Soo Downe

Midwifery and quality care: findings from a new evidence-informed framework for maternal and newborn care

In this first paper in a series of four papers on midwifery, we aimed to examine, comprehensively and systematically, the contribution midwifery can make to the quality of care of women and infants globally, and the role of midwives and others in providing midwifery care. Drawing on international definitions and current practice, we mapped the scope of midwifery. We then developed a framework for quality maternal and newborn care using a mixed-methods approach including synthesis of findings from systematic reviews of womens views and experiences, effective practices, and maternal and newborn care providers. The framework differentiates between what care is provided and how and by whom it is provided, and describes the care and services that childbearing women and newborn infants need in all settings. We identified more than 50 short-term, medium-term, and long-term outcomes that could be improved by care within the scope of midwifery; reduced maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity, reduced stillbirth and preterm birth, decreased number of unnecessary interventions, and improved psychosocial and public health outcomes. Midwifery was associated with more efficient use of resources and improved outcomes when provided by midwives who were educated, trained, licensed, and regulated. Our findings support a system-level shift from maternal and newborn care focused on identification and treatment of pathology for the minority to skilled care for all. This change includes preventive and supportive care that works to strengthen womens capabilities in the context of respectful relationships, is tailored to their needs, focuses on promotion of normal reproductive processes, and in which first-line management of complications and accessible emergency treatment are provided when needed. Midwifery is pivotal to this approach, which requires effective interdisciplinary teamwork and integration across facility and community settings. Future planning for maternal and newborn care systems can benefit from using the quality framework in planning workforce development and resource allocation.

Why Do Women Not Use Antenatal Services in Low- and Middle-Income Countries? A Meta-Synthesis of Qualitative Studies

In a synthesis of 21 qualitative studies representing the views of more than 1,230 women from 15 countries, Kenneth Finlayson and Soo Downe examine the reasons why many women in low- and middle-income countries do not receive adequate antenatal care.

Improvement of maternal and newborn health through midwifery

In the concluding paper of this Series about midwifery, we look at the policy implications from the framework for quality maternal and newborn care, the potential effect of life-saving interventions that fall within the scope of practice of midwives, and the historic sequence of health system changes that made a reduction in maternal mortality possible in countries that have expanded their midwifery workforce. Achievement of better health outcomes for women and newborn infants is possible, but needs improvements in the quality of reproductive, maternal, and newborn care, alongside necessary increases in universal coverage. In this report, we propose three priority research areas and outline how national investment in midwives and in their work environment, education, regulation, and management can improve quality of care. Midwifery and midwives are crucial to the achievement of national and international goals and targets in reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health; now and beyond 2015.

'Weighing up and balancing out': a meta-synthesis of barriers to antenatal care for marginalised women in high-income countries.

Background  In high‐resource settings around 20% of maternal deaths are attributed to women who fail to receive adequate antenatal care. Epidemiological evidence suggests many of these women belong to marginalised groups often living in areas of relative deprivation. Reasons for inadequate antenatal attendance have yet to be fully evaluated.

Stillbirths: economic and psychosocial consequences.

Despite the frequency of stillbirths, the subsequent implications are overlooked and underappreciated. We present findings from comprehensive, systematic literature reviews, and new analyses of published and unpublished data, to establish the effect of stillbirth on parents, families, health-care providers, and societies worldwide. Data for direct costs of this event are sparse but suggest that a stillbirth needs more resources than a livebirth, both in the perinatal period and in additional surveillance during subsequent pregnancies. Indirect and intangible costs of stillbirth are extensive and are usually met by families alone. This issue is particularly onerous for those with few resources. Negative effects, particularly on parental mental health, might be moderated by empathic attitudes of care providers and tailored interventions. The value of the baby, as well as the associated costs for parents, families, care providers, communities, and society, should be considered to prevent stillbirths and reduce associated morbidity.

Creating a Collaborative Culture in Maternity Care

Effective collaboration between professional groups is increasingly seen as an essential element in good quality and safe health care. This is especially important in the context of maternity care, where most women have straightforward labour and birth experiences, but some require rapid transfer between care providers and settings. This article presents current accounts of collaboration--or lack of it--in maternity care in the United Kingdom, United States, and Australia. It then examines tools designed to measure collaboration and teamwork within general health care contexts. Finally, a set of characteristics are proposed for effective collaboration in maternity care, as a basis for further empirical work in this area.

Bereaved parents' experience of stillbirth in UK hospitals: a qualitative interview study.

Objective To obtain the views of bereaved parents about their interactions with healthcare staff when their baby died just before or during labour. Design Qualitative in-depth interview study, following an earlier national survey. All interviews took place during 2011, either face-to-face or on the telephone. Data analysis was informed by the constant comparative technique from grounded theory. Setting Every National Health Service (NHS) region in the UK was represented. Participants Bereaved parents who had completed an e-questionnaire, via the website of Sands (Stillbirth and Neonatal Death Society). Of the 304 survey respondents who gave provisional consent, 29 families were approached to take part, based on maximum variation sampling and data saturation. Results 22 families (n=25) participated. Births took place between 2002 and 2010. Specific practices were identified that were particularly helpful to the parents. Respondents talked about their interactions with hospital staff as having profound effects on their capacity to cope, both during labour and in the longer term. The data generated three key themes: ‘enduring and multiple loss’: ‘making irretrievable moments precious’; and the ‘best care possible to the worst imaginable’. The overall synthesis of findings is encapsulated in the meta-theme ‘One chance to get it right.’ This pertains to the parents and family themselves, clinical and support staff who care for them directly, and the NHS organisations that indirectly provide the resources and governance procedures that may (or may not) foster a caring ethos. Conclusions Positive memories and outcomes following stillbirth depend as much on genuinely caring staff attitudes and behaviours as on high-quality clinical procedures. All staff who encounter parents in this situation need to see each meeting as their one chance to get it right.

A difficult conversation? The views and experiences of parents and professionals on the consent process for perinatal postmortem after stillbirth

Please cite this paper as: Heazell A, McLaughlin M, Schmidt E, Cox P, Flenady V, Khong T, Downe S. A difficult conversation? The views and experiences of parents and professionals on the consent process for perinatal postmortem after stillbirth. BJOG 2012;119:987–997.

A metasynthesis of midwives' experience of hospital practice in publicly funded settings: compliance, resistance and authenticity

Worldwide, increasing percentages of women are giving birth in centralized hospitals in the belief that this maximizes safety for themselves and their babies. In parallel, there is international recognition that the number of birth interventions used in the routine care of labouring women is rising. This is fuelling concern about iatrogenesis, and, particularly, maternal and infant morbidity and mortality. It also has an adverse impact on the economics of health care. National and international policy characterizes midwives as the guardians of normal childbirth. This guardianship appears to be failing. The objective of this metasynthesis is to explore midwives’ perceptions of hospital midwifery with a focus on labour ward practice to examine professional discourses around midwifery work in the current modernist, risk averse and consumerist childbirth context. Based on an iterative search strategy, 14 studies were selected for the metasynthesis. Three overarching themes were identified: ‘power and control’; ‘compliance with cultural norms’; and ‘attempting to normalize birth’. Most midwives aimed to provide what they characterized as ‘real midwifery’ but this intention was often overwhelmed with heavy workloads and the normative pressure to provide equitable care to all women. This raises questions of authenticity, both in terms of midwives living out their beliefs, and in terms of acknowledgement of the power to resist. The theoretical insights generated by the metasynthesis could have resonance for other professional and occupational groups who wish to offer autonomous individualized services in an increasingly risk-averse target driven global society.

A prospective randomised trial on the effect of position in the passive second stage of labour on birth outcome in nulliparous women using epidural analgesia

OBJECTIVE To determine whether the rate of instrumental birth in nulliparous women using epidural analgesia is affected by maternal position in the passive second stage of labour. DESIGN A pragmatic prospective randomised trial. SETTING Consultant maternity unit in the Midlands. PARTICIPANTS One hundred and seven nulliparous women using epidural analgesia and reaching the second stage of labour with no contraindications to spontaneous birth. INTERVENTIONS The lateral versus the supported sitting position during the passive second stage of labour. MEASUREMENTS Mode of birth, incidence of episiotomy, and perineal suturing. FINDINGS Recruitment was lower than anticipated (107 vs. 220 planned). Lateral position was associated with lower rates of instrumental birth rate (lateral group 33%; sitting group 52%; p=0.05, RR 0.64, CI for RR: 0.40-1.01; Number-needed-to-treat (NNT)=5), of episiotomy (45% vs. 64%; p=0.05, RR 0.66, CI for RR: 0.44-1.00, NNT=5), and of perineal suturing (78% vs. 86%; p=0.243, RR 0.75, CI for RR 0.47-1.17). The odds ratio for instrumental birth in the sitting group was 2.2 (CI 1.00-4.6). Logistic regression of potential confounder variables was undertaken, due to a large variation in maternal weight between the randomised groups. Of the nine possible confounders tested, only position of the babys head at full dilation affected the risk of instrumental birth significantly (p=0.4, OR 2.7 where the fetal head was in the lateral or posterior position). Maternal weight did not appear to have any effect. The odds ratio for instrumental delivery for women randomised to the sitting position was slightly higher within the logistic regression model (adjusted OR 2.3). KEY CONCLUSIONS Women randomised to the lateral position had a better chance of a spontaneous vaginal birth than those randomised to the supported sitting position. Position of the babies head at full dilation had an additional effect on mode of birth. These effects are not conclusively generalizable. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The lateral position is likely to be at best beneficial, and at the worst no less harmful than the sitting position for most women and their babies who meet the criteria set for this study. Conclusive evidence for or against the technique should be established using larger trials.