Comparing midwife-led and doctor-led maternity care: a systematic review of reviews

Differential Relationships Between Work-Life Interface Constructs and Intention to Stay in or Leave the Profession: Evidence From Midwives in Canada

This paper investigates how positive and negative work-personal life interface constructs are differentially associated with intentions to stay in or leave the profession. The findings help map work-personal life interface constructs on the typology of determinants of intention to stay and intention to leave (disengagers, retainers, criticals, and neutrals). The ordered logistic regression (ologit) modelling of cross-sectional data from a representative sample (n = 601) of midwives in Canada shows that work interference with personal life is a disengager, which has a stronger association with intention to leave than with intention to stay in the profession. Among the work-personal life interface constructs, work enhancement of personal life seems to be the most critical determinant, showing the most substantive association with both intention to stay and intention to leave. This finding suggests that interventions to increase midwives' intention to stay and decrease their intention to leave should focus on amplifying the enhancing effects of working on midwives' personal lives. Interventions that aim to reduce work interference with personal life might be more effective in decreasing intention to leave the profession than increasing intention to stay.

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All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife continuity of care models or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.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

Targeted health and social care interventions for women and infants who are disproportionately impacted by health inequalities in high-income countries: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Disadvantaged populations (such as women from minority ethnic groups and those with social complexity) are at an increased risk of poor outcomes and experiences. Inequalities in health outcomes include preterm birth, maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, and poor-quality care. The impact of interventions is unclear for this population, in high-income countries (HIC). The review aimed to identify and evaluate the current evidence related to targeted health and social care service interventions in HICs which can improve health inequalities experienced by childbearing women and infants at disproportionate risk of poor outcomes and experiences.

METHODS

Twelve databases searched for studies across all HICs, from any methodological design. The search concluded on 8/11/22. The inclusion criteria included interventions that targeted disadvantaged populations which provided a component of clinical care that differed from standard maternity care.

RESULTS

Forty six index studies were included. Countries included Australia, Canada, Chile, Hong Kong, UK and USA. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, and results showed three intervention types: midwifery models of care, interdisciplinary care, and community-centred services. These intervention types have been delivered singularly but also in combination of each other demonstrating overlapping features. Overall, results show interventions had positive associations with primary (maternal, perinatal, and infant mortality) and secondary outcomes (experiences and satisfaction, antenatal care coverage, access to care, quality of care, mode of delivery, analgesia use in labour, preterm birth, low birth weight, breastfeeding, family planning, immunisations) however significance and impact vary. Midwifery models of care took an interpersonal and holistic approach as they focused on continuity of carer, home visiting, culturally and linguistically appropriate care and accessibility. Interdisciplinary care took a structural approach, to coordinate care for women requiring multi-agency health and social services. Community-centred services took a place-based approach with interventions that suited the need of its community and their norms.

CONCLUSION

Targeted interventions exist in HICs, but these vary according to the context and infrastructure of standard maternity care. Multi-interventional approaches could enhance a targeted approach for at risk populations, in particular combining midwifery models of care with community-centred approaches, to enhance accessibility, earlier engagement, and increased attendance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42020218357.

Every Mother Counts: listening to mothers to transform maternity care

More than a decade ago, the United Nations Human Rights Council passed a resolution recognizing maternal health as a human right. Subsequently, global advocates mobilized to establish the right to respectful maternity care, which has since been formally recognized by the World Health Organization and endorsed by more than 90 international, civil society, and health professional organizations. Despite widespread acknowledgment of this right, traditional approaches to maternity care do not adequately address aspects of quality care that are highly valued by mothers and birthing people, such as respect, dignity, and shared decision-making, and high numbers of women and birthing people worldwide continue to experience disrespect and mistreatment during childbirth. Efforts to reduce maternal mortality have historically overemphasized clinical approaches while failing to listen to mothers and pregnant people, threatening patient autonomy, and contributing to persistent racial disparities and high levels of preventable maternal mortality. This article shares the birth story and evolution of Every Mother Counts, an organization dedicated to making pregnancy and childbirth safe, respectful, and equitable for every mother, everywhere, and provides tangible examples of how storytelling and listening to women-in film, media, research, advocacy, education, and patient care-can serve as powerful vehicles to create awareness of maternal health issues and transform our maternity care system into one that centers mothers in labor and childbirth and elevates equity and birth justice. There are concrete steps that every participant in the maternity care system can take to help make respectful, equitable care a reality, including implementing patient-reported experience measures as part of standard clinical practice, using individualized care plans and shared decision-making tools in patient care, and developing a grievance process to address instances of disrespectful care and mistreatment. Most importantly, we can listen to mothers, women, and birthing people, hear their concerns, and act promptly to provide the care and support that they deserve.

Examining respect, autonomy, and mistreatment in childbirth in the US: do provider type and place of birth matter?

BACKGROUND

Analyses of factors that determine quality of perinatal care consistently rely on clinical markers, while failing to assess experiential outcomes. Understanding how model of care and birth setting influence experiences of respect, autonomy, and decision making, is essential for comprehensive assessment of quality.

METHODS

We examined responses (n = 1771) to an online cross-sectional national survey capturing experiences of perinatal care in the United States. We used validated patient-oriented measures and scales to assess four domains of experience: (1) decision-making, (2) respect, (3) mistreatment, and (4) time spent during visits. We categorized the provider type and birth setting into three groups: midwife at community birth, midwife at hospital-birth, and physician at hospital-birth. For each group, we used multivariate logistic regression, adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics, to estimate the odds of experiential outcomes in all the four domains.

RESULTS

Compared to those cared for by physicians in hospitals, individuals cared for by midwives in community settings had more than five times the odds of experiencing higher autonomy (aOR: 5.22, 95% CI: 3.65-7.45), higher respect (aOR: 5.39, 95% CI: 3.72-7.82) and lower odds of mistreatment (aOR: 0.16, 95% CI: 0.10-0.26). We found significant differences across birth settings: participants cared for by midwives in the community settings had significantly better experiential outcomes than those in the hospital settings: high- autonomy (aOR: 2.97, 95% CI: 2.66-4.27), respect (aOR: 4.15, 95% CI: 2.81-6.14), mistreatment (aOR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.11-0.34), time spent (aOR: 8.06, 95% CI: 4.26-15.28).

CONCLUSION

Participants reported better experiential outcomes when cared for by midwives than by physicians. And for those receiving midwifery care, the quality of experiential outcomes was significantly higher in community settings than in hospital settings. Care settings matter and structures of hospital-based care may impair implementation of the person-centered midwifery care model.

Determinants of neonatal deaths in Indonesia: A national survey data analysis of 10,838 newborns

Background

Neonatal mortality is one of the key impediments in achieving global sustainable development goals, especially in lower middle income countries (LMICs). As an LMIC with the highest reported neonatal mortality rate in Southeast Asia, Indonesia faces inequitable distribution of health facilities across the archipelago. Therefore, in this paper, we aim to evaluate the determinants of neonatal mortality rate in Indonesia to search for better strategies to overcome this problem.

Methods

We conducted an analysis of the 2017 Indonesia Demographic Health Survey dataset of 10,838 live-born infants born from singleton pregnancies in 2017. Using a hierarchical approach, multivariate analysis was conducted to identify potential factors (including socioeconomic, household, and proximate determinants) that contributed to neonatal mortality.

Results

The lack of participation in postnatal care [odds ratio (OR) = 20.394, p = 0.01)] and delivery complications other than prolonged labour (OR = 2.072, p = 0.02) were the maternal factors that significantly associated with increased risk of neonatal death. Regarding neonatal factors, low-birth-weight infants appeared to be more vulnerable to neonatal death (OR = 12.489, p = 0.01).

Conclusion

Low participation in postnatal care, development of labour complications, and low birth weight were associated with higher neonatal mortality. It implies that in a limited resource and geographically challenging country such as Indonesia, improving the quality and optimizing services of public hospitals with equitable distribution of quality health care services in all regions should be prioritized in the efforts of reducing neonatal mortality rate.

Iranian midwives' lived experiences of providing continuous midwife-led intrapartum care: a qualitative study

Background & Objective

Continuity of midwifery-led care during labour and birth is considered optimal. To ensure its sustainability in practice where limited evidence is available, the aim of the present study was to explore midwives’ lived experiences of delivering continuous midwife-led intrapartum care.

Methods

This study took a qualitative approach in meeting its aim. Participants were midwives working in the labour wards of private and public hospitals in Iran. The data were purposefully collected in 2019 through in-depth, semi-structured, and face-to-face interviews with midwives (n = 10) aged between 26 and 55 years. A thematic analysis based on descriptive phenomenology was undertaken to make sense of the data collected.

Results

“Wanting to lead continuous woman-centered care but being unable to” was identified as an overarching theme. Three other themes “emphasis on the non-interventional care”, “midwifery-specific focus” and “barriers and challenges of midwifery care” were also identified. Ultimately, midwives described knowing how to and wanting to lead continuous ‘woman’-centered care but being unable to. Perceived barriers included lack of familiarity with and knowledge in relation to childbirth, the insignificant role of midwives in decision making, obstetrician utilitarianism, high workloads along with work-related stress argument-driven communication between midwives and obstetricians and an absence of a ‘triangle of trust’ in care.

Conclusion

Future research strategies could usefully include obstetricians and focus on the upscaling of midwifery in Iran using continuity of care models, highlight the value of midwives, identify why uptake of antenatal education in Iran is poor and develop user friendly, evidence based, midwife-led programs. Initiatives aiming to promote mutual professional respect, trust and collegiality and increased remuneration for midwifery work would be also welcomed in pursuit of reducing maternal and infant mortality in Iran.

A direct comparison of patient-reported outcomes and experiences in alternative models of maternity care in Queensland, Australia

We aimed to directly compare women’s pregnancy to postpartum outcomes and experiences across the major maternity models of care offered in Queensland, Australia. We conducted secondary analyses of self-reported data collected in 2012 from a state-wide sample of women who had recently given birth in Queensland (response rate = 30.4%). Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of outcomes and experiences associated with three models (GP Shared Care, Public Midwifery Continuity Care, Private Obstetric Care) compared with Standard Public Care, adjusting for relevant maternal characteristics and clinical covariates. Of 2,802 women, 18.2% received Standard Public Care, 21.7% received GP Shared Care, 12.9% received Public Midwifery Continuity Care, and 47.1% received Private Obstetric Care. There were minimal differences for women in GP Shared Care. Women in Public Midwifery Continuity Care were less likely to have a scheduled caesarean and more likely to have an unassisted vaginal birth, experience freedom of mobility during labour and informed consent processes for inducing labour, vaginal examinations, fetal monitoring and receiving Syntocinon to birth their placenta, and report highest quality interpersonal care. They had fewer vaginal examinations, lower odds of perineal trauma requiring sutures and anxiety after birth, shorter postpartum hospital stays, and higher odds of a home postpartum care visit. Women in Private Obstetric Care were more likely to have their labour induced, a scheduled caesarean birth, experience informed consent processes for caesarean, and report highest quality interpersonal care, but less likely to experience unassisted vaginal birth and informed consent for Syntocinon to birth their placenta. There is an urgent need to communicate variations between maternity models across the range of outcome and experiential measures that are important to women; build more rigorous comparative evidence for Private Midwifery Care; and prioritise experiential and out-of-pocket cost comparisons in further research to enable woman-centred informed decision-making.

Collaborative model of intrapartum care: qualitative study on barriers and facilitators to implementation in a private Brazilian hospital

INTRODUCTION

A collaborative (midwife-obstetrician) model of intrapartum care (CMIC) is associated with lower caesarean section (CS) rates than physician-led models. In 2019, the largest private maternity hospital in Latin America (14.000 deliveries/year, 89% CS) created a quality improvement initiative to optimise intrapartum care and safely reduce CS in low-risk women managed by its internal team of healthcare providers (HCP). We conducted formative research to identify potential barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a CMIC.

METHODS

Three groups of stakeholders participated in focus groups and interviews: hospital managers and clinical coordinators, HCP working in labour/delivery wards and pregnant women intending to give birth in the hospital. We explored participants' views about the acceptability of implementing a CMIC where a nurse-midwife (NM) on shift would be the main intrapartum HCP, with continuous support/supervision of a dedicated, in-house, obstetrician-gynaecologist (OB-GYN). A thematic analysis approach was used.

RESULTS

12 HCPs, 5 clinical coordinators, 2 hospital managers and 7 women participated. OB-GYNs, coordinators and managers highlighted health system, organisational and structural factors (NMs' limited experience/skills, professional roles, financial reimbursement) as potential barriers. NMs identified logistical and human resources as additional barriers. Women viewed the CMIC with perplexity and insecurity because of cultural beliefs about the dominant role of OB-GYNs, and limited information about NM's capabilities. All professionals agreed that women's acceptance of a CMIC will require educational interventions and communication strategies to inform potential users about the advantages and safety of this model.

CONCLUSION

There are important barriers and facilitators to implement a CMIC in a private Brazilian maternity hospital. Factors related to health system structure and organisation may have the greatest impact. A CMIC is more likely to succeed if stakeholders' concerns about responsibilities, power and financial revenues are addressed, and educational interventions targeted at users are deployed prior to its implementation.

A comparison between midwifery and obstetric care at birth in Spain: Across-sectional study of perinatal outcomes

BACKGROUND

The organizational structure of maternity services determines the choice of which professionals provide care during pregnancy, birth, and the postnatal period, and it influences the kind of care they deliver and the level of continuity of care offered. There is considerable evidence that demonstrates a relationship between how care is provided and the maternal and neonatal health outcomes. Registered midwives and obstetricians provide maternity care across Spain. To date, no studies have assessed whether maternity outcomes differ between these two groups.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine the association between the care received (midwifery care versus obstetric care) and the maternal and neonatal outcomes in women with normal, low- and medium-risk pregnancies in Spain from 2016 to 2019.

DESIGN

A prospective, multicentre, cross-sectional study was carried out as part of COST Action IS1405 at 44 public hospitals in Spain in the years 2016-2019. The protocol can be accessed through the registry ISRCTN14062994. The sample size of this study was 11,537 women. The primary outcome was mode of birth. The secondary outcomes included augmentation with oxytocin, use of epidural analgesia, women's position at birth, perineal integrity, third stage of labour management, maternal and neonatal admission to intensive care, Apgar score, neonatal resuscitation, and early initiation of breastfeeding. Chi-square tests for categorical variables and independent sample t-test for continuous variables to assess differences between the midwifery and obstetric groups were calculated. Odds ratio with intervals of confidence at 95% were calculated for obstetric interventions and perinatal outcomes. A multivariate logistic regression model was applied in order to examine the effect of type of healthcare provider on perinatal outcomes. These models were adjusted for care provider, type of onset of labour, use of anaesthesia, pregnancy risk, maternal age, parity, and gestational age at birth.

RESULTS

Midwifery care was associated with lower rates of operative births and severe perineal damage and had no higher adverse outcomes. No statistically significant differences were observed in the use of other obstetric interventions between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study should encourage a shift in the current maternity care system towards a greater integration of midwifery-led services in order to achieve optimal birth outcomes for women and newborns.

REGISTRY NUMBER

ISRCTN14062994.

Obstetrician involvement in planned midwife-led births: a cohort study in an obstetric department of a University Hospital in Switzerland

Background

Healthy women with low risk singleton pregnancies are offered a midwife-led birth model at our department. Exclusion criteria for midwife-led births include a range of abnormalities in medical history and during the course of pregnancy. In case of complications before, during or after labor and birth, an obstetrician is involved. The purpose of this study was 1) to evaluate the frequency of and reasons for secondary obstetrician involvement in planned midwife-led births and 2) to assess the maternal and neonatal outcome.

Methods

We analyzed a cohort of planned midwife-led births during a 14 years period (2006-2019). Evaluation included a comparison between midwife-led births with or without secondary obstetrician involvement, regarding maternal characteristics, birth mode, and maternal and neonatal outcome. Statistical analysis was performed by unpaired t-tests and Chi-square tests.

Results

In total, there were 532 intended midwife-led births between 2006 and 2019 (2.6% of all births during this time-period at the department). Among these, 302 (57%) women had spontaneous vaginal births as midwife-led births. In the remaining 230 (43%) births, obstetricians were involved: 62% of women with obstetrician involvement had spontaneous vaginal births, 25% instrumental vaginal births and 13% caesarean sections. Overall, the caesarean section rate was 5.6% in the whole cohort of women with intended midwife-led births. Reasons for obstetrician involvement primarily included necessity for labor induction, abnormal fetal heart rate monitoring, thick meconium-stained amniotic fluid, prolonged first or second stage of labor, desire for epidural analgesia, obstetrical anal sphincter injuries, retention of placenta and postpartum hemorrhage. There was a significantly higher rate of primiparous women in the group with obstetrician involvement. Arterial umbilical cord pH < 7.10 occurred significantly more often in the group with obstetrician involvement, while 5′ Apgar score < 7 did not differ significantly. The overall transfer rate of newborns to neonatal intensive care unit was low (1.3%).

Conclusion

A midwife-led birth in our setting is a safe alternative to a primarily obstetrician-led birth, provided that selection criteria are being followed and prompt obstetrician involvement is available in case of abnormal course of labor and birth or postpartum complications.

Sustaining the quality of midwifery practice in Belgium: Challenges and opportunities for advanced midwife practitioners

BACKGROUND

Midwifery practice is essential in achieving high-quality maternal and newborn care in all settings and countries. However, midwifery practice has become more complex over the past decades. Considerable demands are being placed on midwives to meet increasing epidemiological, socio-economic, and technological challenges. These require a well-trained midwifery workforce ready to shape the care in the near and long-term future.

OBJECTIVE

To discuss advanced midwife practitioner role implementation in Belgium as a possible answer to healthcare-related challenges that impact midwifery practice. Furthermore, to stimulate a debate within the profession at all levels in Belgium and in countries considering advanced midwife practitioner roles.

METHOD

The framework by De Geest et al. (2008) served as a basis for discussing the drivers for advanced midwife practitioner role implementation: the legal, policy and economic context, workforce issues, education, practice patterns, and healthcare needs of the population.

FINDINGS

A legal basis for advanced midwife practitioner role implementation is lacking in Belgium. Remuneration opportunities for the non-clinical part of these roles (e.g. leadership and innovation activities) are missing. It might be challenging for healthcare organisations to support the implementation of such roles, as immediate revenues of non-clinical activities are absent. However, sufficient potential resources are available to fill in future advanced midwife practitioner positions. Additionally, advanced midwife practitioner specific master programmes are being planned in the near future.

CONCLUSIONS

Although several barriers for the implementation of advanced midwife practitioner roles were identified, a discussion should be held on the opportunities of implementing these roles to facilitate the development of new models of care that meet current and future challenges in midwifery practice and healthcare. After initial discussions amongst midwives in academic, managerial, and policy positions, stakeholders such as obstetricians, general practitioners, associations representing healthcare organisations, and policy makers should be involved as a next step.

'I'm having a baby not a labour': Sense of coherence and women's attitudes towards labour and birth

OBJECTIVE

In Western countries, caesarean section rates are increasing and spontaneous vaginal birth rates are decreasing at a rapid rate. This trend has implications for childbearing women's health and calls into question the use of pathogenesis to frame maternity services. The theory and practice of salutogenesis offers a viable alternative as it emphasises health rather than illness. Sense of coherence and generalized resistant resources (GRRs) are the cornerstones of salutogenesis and sense of coherence is a predictive indicator of health. As strong sense of coherence in pregnant women is associated with half the likelihood of caesarean section compared to women with weak sense of coherence, the objective of this study is to examine the association between sense of coherence and women's attitude towards their birthing experiences.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This paper reports on the qualitative component only of a longitudinal study where 753 women planning to have their babies in an Australian tertiary maternity service, completed questionnaires in pregnancy and postnatally. Women answered one openended question during the pregnancy and one open-ended question approximately eight weeks postnatally. Data were analysed by qualitative content analysis.

FINDINGS

When the open-text responses of 119 women with strong sense of coherence and 177 women with weak sense of coherence were analysed, the categories of Language, Demeanour and Focus were identified. Women with strong sense of coherence have a positive, relaxed and baby-focused attitude. In salutogenic terms this attitude towards labour and birth can be described as increased comprehensibility, increased manageability, decreased meaningfulness in the experience of giving birth, increased internal GRRs and increased external GRRs. Women with weak sense of coherence have a more negative, worried and labour-focused attitude. In salutogenic terms this attitude towards labour and birth can be described as decreased comprehensibility, decreased manageability, increased meaningfulness in the experience of giving birth, decreased internal GRRs and decreased external GRRs.

KEY CONCLUSION

Strong sense of coherence in childbearing women is expressed through a positive, relaxed and baby-focused attitude while weak sense of coherence is expressed through negative, worried and labour-focused attitude in childbearing women towards labour and birth.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

As sense of coherence is a modifiable predictor of health, application of the study findings could focus on midwifery work including antenatal education that aims to decrease caesarean section rates by strengthening women's sense of coherence in pregnancy.

Comparison of demographic factors and selected maternity care variables in women who chose midwife-led or obstetrician-led antenatal care respectively

Introduction. The midwife profession is an independent profession, entitled to provide part of the services of gynaecology and obstetrics. Women whose pregnancy goes in a physiological way may benefit from midwife-led services as part of the benefits refunded by the National Health Fund. This model makes it possible to maintain continuity of care, considered a beneficial solution in the area of mother and child health.

Aim. Determination of the scale of the phenomenon of midwife-led antenatal care in Poland and comparison of groups of women actively using the Internet who chose midwife-led or doctor-led antenatal care.

Material and methods. The survey was carried out in February-March 2018. The research tool was an electronic questionnaire. Questions regarding socio-demographic factors of pregnancy, antenatal education, labour, intervention during labour and labour experience described by women-Internet users were used for the purpose of the analysis. The Chi-square test of independence, the Fisher’s Exact Test and the Mann-Whitney U test were used to develop the results.

Results and conclusions. The prenatal care of midwives is not a common phenomenon in Poland. Groups of women who decide on a different form of midwife-led or doctor-led antenatal care differ mainly in the material situation. Women choosing midwifeled antenatal care more often attend antenatal classes and prepare a birth plan. In order to popularize the model of antenatal care provided by midwives, attempts should be made to study the motivation of women who decide on an alternative antenatal care.

Cost-effectiveness of continuity of midwifery care for women with complex pregnancy: a structured review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Critical evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and clinical effectiveness of continuity of midwifery care models for women experiencing complex pregnancy is an important consideration in the review and reform of maternity services. Most studies either focus on women who experience healthy pregnancy or mixed risk samples. These results may not be generalised across the childbearing continuum to women with risk factors. This review critically evaluates studies that measure the cost of care for women with complex pregnancies, with a focus on method and quality.

AIMS / OBJECTIVES

To critically appraise and summarise the evidence relating to the combined cost-effectiveness, resource use and clinical effectiveness of midwifery continuity models for women who experience complex pregnancies and their babies in developed countries.

DESIGN

Structured review of the literature utilising a matrix method to critique the methods and quality of studies.

METHOD

A search of Medline, CINAHL, MIDIRS, DARE, EMBASE, OVID, PubMed, ProQuest, Informit, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHSEED) for the years 1994 - 2018 was conducted.

RESULTS

Nine articles met the inclusion criteria. The review identified four areas of economic evaluation that related to women who experienced complex pregnancy and continuity of midwifery care. (1) cost and clinical effectiveness comparisons between continuity of midwifery care versus obstetric-led units; (2) cost of continuity of midwifery care and/or team midwifery compared to Standard Care; (3) cost-effectiveness of continuity of midwifery care for Australian Aboriginal women versus standard care; (4) patterns of antenatal care for women of high obstetric risk and comparative provider cost. Cost savings specific to women from high risk samples who received continuity of midwifery care compared with obstetric-led standard care was stated for only one study in the review. Kenny et al. 1994 identified cost savings of AUS $29 in the antenatal period for women who received the midwifery team model from a stratified sub-set of high-risk pregnant woman within a mixed risk sample of 446 women. One systematic review relevant to the UK context, Ryan et al. (2013), applied sensitivity analysis to include women of all risk categories. Where risk ratio for overall fetal/neonatal death was systematically varied based on the 95% confidence interval of 0.79 to 1.09 from pooled studies, the aggregate annual net monetary benefit for continuity of midwifery care ranged extremely widely from an estimated gain of £472 million to a loss of £202 million. Net health benefit ranged from an annual gain of 15 723 QALYs to a loss of 6 738 QALYs. All other studies in this review reported cost savings narratively or within mixed risk samples where risk stratification was not clearly stated or related to the midwifery team model only.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies that measure the cost of continuity of midwifery care for women with complex pregnancy across the childbearing continuum are limited and apply inconsistent methods of economic evaluation. The cost and outcomes of implementing continuity of midwifery care for women with complex pregnancy is an important issue that requires further investigation. Robust cost-effectiveness evidence is essential to inform decision makers, to implement sustainable systems change in comparative maternity models for pregnant women at risk and to address health inequity.

Through the resident lens: examining knowledge and attitudes about midwifery among physician trainees

Interprofessional collaboration optimizes maternal-newborn outcomes and satisfaction with care. Since 2002, midwives have provided an increasing proportion of maternity care in British Columbia (BC). Midwives often collaborate with and/or refer to physicians; but no study to date has explored Canadian medical trainees' exposure to, knowledge of, and attitudes towards midwifery practice. We designed an online cross-sectional questionnaire that included a scale to measure attitudes towards midwifery (13 items) and residents' knowledge of midwifery (94 items across 5 domains). A multi-disciplinary expert panel rated each item for importance, relevance, and clarity. The survey was distributed to family medicine (n = 338) and obstetric (n = 40) residents in BC. We analyzed responses from 114 residents. Residents with more favourable exposures to midwifery during their education had significantly more positive attitudes towards midwives (rs = 0.32, p = 0.007). We also found a significant positive correlation between residents' attitudes towards midwifery and four of five knowledge domains: scope of practice (rs = 0.41, p < 0.001); content of education (rs = 0.30, p = 0.002), equipment midwives carry to home births (rs = 0.30, p = 0.004) and tests that midwives can order (rs = 0.39, p < 0.001). The most unfavourable exposures were observing interprofessional conversations (66.2%), and providing inpatient consultations for midwives (61.4%). Findings suggest increased interprofessional education may foster improved midwife-physician collaboration. Abbreviations: BC - British Columbia; UBC - University of British Columbia.

A Literature Review of Midwifery-Led Care in Reducing Labor and Birth Interventions

Certified nurse-midwives are usually recognized as independently practicing advanced practice registered nurses because they provide maternity care to pregnant women in various states. In the United States, certified nurse-midwives are historically underused. Culture favors physician-led care, with 90% of all births attended by physicians. Midwifery-led care is considered high-touch/low-intervention and is guided by a philosophy of care that regards pregnancy and childbirth as normal life events for most women. Evidence from the literature supports midwifery-led care as being safe, effective, and associated with fewer interventions.

Psychosocial Factors of Health Professionals' Intention to Use a Decision Aid for Down Syndrome Screening: Cross-Sectional Quantitative Study

Background

Decisions about prenatal screening for Down syndrome are difficult for women, as they entail risk, potential loss, and regret. Shared decision making increases women’s knowledge of their choices and better aligns decisions with their values. Patient decision aids foster shared decision making but are rarely used in this context.

Objective

One of the most promising strategies for implementing shared decision making is distribution of decision aids by health professionals. We aimed to identify factors influencing their intention to use a DA during prenatal visit for decisions about Down syndrome screening.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional quantitative study. Using a Web panel, we conducted a theory-based survey of health professionals in Quebec province (Canada). Eligibility criteria were as follows: (1) family physicians, midwives, obstetrician-gynecologists, or trainees in these professions; (2) involved in prenatal care; and (3) working in Quebec province. Participants watched a video depicting a health professional using a decision aid during a prenatal consultation with a woman and her partner, and then answered a questionnaire based on an extended version of the theory of planned behavior, including some of the constructs of the theoretical domains framework. The questionnaire assessed 8 psychosocial constructs (attitude, anticipated regret, subjective norm, self-identity, moral norm, descriptive norm, self-efficacy, and perceived control), 7 related sets of behavioral beliefs (advantages, disadvantages, emotions, sources of encouragement or discouragement, incentives, facilitators, and barriers), and sociodemographic data. We performed descriptive, bivariate, and multiple linear regression analyses to identify factors influencing health professionals’ intention to use a decision aid.

Results

Among 330 health professionals who completed the survey, 310 met the inclusion criteria: family physicians, 55.2% (171/310); obstetrician-gynecologists, 33.8% (105/310); and midwives, 11.0% (34/310). Of these, 80.9% were female (251/310). Mean age was 39.6 (SD 11.5) years. Less than half were aware of any decision aids at all. In decreasing order of importance, factors influencing their intention to use a decision aid for Down syndrome prenatal screening were as follows: self-identity (beta=.325, P<.001), attitude (beta=.297, P<.001), moral norm (beta=.288, P<.001), descriptive norm (beta=.166, P<.001), and anticipated regret (beta=.099, P=.003). Underlying behavioral beliefs significantly related to intention were that the use of a decision aid would promote decision making (beta=.117, 95% CI 0.043-0.190), would reassure health professionals (beta=.100, 95% CI 0.024-0.175), and might require more time than planned for the consultation (beta=−.077, 95% CI −0.124 to −0.031).

Conclusions

We identified psychosocial factors that could influence health professionals’ intention to use a decision aid about Down syndrome screening. Strategies should remind them of the following: (1) using a decision aid for this purpose should be a common practice, (2) it would be expected of someone in their societal role, (3) the experience of using it will be satisfying and reassuring, and (4) it is likely to be compatible with their moral values.

Health policies for the reduction of obstetric interventions in singleton full-term births in Catalonia

AIM

To explore the effect of hospital's characteristics in the proportion of obstetric interventions (OI) performed in singleton fullterm births (SFTB) in Catalonia (2010-2014), while incentives were employed to reduce C-sections.

METHODS

Data about SFTB assisted at 42 public hospitals were extracted from the dataset of hospital discharges. Hospitals were classified according to the level of complexity, the volume of births attended, and the adoption of a non-medicalized delivery (NMD) strategy. The annual average change in the percentage for OI was calculated based on Poisson regression models.

RESULTS

The rate of OI (35% of all SFTB) including C-sections (20.6%) remained stable through the period. Hospitals attending less complex cases had a lower average of OI, while hospitals attending lower volumes had the highest average. Higher levels of complexity increased the use of C-sections (+4% yearly) and forceps (+16%). The adoption of the NMD strategy decreased the rate of C-sections.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of OI, including C-sections, remained stable in spite of public incentives to reduce them. The adoption of the NMD strategy could help in decreasing the rate of OI. To reduce the OI rate, new strategies should be launched as the development of low-risk pregnancies units, alignment of incentives and hospital payment, increased value of incentives and encouragement of a cultural shift towards non-medicalized births.

Enhancing the professional dignity of midwives: A phenomenological study

Background:

When midwives are not treated with respect and their professional competencies are not recognised, their professional dignity is violated.

Objective:

This study explored and described how the professional dignity of midwives in the selected hospital can be enhanced based on their experiences.

Research design:

A descriptive phenomenological research design was used with in-depth interviews conducted with 15 purposely selected midwives.

Ethical considerations:

The Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee of the University of Pretoria approved the study. The research was conducted in an academic tertiary hospital with voluntary participants.

Findings:

To dignify midwives it is essential to enhance the following: ‘to acknowledge the capabilities of midwives’, ‘to appreciate interventions of midwives’, ‘to perceive midwives as equal health team members’, ‘to invest in midwives’, ‘to enhance collegiality’, ‘to be cared for by management’ and ‘to create conducive environments’.

Conclusion:

The professional dignity of midwives is determined by their own perspectives of the contribution that they make to the optimal care of patients, the respect that they get from others and the support that hospital management gives them. With support and care, midwives’ professional dignity is enhanced. Midwives will strive to render excellent services as well as increasing their commitment.

A ten-year study of midwife-led care at an Austrian tertiary care center: a retrospective analysis with special consideration of perineal trauma

BACKGROUND

In contrast to other countries, Austria rarely offers alternative models to medical led-care. In an attempt to improve the facilities, a midwife-led care service was incorporated within the Department of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine. The aim of the present study was to analyze the maternal and neonatal outcomes of this approach.

METHODS

Over a 10-years period, a total of 2123 low-risk women receiving midwife-led care were studied. Among these women, 148 required obstetric referral. Age- and parity matched low-risk women with spontaneous vaginal birth overseen by an obstetrician-led team were used as controls to ensure comparability of data.

RESULTS

Midwife-led care management demonstrated a significant decrease in interventions, including oxytocin use (p < 0.001), medical pain relief (p < 0.001), and artificial rupture of membranes (ARM) (p < 0.01) as well as fewer episiotomies (p < 0.001), as compared with obstetrician-led care. Moreover, no negative effects on maternal or neonatal outcomes were observed. The mean length of the second stage of labor, rate of perineal laceration and APGAR scores did not differ significantly between the study groups (p > 0.05). Maternal age (p < 0.01), head diameter (p < 0.001), birth weight (p < 0.001) and the absence of midwife-led care (p < 0.05) were independent risk factors for perineal trauma. The overall referral rate was low (7%) and was most commonly caused by pathologic cardiotocography (CTG) and prolonged first- and second-stage of labor. Most referred mothers nevertheless had spontaneous deliveries (77%), and there were low rates of vaginal operative deliveries and cesarean sections (vacuum extraction, 16%; cesarean section, 7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study confirmed that midwife-led care confers important benefits and causes no adverse outcomes for mother and child. The favorable obstetrical outcome clearly highlights the importance of the selection of obstetric care, on the basis of previous risk assessment. We therefore fully support the recommendation that midwife-led care be offered to all low-risk women and that mothers should be encouraged to use this option. However, to increase the numbers of midwife-led care deliveries in Austria in the future, it will be necessary to expand this care model and to establish new midwife-led care units within hospital facilities.

Birth setting, labour experience, and postpartum psychological distress

OBJECTIVE

although psychosocial risk factors have been identified for postpartum depression (PPD) and perinatal posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the role of labour- and birth-related factors remains unclear. The present investigation explored the impact of birth setting, subjective childbirth experience, and their interplay, on PPD and postpartum PTSD.

METHOD

in this prospective longitudinal cohort study, three groups of women who had vaginal births at a tertiary care hospital, a birthing center, and those transferred from the birthing centre to the tertiary care hospital were compared. Participants were followed twice during pregnancy (12-14 and 32-34 weeks gestation) and twice after childbirth (1-3 and 7-9 weeks postpartum).

RESULTS

symptoms of PPD and PTSD did not significantly differ between birth groups; however, measures of subjective childbirth experience and obstetric factors did. Moderation analyses indicated a significant interaction between pain and birth group, such that higher ratings of pain among women who were transferred was associated with greater symptoms of postpartum PTSD.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

women who are transferred appear to have a unique experience that may put them at greater risk for postpartum psychological distress. It may be beneficial for care providers to help prepare women for pain management and potential unexpected complications, particularly if it is their first childbirth.

Midwife-led maternity care in Ireland - a retrospective cohort study

Background

Midwife-led maternity care is shown to be safe for women with low-risk during pregnancy. In Ireland, two midwife-led units (MLUs) were introduced in 2004 when a randomised controlled trial (the MidU study) was performed to compare MLU care with consultant-led care (CLU). Following study completion the two MLUs have remained as a maternity care option in Ireland. The aim of this study was to evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes and transfer rates during six years in the larger of the MLU sites.

Methods

MLU data for the six years 2008–2013 were retrospectively analysed, following ethical approval. Rates of transfer, reasons for transfer, mode of birth, and maternal and fetal outcomes were assessed. Linear-by-Linear Association trend analysis was used for categorical data to evaluate trends over the years and one-way ANOVA was used when comparing continuous variables.

Results

During the study period, 3,884 women were registered at the MLU. The antenatal transfer rate was 37.4% and 2,410 women came to labour in the MLU. Throughout labour and birth, 567 women (14.6%) transferred to the CLU, of which 23 were transferred after birth due to need for suturing or postpartum hemorrhage. The most common reasons for intrapartum transfer were meconium stained liquor/abnormal fetal heart rate (30.3%), delayed labour progress in first or second stage (24.9%) and woman’s wish for epidural analgesia (15.1%). Of the 1,903 babies born in the MLU, 1,878 (98.7%) were spontaneous vaginal births and 25 (1.3%) were instrumental (ventouse/forceps). Only 25 babies (1.3%) were admitted to neonatal intensive care unit.

All spontaneous vaginal births from the MLU registered population, occurring in the study period in both the MLU and CLU settings (n = 2,785), were compared. In the MLU more often 1–2 midwives (90.9% vs 69.7%) cared for the women during birth, more women had three vaginal examinations or fewer (93.6% vs 79.9%) and gave birth in an upright position (standing, squatting or kneeling) (52.0% vs 9.4%), fewer women had an amniotomy (5.9% vs 25.9%) or episiotomy (3.4% vs 9.7%) and more women had a physiological management of third stage of labour (50.9% vs 4.6%).

Conclusions

Midwife-led care is a safe option that could be offered to a large proportion of healthy pregnant women. With strict transfer criteria there are very few complications during labour and birth. Maternity units without the option of MLU care should consider its introduction.

First-time mothers' choice of birthplace: influencing factors, expectations of the midwife's role and perceived safety

AIM

To explore first-time pregnant women's expectations and factors influencing their choice of birthplace.

BACKGROUND

Although outcomes and advantages for low-risk childbearing women giving birth in midwifery-led units and home compared with obstetric units have been investigated previously, there is little information on the factors that influence women's choice of place of birth.

DESIGN

A qualitative Straussian grounded theory methodology was adopted. Fourteen women expecting their first baby were recruited from three large National Health Service organizations that provided maternity services free at the point of care. The three organizations offered the following birthplace options: home, freestanding midwifery unit and obstetric unit. Ethical approvals were obtained and informed consent was gained from each participant.

METHODS

Data collection was undertaken in 2013-2014. One tape-recorded face-to-face semistructured interview was conducted with each woman in the third trimester of pregnancy.

FINDINGS

Findings are presented as three main themes: (i) influencing factors on the choice of birthplace; (ii) expectations on the midwife's 'being' and 'doing' roles; (iii) perceptions of safety.

CONCLUSION

Midwives should consider each woman's expectations and approach to birth beyond the planned birthplace, as these are often influenced by the intersection of various influencing factors. Several birthplace options should be made available to women in each maternity service and the alternatives should be shared with women by healthcare professionals during pregnancy to allow an informed choice. Virtual tours or visits to the birth units could also be offered to women to help them familiarize with the chosen setting.

Cesarean Outcomes in US Birth Centers and Collaborating Hospitals: A Cohort Comparison

INTRODUCTION

High rates of cesarean birth are a significant health care quality issue, and birth centers have shown potential to reduce rates of cesarean birth. Measuring this potential is complicated by lack of randomized trials and limited observational comparisons. Cesarean rates vary by provider type, setting, and clinical and nonclinical characteristics of women, but our understanding of these dynamics is incomplete.

METHODS

We sought to isolate labor setting from other risk factors in order to assess the effect of birth centers on the odds of cesarean birth. We generated low-risk cohorts admitted in labor to hospitals (n = 2527) and birth centers (n = 8776) using secondary data obtained from the American Association of Birth Centers (AABC). All women received prenatal care in the birth center and midwifery care in labor, but some chose hospital admission for labor. Analysis was intent to treat according to site of admission in spontaneous labor. We used propensity score adjustment and multivariable logistic regression to control for cohort differences and measured effect sizes associated with setting.

RESULTS

There was a 37% (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.79) to 38% (adjusted OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49-0.79) decreased odds of cesarean in the birth center cohort and a remarkably low overall cesarean rate of less than 5% in both cohorts.

DISCUSSION

These findings suggest that low rates of cesarean in birth centers are not attributable to labor setting alone. The entire birth center care model, including prenatal preparation and relationship-based midwifery care, should be studied, promoted, and implemented by policy makers interested in achieving appropriate cesarean rates in the United States.

Working together for women’s empowerment: Strategies for interdisciplinary collaboration in perinatal care

Women’s experiences of pregnancy, birth, and postpartum adjustment are often characterized by feelings of disempowerment, trauma, and emotional pain. Psychosocial perinatal care has not kept up with medical advances in perinatal care. Access to psychosocial care appears to be inadequate because of the following: (a) perinatal health care providers are insufficiently prepared to address emotional aspects of maternal care and (b) traditional, compartmentalized psychological services benefit only a subsection of perinatal women, often in an untimely manner. Practical and innovative psychosocial services, integrated into routine perinatal care, can provide widespread access to psychosocial resources for mothers and supports providers in delivering optimal care.

Preventing deaths due to haemorrhage

Prevention of deaths from obstetric haemorrhage requires effective health systems including family planning, commodities, personnel, infrastructure and ultimately universal access to comprehensive obstetric care for women giving birth. The main causes of death associated with antepartum haemorrhage are placental abruption, placenta praevia and uterine rupture. Preventive measures include preconceptual folate supplementation, management of hypertensive disorders, early diagnosis of placenta praevia and use of uterine stimulants cautiously, particularly misoprostol. Preventive measures for post-partum haemorrhage include routine active management of the third stage of labour. Treatment involves a cascade of increasingly invasive interventions in rapid sequence until the bleeding is stopped. These interventions include fluid resuscitation, removal of the placenta, bimanual uterine compression, uterotonics, tranexamic acid, suturing of lower genital tract injury, blood product replacement, balloon tamponade, laparotomy, stepwise uterine devascularization, uterine compression sutures and hysterectomy. Emergency temporizing measures include application of the non-pneumatic anti-shock garment, and at laparotomy, aortic compression and uterine tourniquet application. The effectiveness of treatment methods and the optimal dosage of misoprostol are research priorities. Interesting new approaches include transvaginal uterine artery clamping and suction uterine tamponade.

The kaleidoscopic midwife: A conceptual metaphor illustrating first-time mothers' perspectives of a good midwife during childbirth. A grounded theory study

BACKGROUND

The literature review reveals general information about a good midwife from a range of perspectives and what childbearing women generally value in a midwife, but there is a lack of information around mothers' perspectives of what makes a good midwife specifically during labour and birth, and even less in the context of different places of birth.

AIM

To conceptualise first-time mothers' expectations and experiences of a good midwife during childbirth in the context of different birthplaces.

DESIGN

Qualitative Straussian grounded theory methodology.

SETTING

Three National Health Service Trusts in England providing maternity care that offered women the possibility of giving birth in different settings (home, freestanding midwifery unit and obstetric unit).

PARTICIPANTS

Fourteen first-time mothers in good general health with a straightforward singleton pregnancy anticipating a normal birth.

METHODS

Ethical approval was gained. Data were collected through two semi-structured interviews for each participant (before and after birth). Data analysis included the processes of coding and conceptualising data, with constant comparison between data, literature and memos.

FINDINGS

The model named 'The kaleidoscopic midwife: a conceptual metaphor illustrating first-time mothers' perspectives of a good midwife during childbirth' was developed. The model is dynamic and woman-centred, and is operationalised as the midwife adapts to each woman's individual needs in the context of each specific labour. Four pillars of intrapartum care were identified for a good midwife in the labour continuum: promoting individuality; supporting embodied limbo; helping to go with the flow; providing information and guidance. The metaphor of a kaleidoscopic figure is used to describe a midwife who is 'multi-coloured' and ever changing in the light of the woman's individual needs, expectations and labour journey, in order to create an environment that enables her to move forward despite the uncertainty and the expectations-experiences gap. The following elements are harmonised by the kaleidoscopic midwife: relationship-mediated being; knowledgeable doing; physical presence; immediately available presence.

CONCLUSION

The model presented has relevance to contemporary debates about quality of care and place of birth and can be used by midwives to pursue excellence in caring for labouring mothers. Independently from the place of birth, when the woman is cared for by a midwife demonstrating the above characteristics, she is likely to have an optimum experience of birth. Future research is necessary to tease out individual components of the model in a variety of practice settings.

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.

Barriers and facilitators related to implementation of regulated midwifery in Manitoba: a case study

BACKGROUND

In 2000, midwifery was regulated in the Canadian Province of Manitoba. Since the establishment of the midwifery program, little formal research has analyzed the utilization of regulated midwifery services. In Manitoba, the demand for midwifery services has exceeded the number of midwives in practice. The specific objective of this study was to explore factors influencing the implementation and utilization of regulated midwifery services in Manitoba.

METHODS

The case study design incorporated qualitative exploratory descriptive methods, using data derived from two sources: interviews and public documents. Twenty-four key informants were purposefully selected to participate in semi-structured in-depth interviews. All documents analyzed were in the public domain. Content analysis was employed to analyze the documents and transcripts of the interviews.

RESULTS

The results of the study were informed by the Behavioral Model of Health Services Use. Three main topic areas were explored: facilitators, barriers, and future strategies and recommendations. The most common themes arising under facilitators were funding of midwifery services and strategies to integrate the profession. Power and conflict, and lack of a productive education program emerged as the most prominent themes under barriers. Finally, future strategies for sustaining the midwifery profession focused on ensuring avenues for registration and education, improving management strategies and accountability frameworks within the employment model, enhancing the work environment, and evaluating both the practice and employment models. Results of the document analysis supported the themes arising from the interviews.

CONCLUSION

These findings on factors that influenced the implementation and integration of midwifery in Manitoba may provide useful information to key stakeholders in Manitoba, as well as other provinces as they work toward successful implementation of regulated midwifery practice. Funding for new positions and programs was consistently noted as a successful strategy. While barriers such as structures of power within Regional Health Authorities and inter and intra-professional conflict were identified, the lack of a productive midwifery education program emerged as the most prominent barrier. This new knowledge highlights issues that impact the ongoing growth and capacity of the midwifery profession and suggests directions for ensuring its sustainability.

Costing Alternative Birth Settings for Women at Low Risk of Complications: A Systematic Review

Background

There is demand from women for alternatives to giving birth in a standard hospital setting however access to these services is limited. This systematic review examines the literature relating to the economic evaluations of birth setting for women at low risk of complications.

Methods

Searches of the literature to identify economic evaluations of different birth settings of the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EconLit, Business Source Complete and Maternity and Infant care. Relevant English language publications were chosen using keywords and MeSH terms between 1995 and 2015. Inclusion criteria included studies focussing on the comparison of birth setting. Data were extracted with respect to study design, perspective, PICO principles, and resource use and cost data.

Results

Eleven studies were included from Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, the USA, and the UK. Four studies compared costs between homebirth and the hospital setting and the remaining seven focussed on the cost of birth centre care and the hospital setting. Six studies used a cost-effectiveness analysis and the remaining five studies used cost analysis and cost comparison methods. Eight of the 11 studies found a cost saving in the alternative settings. Two found no difference in the cost of the alternative settings and one found an increase in birth centre care.

Conclusions

There are few studies that compare the cost of birth setting. The variation in the results may be attributable to the cost data collection processes, difference in health systems and differences in which costs were included. A better understanding of the cost of birth setting is needed to inform policy makers and service providers.

Sense of coherence and women׳s birthing outcomes: A longitudinal survey

BACKGROUND

in Western countries, caesarean section rates are increasing at an alarming rate. This trend has implications for women׳s health and calls into question the use of pathogenesis to frame maternity services. The theory of salutogenesis offers an alternative as it focuses on health rather than illness. Sense of coherence (SOC), the cornerstone of salutogenesis, is a predictive indicator of health. This study aimed to explore associations between pregnant women׳s SOC, their birthing outcomes and factors associated with SOC changes.

METHODS

a longitudinal survey was conducted where women completed a questionnaire in the antenatal and postnatal period. Questionnaire one provided information on SOC scores, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) scores, Support Behaviour Inventory (SBI) scores, pregnancy choices and demographics. Questionnaire two provided information on SOC scores, EPDS scores and birthing outcomes.

FINDINGS

1074 women completed questionnaire one and 753 women completed questionnaire two. Compared to women with low antenatal SOC, women with high antenatal SOC were less likely to experience caesarean section (OR 0.437 95% CI 0.209-0.915) and more likely to experience assisted vaginal birth (AVB) (OR 3.108 95% CI 1.557-6.203). Higher birth satisfaction, higher antenatal EPDS scores and lower antenatal SOC were associated with an increase in SOC. Epidural, AVB and decreased birth satisfaction were associated with a decrease in SOC.

CONCLUSION

high sense of coherence in pregnant women is associated with half the likelihood of caesarean section compared to women with low sense of coherence. Women׳s sense of coherence is raised and lowered by degree of satisfaction with their births and lowered by some labour interventions.

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.

The contributions of maternity care to reducing adverse pregnancy outcomes: a cohort study in Dabat district, northwest Ethiopia

This study was designed to evaluate the effect of maternity care by skilled providers on the occurrence of adverse pregnancy outcomes. A community-based cohort study was conducted at Dabat district, northwest Ethiopia, from December 1, 2011 to August 31, 2012. During the study period, 763 pregnant women were registered and followed until 42 days of their postpartum period. Use of skilled maternal care was the exposure variable. Reductions in occurrence of serious complications or death (adverse pregnancy outcomes) were used as outcome indicators. Data was collected at four time points; first contact, during the 9th month of pregnancy, within 1 week after delivery and at 42 days of postpartum. The effects of the exposure variable were evaluated by controlling potential confounders using logistic regression. One hundred and fifty-three (21%) of the women encountered at least one obstetric complication or death during delivery and postpartum period. Hemorrhage and prolonged labor were the major types. Pregnancy outcomes for 41 women (5.6%) were fetal, neonatal, or maternal deaths. Four or more ANC (antenatal care) visits, <4 ANC visits and delivery by skilled attendant showed 25% (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.25, 2.75), 9% (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.43, 1.69) and 31% (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.36, 1.33) reduction in the occurrence of adverse pregnancy outcomes, respectively. Skilled maternal care showed reduction in adverse pregnancy outcomes (complications and deaths). However, the associations were not significant. Improving the quality of maternity care services and ensuring continuum of care in the health care system are imperative for effective maternal health care in the study area.

Exploration of preterm birth rates associated with different models of antenatal midwifery care in Scotland: Unmatched retrospective cohort analysis

OBJECTIVES

preterm birth represents a significant personal, clinical, organisational and financial burden. Strategies to reduce the preterm birth rate have had limited success. Limited evidence indicates that certain antenatal care models may offer some protection, although the causal mechanism is not understood. We sought to compare preterm birth rates for mixed-risk pregnant women accessing antenatal care organised at a freestanding midwifery unit (FMU) and mixed-risk pregnant women attending an obstetric unit (OU) with related community-based antenatal care.

METHODS

unmatched retrospective 4-year Scottish cohort analysis (2008-2011) of mixed-risk pregnant women accessing (i) FMU antenatal care (n=1107); (ii) combined community-based and OU antenatal care (n=7567). Data were accessed via the Information and Statistics Division of the NHS in Scotland. Aggregates analysis and binary logistic regression were used to compare the cohorts׳ rates of preterm birth; and of spontaneous labour onset, use of pharmacological analgesia, unassisted vertex birth, and low birth weight. Odds ratios were adjusted for age, parity, deprivation score and smoking status in pregnancy.

FINDINGS

after adjustment the 'mixed risk' FMU cohort had a statistically significantly reduced risk of preterm birth (5.1% [n=57] versus 7.7% [n=583]; AOR 0.73 [95% CI 0.55-0.98]; p=0.034). Differences in these secondary outcome measures were also statistically significant: spontaneous labour onset (FMU 83.9% versus OU 74.6%; AOR 1.74 [95% CI 1.46-2.08]; p<0.001); minimal intrapartum analgesia (FMU 53.7% versus OU 34.4%; AOR 2.17 [95% CI 1.90-2.49]; p<0.001); spontaneous vertex delivery (FMU 71.9% versus OU 63.5%; AOR 1.46 [95% CI 1.32-1.78]; p<0.001). Incidence of low birth weight was not statistically significant after adjustment for other variables. There was no significant difference in the rate of perinatal or neonatal death.

CONCLUSIONS

given this study׳s methodological limitations, we can only claim associations between the care model and or chosen outcomes. Although both cohorts were mixed risk, differences in risk levels could have contributed to these findings. Nevertheless, the significant difference in preterm birth rates in this study resonates with other research, including the recent Cochrane review of midwife-led continuity models. Because of the multiplicity of risk factors for preterm birth we need to explore the salient features of the FMU model which may be contributing to this apparent protective effect. Because a randomised controlled trial would necessarily restrict choice to pregnant women, we feel that this option is problematic in exploring this further. We therefore plan to conduct a prospective matched cohort analysis together with a survey of unit practices and experiences.

Is induction of labour by Propess(®) safe? A comparison of midwife-led versus obstetrician-led labour management

This retrospective study compared maternal and fetal outcomes after labour induction, using a dinoprostone vaginal pessary (Propess(®)) in midwife-led and obstetrician-led labour management. Labour induction outcomes, delivery mode and rates of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit were compared. A total of 405 women, 40.5% (n = 164) from midwife-led units and 59.5% (n = 241) from an obstetrician-led unit, participated. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in caesarean section rate or neonatal intensive care unit admission rates (p = 0.789 and 0.769, respectively). Non-reassuring fetal non-stress test and uterine hyperstimulation risks were higher in the obstetrician-led unit (p = 0.003 and 0.001, respectively, and odds ratio (OR) 0.165, 95% CI: 0.117-0.232 and OR 0.218, 95% CI: 0.078-0.611, respectively). Postpartum blood transfusion rate was higher in the midwife-led units (p = 0.002, OR 8.082, 95% CI: 1.879-39.292). Labour induction with Propess(®) is safe during both midwife-led and obstetrician-led labour management.

A comparison of frequency of medical interventions and birth outcomes between the midwife led unit and the obstetric unit in low-risk primiparous women

Introduction: The purpose of this national research was to compare birth, maternal and newborn outcomes in the midwife led unit and the obstetric unit to ascertain whether a midwife led unit reduced medicalisation of childbirth. Methods: A prospective observational case-control study was carried out in Ljubljana Maternity Hospital in the period May - August 2013. The sample comprised 497 labouring women; 154 who attended the midwife led and 343 who attended in the obstetric unit, both matching the same inclusion criteria: low risk primiparous; singleton term pregnancies, normal foetal heart beat, cephalic presentation; spontaneous onset of labour. The primary outcome was the caesarean section rate. Chi-square test was used to compare medical interventions and birth outcomes. Results: Women in the midwife led unit had statistically significant higher spontaneous vaginal births (p < 0.001), less augmentation with oxytocin (p < 0.001), less use of analgesia (p < 0.001), less operative vaginal deliveries (p < 0.001) and less caesarean sections (p < 0.001), lower rates of episiotomy (p < 0.001) and more exclusively breastfed (p = 0.002). Discussion and conclusion: These significant findings showed that in the midwife led unit fewer medical interventions were used. For generalisation of the findings more similar studies in Slovenia are needed.

An Exploratory Survey of Low-Risk Pregnant Women’s Perceptions of Antenatal Care and Services in Southern Ireland

Ireland currently has the highest birthrate of the 27 European Union countries which has led to an increase in demand for maternity services. In the Irish Republic, most maternity units have traditionally followed the medical-led model of care, which, as a result, has limited women’s choice for maternity care. Although various different midwifery-led schemes are available, concerns exist regarding the knowledge and accessibility of these schemes.

The aim of this descriptive, exploratory survey was to explore and determine the views of “low-risk” pregnant women (n= 394) regarding their antenatal care and services. A purposive homogeneous sample comprised the first phase of a mixed methods study and data were analyzed using Predictive Analytics Software. The findings identified a lack of awareness and understanding of the concept of a low-risk pregnancy. Consequently, women identified an overall lack of information and an inability to access available options for their 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 (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.

Exploring Professional Support Offered by Midwives during Labour: An Observation and Interview Study

Support in labour has an impact on the childbirth experience as well as on childbirth outcomes. Both social and professional support is needed. The aim of this study was to explore professional support offered by midwives during labour in relation to the supportive needs of the childbearing woman and her partner. The study used a qualitative, inductive design using triangulation, with observation followed by interviews. Seven midwives were observed when caring for seven women/couples in labour. After the observations, individual interviews with midwives, women, and their partners were conducted. Data were analysed using hermeneutical text interpretation. The results are presented with three themes. (1) Support as a professional task seems unclear and less well defined than medical controls. (2) Midwives and parents express somewhat different supportive ideas about how to create a sense of security. (3) Partner and midwife interact in support of the childbearing woman. The main interpretation shows that midwives' supportive role during labour could be understood as them mainly adopting the "with institution" ideology in contrast to the "with woman" ideology. This may increase the risk of childbearing women and their partners perceiving lack of support during labour. There is a need to increase efficiency by providing support for professionals to adopt the "with woman" ideology.