met were more satisfied than those who were not. Other aspects of woman-centred care were likely to be more important. Women wanted consistent care from caregivers that they trust, but most did not value continuity of carer for its own sake.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Limited definitions of continuity of carer seem to be becoming ends in themselves. This has particularly been the case with defining continuity as 'having a known carer in labour'. The available evidence does not justify prioritising this definition of continuity--rather the reverse. This is important for both women and midwives since it opens up other possibilities for organising services that put less strain on midwives' lives and may be equally satisfying for both women and midwives.

A weight off my mind: the abandonment of routine antenatal weighing a change of practice research

The 50 year old tradition of routinely weighing pregnant women, which has been identified as an obsolete practice, is still practiced by many. The antenatal clinic and community midwives, and medical staff from the Division of Obstetrics (Central Coast Area Health Service) as well as pregnant women attending the clinics have been surveyed to identify the impact on implementing evidence based practice (ceasing routine antenatal weighing). Using both quantitative and qualitative methods to provide a rich and detailed picture, the outcomes showed that the importance of weighing decreased for most of pregnant women. Midwives were surprised at the women's' acceptance to the change; and both health professional groups did not feel a loss of overall care. This research suggests that organised and planned change can achieve acceptance of evidence based practice.

Randomised, controlled trial of efficacy of midwife-managed care

BACKGROUND

Midwife-managed programmes of care are being widely implemented although there has been little investigation of their efficacy. We have compared midwife-managed care with shared care (ie, care divided among midwives, hospital doctors, and general practitioners) in terms of clinical efficacy and women's satisfaction.

METHODS

We carried out a randomised controlled trial of 1299 pregnant women who had no adverse characteristics at booking (consent rate 81.9%). 648 women were assigned midwife-managed care and 651 shared care. The research hypothesis was that compared with shared care, midwife-managed care would produce fewer interventions, similar (or more favourable) outcomes, similar complications, and greater satisfaction with care. Data were collected by retrospective review of case records and self-report questionnaires. Analysis was by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

Interventions were similar in the two groups or lower with midwife-managed care. For example, women in the midwife-managed group were less likely than women in shared care to have induction of labour (146 [23.9%] vs 199 [33.3%]; 95% CI for difference 4.4-14.5). Women in the midwife-managed group were more likely to have an intact perineum and less likely to have had an episiotomy (p = 0.02), with no significant difference in perineal tears. Complication rates were similar. Overall, 32.8% of women were permanently transferred from midwife-managed care (28.7% for clinical reasons, 3.7% for non-clinical reasons). Women in both groups reported satisfaction with their care but the midwife-managed group were significantly more satisfied with their antenatal (difference in mean scores 0.48 [95% CI 0.41-0.55]), intrapartum (0.28 [0.18-0.37]), hospital-based postnatal care (0.57 [0.45-0.70]), and home-based postnatal care (0.33 [0.25-0.42]).

INTERPRETATION

We conclude that midwife-managed care for healthy women, integrated within existing services, is clinically effective and enhances women's satisfaction with maternity care.