Designing a Midwife-Led Birth Center Program Based on the MAP-IT Model: A Sequential Explanatory Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades, medical supervision of the labor and delivery process has expanded beyond its boundaries to the extent that in many settings, childbirth has become a medical event. This situation has influenced midwifery care. One of the significant barriers to midwives providing care to pregnant women is the medicalization of childbirth. So far, the policies and programs of the Ministry of Health to reduce medical interventions and cesarean section rates have not been successful. Therefore, the current study aims to be conducted with the purpose of "Designing a Midwife-Led Birth Center Program Based on the MAP-IT Model". METHODS/DESIGN: The current study is a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design by using the MAP-IT model includes 5 steps: Mobilize, Assess, Plan, Implement, and Track, providing a framework for planning and evaluating public health interventions in a community. It will be implemented in three stages: The first phase of the research will be a cross-sectional descriptive study to determine the attitudes and preferences towards establishing a midwifery-led birthing center focusing on midwives and women of childbearing age by using two researcher-made questionnaires to assess the participants' attitudes and preferences toward establishing a midwifery-led birthing center. Subsequently, extreme cases will be selected based on the participants' average attitude scores toward establishing a midwifery-led birthing center in the quantitative section. In the second stage of the study, qualitative in-depth interviews will be conducted with the identified extreme cases from the first quantitative phase and other stakeholders (the first and second steps of the MAP-IT model, namely identifying and forming a stakeholder coalition, and assessing community resources and real needs). In this stage, the conventional qualitative content analysis approach will be used. Subsequently, based on the quantitative and qualitative data obtained up to this stage, a midwifery-led birthing center program based on the third step of the MAP-IT model, namely Plan, will be developed and validated using the Delphi method. DISCUSSION: This is the first study that uses a mixed-method approach for designing a midwife-led maternity care program based on the MAP-IT model. This study will fill the research gap in the field of improving midwife-led maternity care and designing a program based on the needs of a large group of pregnant mothers. We hope this program facilitates improved eligibility of midwifery to continue care to manage and improve their health easily and affordably. ETHICAL CODE: IR.MUMS.NURSE.REC. 1403. 014.

In recent decades, medical management of the labor and delivery process has extended beyond its limitations to the extent that in many settings, childbirth has become a medical event. This situation has influenced midwifery care. The global midwifery situation indicates that one in every five women worldwide gives birth without the support of a skilled attendant. One of the significant barriers to midwives providing care to pregnant women is the medicalization of childbirth. In industrialized countries, maternal and infant mortality rates have decreased over the past 60 years due to medical or social reasons. So far, the policies and programs of the Ministry of Health to diminish medical interventions and cesarean section rates have not been successful. Midwifery models in hospital care contain midwives who support women's choices and diverse ideas about childbirth on the one hand, and on the other hand, they must adhere to organizational guidelines as employees, primarily based on a medical and pathological approach rather than a health-oriented and midwifery perspective. Therefore, the current study aims to be conducted with the purpose of "Designing a midwifery-led birth centered maternity program based on the MAP-IT model". It is a Model for Implementing Healthy People 2030, (Mobilize, Assess, Plan, Implement, Track), a step-by-step method for creating healthy communities. Using MAP-IT can help public health professionals and community changemakers implement a plan that is tailored to a community's needs and assets.

What are the strategies for implementing primary care models in maternity? A systematic review on midwifery units.

BACKGROUND: Midwifery Units (MUs) are associated with optimal perinatal outcomes, improved service users' and professionals' satisfaction as well as being the most cost-effective option. However, they still do not represent the mainstream option of maternity care in many countries. Understanding effective strategies to integrate this model of care into maternity services could support and inform the MU implementation process that many countries and regions still need to approach. METHODS: A systematic search and screening of qualitative and quantitative research about implementation of new MUs was conducted (Prospero protocol reference: CRD42019141443) using PRISMA guidelines. Included articles were appraised using the CASP checklist. A meta-synthesis approach to analysis was used. No exclusion criteria for time or context were applied to ensure inclusion of different implementation attempts even under different historical and social circumstances. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to reflect the major contribution of higher quality studies. RESULTS: From 1037 initial citations, twelve studies were identified for inclusion in this review after a screening process. The synthesis highlighted two broad categories: implementation readiness and strategies used. The first included aspects related to cultural, organisational and professional levels of the local context whilst the latter synthesised the main actions and key points identified in the included studies when implementing MUs. A logic model was created to synthesise and visually present the findings. CONCLUSIONS: The studies selected were from a range of settings and time periods and used varying strategies. Nonetheless, consistencies were found across different implementation processes. These findings can be used in the systematic scaling up of MUs and can help in addressing barriers at system, service and individual levels. All three levels need to be addressed when implementing this model of care.

Midwife-centred management: a qualitative study of midwifery group practice management and leadership in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Midwifery group practice (MGP) has consistently demonstrated optimal health and wellbeing outcomes for childbearing women and their babies. In this model, women can form a relationship with a known midwife, improving both maternal and midwife satisfaction. Yet the model is not widely implemented and sustained, resulting in limited opportunities for women to access it. Little attention has been paid to how MGP is managed and led and how this impacts the sustainability of the model. This study clarifies what constitutes optimal management and leadership and how this influences sustainability. METHODS: This qualitative study forms part of a larger mixed methods study investigating the management of MGP in Australia. The interview findings presented in this study are part of phase one, where the findings informed a national survey. Nine interviews and one focus group were conducted with 23 MGP managers, clinical midwife consultants, and operational/strategic managers who led MGPs. Transcripts of the audio-recordings were analysed using inductive, reflexive, thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes were constructed, namely: The manager, the person, describing the ideal personal attributes of the MGP manager; midwifing the midwives, illustrating how the MGP manager supports, manages, and leads the group practice midwives; and gaining acceptance, explaining how the MGP manager can gain acceptance beyond group practice midwives. Participants described the need for MGP managers to display midwife-centred management. This requires the manager to have qualities that mirror what is generally accepted as requirements for good midwifery care namely: core beliefs in feminist values and woman-centred care; trust; inclusiveness; being an advocate; an ability to slow down or take time; an ability to form relationships; and exceptional communication skills. Since emotional labour is a large part of the role, it is also necessary for them to encourage and practice self-care. CONCLUSIONS: Managers need to practice in a way that is midwife-centred and mimics good midwifery care. To offset the emotional burden and improve sustainability, encouraging and promoting self-care practices might be of value.

Does midwifery-led care demonstrate care ethics: A template analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ethical care in maternity is fundamental to providing care that both prevents harm and does good, and yet, there is growing acknowledgement that disrespect and abuse routinely occur in this context, which indicates that current ethical frameworks are not adequate. Care ethics offers an alternative to the traditional biomedical ethical principles. RESEARCH AIM: The aim of the study was to determine whether a correlation exists between midwifery-led care and care ethics as an important first step in an action research project. RESEARCH DESIGN: Template analysis was chosen for this part of the action research. Template analysis is a design that tests theory against empirical data, which requires pre-set codes. PARTICIPANTS AND CONTEXT: A priori codes that represent midwifery-led care were generated by a stakeholder consultative group of nine childbearing women using nominal group technique, collected in Perth, Western Australia. The a priori codes were applied to a predesigned template with four domains of care ethics. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Ethics approval was granted by the Edith Cowan University research ethics committee REMS no. 2019-00296-Buchanan. FINDINGS: The participants generated eight a priori codes representing ethical midwifery care, such as: 1.1 Relationship with Midwife; 1.2 Woman-centred care; 2.1 Trust women's bodies and abilities; 2.2. Protect normal physiological birth; 3.1. Information provision; 3.2. Respect autonomy; 4.1. Birth culture of fear (midwifery-led care counter-cultural) and 4.2. Recognition of rite of passage. The a priori codes were mapped to the care ethics template. The template analysis found that midwifery-led care does indeed demonstrate care ethics. DISCUSSION: Care ethics takes into consideration what principle-based bioethics have previously overlooked: relationship, context and power. CONCLUSION: Midwifery-led care has been determined in this study to demonstrate care ethics, which suggest that further research is defensible with the view that it could be incorporated into the ethical codes and conduct for the midwifery profession.

Are women attending a midwifery-led birthing center at increased risk of anal sphincter injury?

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: In recent years there has been renewed interest in midwifery-led care for women, with studies reporting similar neonatal outcomes despite lower rates of intervention in midwifery-led birthing centers. Research into obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASI) in these birthing centers is scarce. The objective of this study was to compare the rate of OASI after spontaneous vaginal delivery in nulliparous women in consultant or midwifery-led units over a ten-year period. METHODS: All spontaneous vaginal deliveries in nulliparous women from 2008 to 2017 were analyzed in a single-center retrospective study. Women who had neuraxial analgesia were excluded. The primary endpoint was OASI. Labor characteristics in both groups were compared, and a multiple regression model was created. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 3260 spontaneous vaginal deliveries in nulliparous women; 75.7% (2467/3260) delivered in the consultant-led unit and 24.3% (793/3260) in the midwifery-led unit (MLU). Women delivering in the MLU had a greater risk of anal sphincter injury than those delivering in the CLU (4.9% [39/793] vs 2.5% [62/2467], OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.32 - 3.01). Significant risk factors that increased the risk of OASI on regression analysis were birthweight and delivery in the midwifery-led unit. CONCLUSIONS: Women delivering in the midwifery-led unit appear to be at double the risk of OASI when compared to those delivering in the consultant-led unit. These results are in contrast to previous studies in midwifery-led centers. This difference may be site-specific and further research is required before these results form part of patient counseling.

Management of late-term pregnancy in midwifery- and obstetrician-led care.

Management of late-term pregnancy in midwifery- and obstetrician-led care. BACKGROUND: Since there is no consensus regarding the optimal management in late-term pregnancies (≥41.0 weeks), we explored the variety of management strategies in late-term pregnancy in the Netherlands to identify the magnitude of this variety and the attitude towards late-term pregnancy. METHODS: Two nationwide surveys amongst all midwifery practices (midwifery-led care) and all hospitals with an obstetric unit (obstetrician-led care) were performed with questions on timing, frequency and content of consultations/surveillance in late-term pregnancy and on timing of induction. Propositions about late-term pregnancy were assessed using Likert scale questions. RESULTS: The response rate was 40% (203/511) in midwifery-led care and 92% (80/87) in obstetrician-led care. All obstetric units made regional protocols with their collaborating midwifery practices about management in late-term pregnancy. Most midwifery-led care practices (93%) refer low-risk women at least once for consultation in obstetrician-led care in late-term pregnancy. The content of consultations varies among hospitals. Membrane sweeping is performed more in midwifery-led care compared to obstetrician-led care (90% vs 31%, p < 0.001). Consultation at 41 weeks should be standard care according to 47% of midwifery-led care practices and 83% of obstetrician-led care units (p < 0.001). Induction of labour at 41.0 weeks is offered less often to women in midwifery-led care in comparison to obstetrician-led care (3% vs 21%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial practice variation exists within and between midwifery-and obstetrician-led care in the Netherlands regarding timing, frequency and content of antenatal monitoring in late-term pregnancy and timing of labour induction. An evidence based interdisciplinary guideline will contribute to a higher level of uniformity in the management in late- term pregnancies.

Survey of alongside midwifery-led care in North Rhine-Westfalia, Germany.

Background Alongside midwifery-led care (AMC) was introduced in Germany in 2003. The aim of our study was to collect data about the utilization of AMC within North Rhine-Westfalia (NRW), Germany's most populous state, and to collect information regarding the approach used for implementation of AMC and providers' experiences in day-to-day work. Methods Quantitative data were collected by questionnaire, telephone interview and comparative analysis of documents created for use in AMC. Qualitative data were compiled by questionnaire and workshop. Results Seven obstetric departments offer AMC in NRW. On average, 3.4% of women gave birth in these AMC units, corresponding to 0.3% of all births in NRW. For the establishment of AMC, institutional, organizational, professional and formal arrangements were undertaken. An eligibility and transfer checklist was agreed upon between midwives and obstetricians. Both professions were faced with skepticism. Daily work in AMC resulted in improved teamwork between the two professions and increased job satisfaction for midwives. Acquisition of manual skills and time constraints were the major challenges. Conclusion The low utilization of AMC is not due to the concept of care itself or difficulties with its implementation, nor to a lack of eligible women. Reasons may be insufficient awareness about AMC or a lack of interest in this type of care.

The perceptions and experiences of women who achieved and did not achieve a waterbirth.

BACKGROUND: There is a gap in knowledge and understanding relating to the experiences of women exposed to the opportunity of waterbirth. Our aim was to explore the perceptions and experiences of women who achieved or did not achieve their planned waterbirth. METHODS: An exploratory design using critical incident techniques was conducted between December 2015 and July 2016, in the birth centre of the tertiary public maternity hospital in Western Australia. Women were telephoned 6 weeks post birth. Demographic data included: age; education; parity; and previous birth mode. Women were also asked the following: what made you choose to plan a waterbirth?; what do you think contributed to you having (or not having) a waterbirth?; and which three words would you use to describe your birth experience? Frequency distributions and univariate comparisons were employed for quantitative data. Thematic analysis was undertaken to extract common themes from the interviews. RESULTS: A total of 31% (93 of 296) of women achieved a waterbirth and 69% (203 of 296) did not. Multiparous women were more likely to achieve a waterbirth (57% vs 32%; p < 0.001). Women who achieved a waterbirth were less likely to have planned a waterbirth for pain relief (38% vs 52%; p = 0.24). The primary reasons women gave for planning a waterbirth were: pain relief; they liked the idea; it was associated with a natural birth; it provided a relaxing environment; and it was recommended. Two fifths (40%) of women who achieved a waterbirth suggested support was the primary reason they achieved their waterbirth, with the midwife named as the primary support person by 34 of 37 women. Most (66%) women who did not achieve a waterbirth perceived this was because they experienced an obstetric complication. The words women used to describe their birth were coded as: affirming; distressing; enduring; natural; quick; empowering; and long. CONCLUSIONS: Immersion in water for birth facilitates a shift of focus from high risk obstetric-led care to low risk midwifery-led care. It also facilitates evidence based, respectful midwifery care which in turn optimises the potential for women to view their birthing experience through a positive lens.

Factors promoting or inhibiting normal birth.

BACKGROUND: In response to rising rates of medical intervention in birth, there has been increased international interest in promoting normal birth (without induction of labour, epidural/spinal/general anaesthesia, episiotomy, forceps/vacuum, or caesarean section). However, there is limited evidence for how best to achieve increased rates of normal birth. In this study we examined the role of modifiable and non-modifiable factors in experiencing a normal birth using retrospective, self-reported data. METHODS: Women who gave birth over a four-month period in Queensland, Australia, were invited to complete a questionnaire about their preferences for and experiences of pregnancy, labour, birth, and postnatal care. Responses (N = 5840) were analysed using multiple logistic regression models to identify associations with four aspects of normal birth: onset of labour, use of anaesthesia, mode of birth, and use of episiotomy. The probability of normal birth was then estimated by combining these models. RESULTS: Overall, 28.7% of women experienced a normal birth. Probability of a normal birth was reduced for women who were primiparous, had a history of caesarean, had a multiple pregnancy, were older, had a more advanced gestational age, experienced pregnancy-related health conditions (gestational diabetes, low-lying placenta, high blood pressure), had continuous electronic fetal monitoring during labour, and knew only some of their care providers for labour and birth. Women had a higher probability of normal birth if they lived outside major metropolitan areas, did not receive private obstetric care, had freedom of movement throughout labour, received continuity of care in labour and birth, did not have an augmented labour, or gave birth in a non-supine position. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight several relevant modifiable factors including mobility, monitoring, and care provision during labour and birth, for increasing normal birth opportunity. An important step forward in promoting normal birth is increasing awareness of such relationships through patient involvement in informed decision-making and implementation of this evidence in care guidelines.

The sustainability of midwifery group practice: A cross-sectional study of midwives and managers.

PROBLEM: Although there is robust evidence for the benefits of midwifery group practice (MGP) caseload care, there are limited opportunities for women to access this model in Australia. There is also limited knowledge on how to sustain these services. BACKGROUND: MGP can benefit childbearing women and babies and improve satisfaction for women and midwives. However, sustainability of the model is challenging. While MGPs are often supported and celebrated, in Australia some services have closed, while others struggle to adequately staff MGPs. AIM: To investigate midwives and managers opinions on the management, culture, and sustainability of MGP. METHODS: A national survey of MGP midwives and managers was distributed (2021 and 2022). Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative data were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 579 midwives and 90 managers completed the survey. The findings suggest that many MGPs do not support new graduates and students to work in MGP. Over half (59.8%) the participants (midwives and managers) reported that the women and families were the best aspect about working in MGP, while 44.3% said the effects on midwives' lifestyle and families were the worst aspect. DISCUSSION: The relationship with women remains the major motivator for providing MGP care. However, work-life imbalance is a deterrent, exacerbated by staffing shortages. Staffing might be improved by adequate renumeration, strengthening orientation, and attracting new graduates and students through experience in MGP. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to attract midwives to MGP and improve work-life balance and sustainability.

Corrigendum: Maternity care in the Brussels Capital Region: Towards a paradigm shift?

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.18332/ejm/186405.].

Outcomes for women admitted for labour care to alongside midwifery units in the UK following a postpartum haemorrhage in a previous pregnancy: A national population-based cohort and nested case-control study using the UK Midwifery Study System (UKMidSS).

BACKGROUND: Women who have experienced a postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) 'requiring treatment or transfusion' are typically advised to plan birth in obstetric-led settings in subsequent pregnancies. Many UK alongside midwifery units (AMU) admit women for labour care following a previous PPH. We aimed to describe outcomes in women admitted for labour care to AMUs following a previous PPH, compare outcomes with other multiparous women admitted to the same AMUs, and explore risk factors for recurrence. METHODS: A national cohort and nested case-control study using the UK Midwifery Study System (UKMidSS), between August 2018 and April 2019. Multivariable Poisson regression and logistic regression were performed to compare outcomes and investigate risk factors for recurrence. FINDINGS: Women who experienced a previous PPH were significantly more likely than comparison women to: have a PPH requiring transfer to obstetric care (4·2% vs. 2·4%, aRR=1·65, 95% CI 1·14-2·38), be transferred to obstetric care for any reason (17·8% vs 11·9%; aRR=1·41; 95% CI 1·09-1·83), and have any PPH≥ 500 ml (22·7% vs 11·1%, aRR=1·86, 95% CI 1·49-2·32). Among women with a previous PPH, previous blood loss > 1500 ml; uterotonics for previous PPH; Caesarean associated with previous PPH; gestation at admission and higher birthweight were independent risk factors for PPH. CONCLUSION: Women considering birth in an AMU after a previous PPH should be advised that they are at increased risk of experiencing a subsequent PPH requiring transfer to obstetric care, compared with other multiparous women who have not had a PPH. The absolute risk of a subsequent PPH in this group is low and comparable to the overall risk of having a PPH among women having a spontaneous vaginal birth in England.

Women's experience of continuity of midwifery care in North-Eastern Italy: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: The establishment of a maternity path is often hampered by the fragmentation of care processes resulting in discontinuity of care. The interruption of continuity of care negatively affects the experience of maternity. The purpose of this research is to analyze the experience of women who get midwifery continuity of care from pregnancy till after childbirth. METHODS: A qualitative study using a phenomenological-grounded approach was undertaken. Audio-recorded semi-structured interviews were taken from 11 pregnant women who received midwifery care during maternity. This research was carried out between March 2020 and February 2021. RESULTS: Continuous and quality care is what allows women to develop new skills, increasing awareness and confidence in themselves and in their abilities both during pregnancy and after delivery. Assistance provided by competent professionals allows women to be taken in charge globally with greater personalization of care.Since the research was carried out during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, some of the repercussions that the situation had on women during maternity were also experienced negatively, such as the interruption of continuity of care or the inability to choose whom to have next to. CONCLUSIONS: From the perspective of prevention and protection of maternal and child health, in the short- and long-term, it becomes essential to focus on developing maternal competencies. This may be possible by implementing midwifery continuity of care pathways with an appropriate and flexible organizational system capable of responding to women's needs throughout the maternity journey, even during periods of a health emergency.

Contextual factors influencing the implementation of midwifery-led care units in India.

BACKGROUND: The Government of India has committed to educate 90,000 midwives functioning in midwifery-led care units (MLCUs) to care for women during labour and birth. There is a need to consider local circumstances in India, as there is no 'one size fits all' prescription for MLCUs. AIM: To explore contextual factors influencing the implementation of MLCUs across India. METHOD: Data were collected through six focus group interviews with 16 nurses, midwives, public health experts and physicians, representing six national and international organisations supporting the Indian Government in its midwifery initiative. Transcribed interviews were analysed using content analysis. FINDINGS: Four generic categories describe the contextual factors which influence the implementation of MLCUs in India: (i) Perceptions of the Nurse Practitioner in Midwifery and MLCUs and their acceptance, (ii) Reversing the medicalization of childbirth, (iii) Engagement with the community, and (iv) The need for legal frameworks and standards. CONCLUSION: Based on the identified contextual factors in this study, we recommend that in India and other similar contexts the following should be in place when designing and implementing MLCUs: legal frameworks to enable midwives to provide full scope of practice in line with the midwifery philosophy and informed by global standards; pre- and in-service training to optimize interdisciplinary teamwork and the knowledge and skills required for the implementation of the midwifery philosophy; midwifery leadership acknowledged as key to the planning and implementation of midwifery-led care at the MLCUs; and a demand among women created through effective midwifery-led care and advocacy messages.

Midwife-Led Continuity of Antenatal Care and Breastfeeding Duration Beyond Postpartum Hospital Discharge: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends that infants should be exclusively breastfed for the first 6 months of life and that breastfeeding should continue for 2 years and beyond. Most women initiate breastfeeding, but many do not continue for the recommended duration. While midwife-led continuity of antenatal care is linked to improved mother and infant outcomes, the influence on breastfeeding duration has not been previously reviewed. RESEARCH AIM: To critically analyze the literature that compared midwife-led continuity of antenatal care with other models of care where researchers have measured breastfeeding duration beyond postpartum hospital discharge. METHODS: A systematic literature review with critical analysis was used to answer the research aim. We systematically searched and screened five databases for quantitative studies where researchers had reported breastfeeding duration beyond postpartum hospital discharge after midwife-led continuity of antenatal care, compared with another model of antenatal care. Methodological quality was assessed using tools from the Cochrane Collaboration (RoB2 and ROBINS-I). In total, nine studies met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Clear conclusions about the association between midwife-led continuity of antenatal care and breastfeeding duration were not found. The risk of bias within non-randomized studies ranged from serious to critical, and a judgement of "some concerns" of risk of bias in the one randomized study. CONCLUSION: To date, the question of whether midwife-led continuity of antenatal care improves breastfeeding duration has not been established. There has been a lack of consistency in definitions of breastfeeding and descriptions of models of care, which has weakened the evidence-based of literature reviewed.Our review protocol was registered with PROSPERO; although due to COVID-19, this registration was not checked for eligibility by the PROSPERO team (CRD42020151276). https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020151276.

Implementing midwifery units in a European country: Situational analysis of an Italian case study.

INTRODUCTION: Strong evidence recommends midwifery-led care for women with uncomplicated pregnancies. International research is now focusing on how to implement midwifery models of care in countries where they are not well established. In Europe, many countries like Italy are promoting midwifery-led care in national guidelines but often struggle to apply this change in practice. METHODS: This study collected data on professional, organisational and service users' levels to conduct a situational analysis of an Italian service which is approaching the implementation of a midwifery unit. Participatory Action Research was used together with the support of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to conduct data collection and analysis. RESULTS: Forty-eight participants amongst professionals (midwives, obstetricians and neonatologists) and at organisational level (midwifery leaders and medical directors) were recruited; secondary data on service users' views was analysed via regional online surveys. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation were identified to assess the readiness of the local context. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to include professionals, managers and service users in a European context such as Italy. Facilitators to the implementation of the alongside midwifery unit were found in national guidelines, allocated funding, collaborative engagement and medical support. Hierarchical structures, a prevalent medical model and lack of trust and awareness of the evidence of safety of midwifery-led models were main barriers.

Improving the Quality of Maternity Care through the Introduction of Professional Midwives and Mentoring in Selected Sub-District Hospitals in Bangladesh: A Mixed Method Study Protocol.

Introduction: Bangladesh introduced professional midwives in 2018 to address gaps in sexual and reproductive health services, focusing on improved maternity care. Facility mentoring has been introduced in selected facilities within the government to enable midwives as they move into their new roles. Objectives: To describe a protocol (1) to determine if introducing international standard midwives in rural sub-district hospitals in Bangladesh, both with and without facility mentoring, improve the availability and quality of maternal and newborn health care compared to the facility without midwives; and (2) to explore the experiences of the midwives, and the maternity staff and managers that they joined, following their introduction. Methods: This will be a mixed-methods study to examine differences between selected hospitals grouped into three categories: without midwives (only nurses), with midwives, and both with midwives and mentorship. Hospital selection will be based on choosing those with the highest birth caseload. The quantitative component will consist of facility observations and clinical data extraction to assess their (hospital and midwives) readiness (birth preparedness and complication readiness) and clinical care to explore whether facilities with newly introduced midwives have improved availability and quality of care. We will use facility assessment tools to extract clinical data. In addition, we will use a structured open-ended interview guideline to conduct focus groups and in-depth interviews to understand the perceptions, attitudes, and experiences among maternity staff (e.g., nurses and paramedics) and health managers (e.g., facility manager, residential medical officer, consultants), as well as the midwives themselves toward the newly introduced midwives and the quality of care. We plan to use a fixed effect logistic regression to compare the relationship between variables in the three hospital types for each observed data point. For analyzing qualitative data, we will adopt content analysis and use NVivo to identify themes related to perceptions, attitudes, and experiences. Expected results: The introduction of professional midwives may improve the quality of maternal health care in rural settings. The addition of a mentoring program can support midwives in transitioning into their new roles and introduce improved care quality.

Management and sustainability of midwifery group practice: Thematic and lexical analyses of midwife interviews.

BACKGROUND: Although there is high-level evidence supporting positive perinatal outcomes for midwifery group practice (MGP) care, not all women can access this model due to a failure to implement or sustain it. The way that MGPs are managed could be an important factor in whether they are successful in the long-term. AIM: To explore what determines optimal management of MGP in Australia, and the influence it has on sustainability of MGP. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with MGP midwives (n=8). Transcriptions of the audio recordings were analysed thematically and lexically for triangulation. FINDINGS: Following a thematic analysis of the data, an over-arching theme emerged - namely - being valued and supported, with three sub-themes: a nice little sweet spot, someone to stand up for you, and building relationships and support beyond the model. This revealed that value and support by all stakeholders, including the midwives themselves, was necessary to sustain an MGP. The lexical analysis revealed the themes: support, the system, and the caseload. This analysis highlighted the importance of the system - specifically, the impact of the institution on how MGP is operationalised. CONCLUSION: For MGP to be sustained in Australia, it needs to be prioritised, nurtured, and embraced by the whole maternity care system. Management plays an important role in ensuring the right people are employed to pivotal positions and that midwifery-led models of care are valued and supported throughout the system.

Factors Associated With Normal Physiologic Birth for Women Who Labor In Water: A Secondary Analysis of A Prospective Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Research to understand factors associated with normal physiologic birth (unassisted vaginal birth, spontaneous labor onset without epidural analgesia, spinal, or general anesthetic, without episiotomy) is required. Laboring and/or giving birth in water has been shown to be associated with a high proportion of physiologic birth but with little understanding of factors that may influence this outcome. This study explored factors associated with normal physiologic birth for women who labored in water. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a UK-based prospective observational study of 8064 women at low risk of childbirth complications who labored in water. Consecutive women were recruited from birth settings in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Planned place of birth, maternal characteristics, intrapartum events, and maternal and neonatal outcomes were measured. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression modelling explored factors associated with normal physiologic birth. RESULTS: In total, 5758 (71.4%) of women who labored in water had a normal physiologic birth. Planned birth in the community (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.58; 95% CI, 2.22-2.99) or at an alongside midwifery unit (aOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.04-1.41) was positively associated with normal physiologic birth compared with planned birth in an obstetric unit. Duration of second stage (aOR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.62-0.70), duration in the pool [aOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.96), and birth weight of the neonate (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65-0.85) were negatively associated with normal physiologic birth. Parity was not associated with normal physiologic birth in multivariate analyses. DISCUSSION: Our findings largely reflected wider research, both in and out of water. We found midwifery-led birth settings may increase the likelihood of normal physiologic birth among healthy women who labor in water, irrespective of parity. This association supports growing evidence demonstrating the importance of planned place of birth on reducing intervention rates and adds to research on labor and birth in water.

A Model of True CHOICES: Learnings from a Comprehensive Sexual and Reproductive Health Clinic in Tennessee that Provides Abortions and Opened the City's First Birth Center.

CHOICES: Memphis Center for Reproductive Health staff is passionate about ensuring that everyone has access to the full continuum of comprehensive reproductive health care (including abortion, gender-affirming care, miscarriage management, and community birth) regardless of race, gender identity, sexual orientation, HIV status, economic status, or religious beliefs. Memphis, Tennessee, has a history of limited community birth options (birthing outside of hospital walls). In 2017, when home birth services were added to CHOICES and plans for opening Memphis' first freestanding birth center were being imagined, it was intentional to create a model in which midwifery care could be accessible for patients who may be eligible for state-funded health care services, those considered at higher health risk than traditional low-risk midwifery patients, or both. In fact, individuals and their families with limited out-of-pocket funds and those historically marginalized would purposely receive holistic, individualized care based on their unique health care needs and personal desires, driven by a reproductive justice framework. In this article, we outline the success and challenges of addressing the reproductive health needs of marginalized communities, including the benefits of a nonprofit business model, operationalizing reproductive justice concepts, and the reclamation of Black midwifery. We also discuss the challenges of caring for Black birthing people and providing abortion and gender-affirming care in a politically hostile environment. Although individuals have complex needs, at its core, CHOICES believes that every person must be seen as whole human beings and that each can be cared for by a midwife. The CHOICES approach is informed by evidence-based information, clinical judgment, and an intentional partnership with and investment in a people who have historically been and are presently pushed to the margins, neglected, and blamed for poor health outcomes and demise. Striving to adapt the CHOICES model of care in other parts of the country is important now more than ever following the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.