Child and maternal benefits and risks of caseload midwifery - a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It has been reported that caseload midwifery, which implies continuity of midwifery care during pregnancy, childbirth, and the postnatal period, improves the outcomes for the mother and child. The aim of this study was to review benefits and risks of caseload midwifery, compared with standard care comparable to the Swedish setting where the same midwife usually provides antenatal care and the checkup postnatally, but does not assist during birth and the first week postpartum. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and the Cochrane Library were searched (Nov 4th, 2021) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Retrieved articles were assessed and pooled risk ratios calculated when possible, using random-effects meta-analyses. Certainty of evidence was assessed according to GRADE. RESULTS: In all, 7,594 patients in eight RCTs were included, whereof five RCTs without major risk of bias, including 5,583 patients, formed the basis for the conclusions. There was moderate certainty of evidence for little or no difference regarding the risk of Apgar ≤ 7 at 5 min, instrumental birth, and preterm birth. There was low certainty of evidence for little or no difference regarding the risk of perinatal mortality, neonatal intensive care, perineal tear, bleeding, and acute caesarean section. Caseload midwifery may reduce the overall risk of caesarean section. Regarding breastfeeding after hospital discharge, maternal mortality, maternal morbidity, health-related quality of life, postpartum depression, health care experience/satisfaction and confidence, available studies did not allow conclusions (very low certainty of evidence). For severe child morbidity and Apgar ≤ 4 at 5 min, there was no literature available. CONCLUSIONS: When caseload midwifery was compared with models of care that resembles the Swedish one, little or no difference was found for several critical and important child and maternal outcomes with low-moderate certainty of evidence, but the risk of caesarean section may be reduced. For several outcomes, including critical and important ones, studies were lacking, or the certainty of evidence was very low. RCTs in relevant settings are therefore required.

Challenges imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic on the Obstetrics and Gynecology residency program: a mixed-methods Swedish survey in the COPE Staff cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To outline how the training program and work situation of residents in Obstetrics and Gynecology (OB-GYN) was affected by the pandemic and to illuminate how residents experienced these changes. METHODS: As part of the COVID-19 in Pregnancy and Early Childhood Staff (COPE Staff) cohort study, between January and May 2021, all participating residents were invited to answer a 28-question online Resident Survey focusing on their specialist education, work situation and experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Descriptive statistics were given in percentages for categorical variables and means and standard deviations (SD) for continuous variables. Univariate comparative analyses were performed with the use of the Pearson's Chi-2-test for dichotomous data. The association between residents' worry about the quality and length of their specialist training, with extra clinical hours and transfer to other healthcare institutions were assessed by multivariate logistic regression. Free text responses were analyzed by content analysis. RESULTS: Of the 162 participating OB-GYN residents, 69% expressed concern that the pandemic would have a negative impact on their training. Ninety-five (95%) reported cancellation/postponement of educational activities, 70% performed fewer surgeries and 27% had been transferred to other healthcare institutions where about half reported having gained more general knowledge as a physician. Working extra clinical hours was reported by 69% (7.4 ± 5.3 hours per week) and 14% had considered changing their profession due to the pandemic. Senior residents, compared to junior residents, more often experienced cancelled/postponed clinical rotations (30% vs 15%, P=0.02) and reported performing fewer surgeries (P=0.02). The qualitative analysis highlighted the lack of surgical procedural training as a major concern for residents. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has strongly impacted the training program and work situation of OB-GYN residents in Sweden. Residents were concerned over the negative impact of the pandemic on their training program and senior residents reported more missed educational opportunities as compared to junior residents. Program directors, head of institutions and clinical supervisors can use the problem areas pinpointed by this study to support residents and compensate for missed educational opportunities. While hands-on-training and operating time cannot be compensated for, the authors hope that the findings of the study can help develop new strategies to minimize the negative impact of the current and future pandemics on resident education and work situation.

Efficacy and safety of oral misoprostol vs transvaginal balloon catheter for labor induction: An observational study within the SWEdish Postterm Induction Study (SWEPIS).

INTRODUCTION: Induction of labor is increasing. A common indication for induction of labor is late term and postterm pregnancy at 41 weeks or more. We aimed to evaluate if there are any differences regarding efficacy, safety, and women's childbirth experience between oral misoprostol and transvaginal balloon catheter for cervical ripening in women with a low-risk singleton pregnancy and induction of labor at 41+0 to 42+0 to 1 weeks of gestation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this observational study, based on data from the Swedish Postterm Induction Study (SWEPIS), a multicenter randomized controlled trial, a total of 1213 women with a low-risk singleton pregnancy at 41 to 42 weeks of gestation were induced with oral misoprostol (n = 744) or transvaginal balloon catheter (n = 469) at 15 Swedish delivery hospitals. The primary efficacy outcome was vaginal delivery within 24 h and primary safety outcomes were neonatal and maternal composite adverse outcomes. Secondary outcomes included time to vaginal delivery and mode of delivery. Women's childbirth experience was assessed with the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ 2.0) and visual analog scale. We present crude and adjusted mean differences and relative risks (RR) with 95% CI. Adjustment was performed for a propensity score based on delivery hospital and baseline characteristics including Bishop score. RESULTS: Vaginal delivery within 24 h was significantly lower in the misoprostol group compared with the balloon catheter group (46.5% [346/744] vs 62.7% [294/469]; adjusted RR 0.76 95% CI 0.640.89]). Primary neonatal and maternal safety outcomes did not differ between groups (neonatal composite 3.5% [36/744] vs 3.2% [15/469]; adjusted RR 0.77 [95% CI 0.31-1.89]; maternal composite 2.3% [17/744] vs 1.9% [9/469]; adjusted RR 1.70 [95% CI 0.58-4.97]). Adjusted mean time to vaginal delivery was increased by 3.8 h (95% CI 1.3-6.2 h) in the misoprostol group. Non-operative vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery rates did not differ. Women's childbirth experience was positive overall and similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Induction of labor with oral misoprostol compared with a transvaginal balloon catheter was associated with a lower probability of vaginal delivery within 24 h and a longer time to vaginal delivery. However, primary safety outcomes, non-operative vaginal delivery, and women's childbirth experience were similar in both groups. Therefore, both methods can be recommended in women with low-risk postdate pregnancies.

Being in limbo: Women's lived experiences of pregnancy at 41 weeks of gestation and beyond - A phenomenological study.

BACKGROUND: Globally, the prevalence of post term pregnancy (PTP) is about 5-10%, but the rate varies considerably between and within countries. PTP is defined as a pregnancy ≥294 days, but the definition is arbitrary. Many studies focusing on the prevalence, risks and management of PTP include pregnancies ≥41 gestational weeks (GW). However, qualitative interview studies concerning women's experiences of PTP are lacking. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe women's lived experiences of a pregnancy ≥41 GW. METHOD: The study has a lifeworld research approach. Individual in-depth interviews were conducted from August 2013 to September 2014 with 10 healthy women with an expected normal pregnancy at GW 41 + 1-6 days in Gothenburg, Sweden. Interviews were conducted at the antenatal clinic or in the woman's home, depending on her preference. Data were analysed with a phenomenological reflective lifeworld approach. RESULT: The essence of women's experiences of a pregnancy at GW ≥ 41 was described as being in limbo, a void characterised by contradictions related to time, giving birth and the condition. Exceeding the estimated date of childbirth implied a period of up to 2 weeks that was not expected. The contradictory aspect was the notion that time passed both slowly and quickly. Negative feelings dominated and increased over time. The women experienced difficulty due to not being in complete control, while at the same time finding it a beneficial experience. Health care professionals focused solely on the due date, while the women felt neither seen nor acknowledged. Lack of information led to searches in social media. Previously, they had trusted the body's ability to give birth, but this trust diminished after GW 41 + 0. In this state of limbo, the women became more easily influenced by people around them, while in turn influencing others. CONCLUSIONS: Being in limbo represents a contradictory state related to time and process of giving birth, when women need to be listened to by healthcare professionals. An understanding of the importance of different information sources, such as family and friends, is necessary. It is vital that women are seen and acknowledged by midwives at the antenatal clinics. In addition, they should be asked how they experience waiting for the birth in order to create a sense of trust and confidence in the process.

Study protocol of SWEPIS a Swedish multicentre register based randomised controlled trial to compare induction of labour at 41 completed gestational weeks versus expectant management and induction at 42 completed gestational weeks.

BACKGROUND: Observational data shows that postterm pregnancy (≥42 gestational weeks, GW) and late term pregnancy (≥41 GW), as compared to term pregnancy, is associated with an increased risk for adverse outcome for the mother and infant. Standard care in many countries is induction of labour at 42 GW. There is insufficient scientific support that induction of labour at 41 GW, as compared with expectant management and induction at 42 GW will reduce perinatal mortality and morbidity without an increase in operative deliveries, negative delivery experiences or higher costs. Large randomised studies are needed since important outcomes; such as perinatal mortality and hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy are rare events. METHODS/DESIGN: A total of 10 038 healthy women ≥18 years old with a normal live singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation at 41 GW estimated with a first or second trimester ultrasound, who is able to understand oral and written information will be randomised to labour induction at 41 GW (early induction) or expectant management and induction at 42 GW (late induction). Women will be recruited at university clinics and county hospitals in Sweden comprising more than 65 000 deliveries per year. Primary outcome will be a composite of stillbirth, neonatal mortality and severe neonatal morbidity. Secondary outcomes will be other adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes, mode of delivery, women's experience, cost effectiveness and infant morbidity up to 3 months of age. Data on background variables, obstetric and neonatal outcomes will be obtained from the Swedish Pregnancy Register and the Swedish Neonatal Quality Register. Data on women's experiences will be collected by questionnaires after randomisation and 3 months after delivery. Primary analysis will be intention to treat. The statistician will be blinded to group and intervention. DISCUSSION: It is important to investigate if an intervention at 41 GW is superior to standard care in order to reduce death and lifelong disability for the children. The pregnant population, >41 GW, constitutes 15-20% of all pregnancies and the results of the study will thus have a great impact. The use of registries for randomisation and collection of outcome data represents a unique and new study design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN26113652 the 30(th) of March 2015 (DOI 10.1186/ISRCTN26113652 ).

The COPE Staff study: Study description and initial report regarding job satisfaction, work-life conflicts, stress, and burnout among Swedish maternal and neonatal healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the study design of the COPE Staff cohort study on working conditions for maternal and neonatal healthcare workers (MNHCWs), and present baseline data regarding job satisfaction, work-life conflicts, stress, and burnout. METHODS: Between January and April 2021, 957 MNHCWs (administrative and medical staff) completed a baseline survey. Average levels of job satisfaction, work-life conflicts, stress, and burnout, and associations to perceived workload were assessed. RESULTS: The average levels of job satisfaction, work-life conflicts, stress, and burnout were 68.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 64.3-72.8), 42.6 (95% CI 37.3-48.0), 42.0 (95% CI 37.7-46.3), and 1.9 (95% CI 1.6-2.2), respectively. The respondents scoring above critical values indicating clinical burnout ranged between 3% and 18%, respectively, for the four burnout sub-dimensions. Women reported significantly higher levels of stress and burnout. Younger participants had lower job satisfaction and higher levels of work-life conflicts, stress, and burnout. Higher perceived workload was significantly associated with lower job satisfaction levels and higher levels of work-life conflicts, stress, and burnout. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate associations between MNHCWs perceived workload and job satisfaction, work-life conflicts, stress, and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eighteen percent scored above critical values for exhaustion.

Being in the shadow of the unknown - Swedish women's lived experiences of pregnancy during the COVID-19 pandemic, a phenomenological study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound effect on the emotional well-being of expecting mothers. Sweden's unique strategy for managing COVID-19 involved no national lockdown. Emphasis was instead placed on limiting crowding and asking citizens to practice social distancing measures. AIM: To gain a deeper understanding of how women not infected by SARS-CoV-2 experienced pregnancy during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden. METHODS: This was a qualitative study with a reflective lifeworld approach. Fourteen women that had not contracted COVID-19 and who were pregnant during the first and second wave of the pandemic were interviewed. Data were analysed with a phenomenological reflective lifeworld approach. FINDINGS: The essence of the women's experiences of being pregnant during the COVID-19 pandemic was best described as being in the shadow of the unknown, where the COVID-19 pandemic could at times totally overshadow the experience of being pregnant, while at other times, rays of sunlight pierced through the clouds. The experience was characterised by having to deal with the uncertainties caused by the pandemic and feelings of being in an information echo. Women felt socially isolated and had to face maternal check-ups without the support of their partners. There was, however, a strong trust in maternal health-care services despite the lack of information available. CONCLUSION: Being in the shadow of the unknown represents the uncertainties posed by the COVID-19 pandemic on the experience of pregnancy. Sufficient information, a companion of choice and screening for emotional well-being are important factors in maternity care during pandemics.

Women's childbirth experiences in the Swedish Post-term Induction Study (SWEPIS): a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare childbirth experiences in women randomly assigned to either induction of labour at 41 weeks or to expectant management until 42 weeks, in the Swedish Post-term Induction Study. DESIGN: A register-based, multicentre, randomised, controlled, superiority trial. SETTING: Women were recruited at 14 hospitals in Sweden, 2016-2018. PARTICIPANTS: Women with an uncomplicated singleton pregnancy were recruited at 41 gestational weeks. INTERVENTIONS: The women were randomly assigned to induction of labour at 41 weeks (induction group, n=1381) or expectant management until 42 weeks (expectant management group, n=1379). OUTCOME MEASURES: As main outcome, women's childbirth experiences were measured using the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire version 2 (CEQ2), in 656 women, 3 months after the birth at three hospitals. As exploratory outcome, overall childbirth experience was measured in 1457 women using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS 1-10) within 3 days after delivery at the remaining eleven hospitals. RESULTS: The total response rate was 77% (2113/2760). There were no significant differences in childbirth experience measured with CEQ2 between the groups (induction group, n=354; expectant management group, n=302) in the subscales: own capacity (2.8 vs 2.7, p=0.09), perceived safety (3.3 vs 3.2, p=0.06) and professional support (3.6 vs 3.5, p=0.38) or in the total CEQ2 score (3.3 vs 3.2, p=0.07), respectively. Women in the induction group scored higher in the subscale participation (3.6 vs 3.4, p=0.02), although with a small effect size (0.19). No significant difference was observed in overall childbirth experience according to VAS (8.0 (n=735) vs 8.1 (n=735), p=0.22). CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in childbirth experience, according to CEQ2 or overall childbirth experience assessed with VAS, between women randomly assigned to induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks. Overall, women rated their childbirth experiences high. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26113652.

Late-term pregnancy: Navigating in unknown waters - A hermeneutic study.

BACKGROUND: Late-term pregnancy is related to increased risk of serious complications for babies and women, as pregnancies proceed. Pregnancy is an individual, complex and existential situation for women, who may experience late-term pregnancy as a mentally strenuous period, characterised by worries and anxiety. However, there is a lack of studies in this area. AIM: To describe women's experiences of late-term pregnancy ≥41 gestational weeks. METHODS: A lifeworld hermeneutic approach was used. Qualitative interviews were performed with ten women, two to seven months after the birth. FINDINGS: Six themes emerged from the analysis Doubting the body's ability to cope with the transition from pregnancy to giving birth, The importance of their partner's support during the sea voyage, Lacking clear guidelines for the voyage, Worrying about the cargo at the end of the voyage, How the voyage turned out and Thoughts related to a future voyage. CONCLUSION: The women did not feel sufficiently empowered to trust their body's ability to make the transition from late pregnancy to birth. It is vital that midwives provide clear guidance and empower women to trust the ability of their body to give birth. This transition is important in relation to positive thoughts about future pregnancies and births.

Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if induction of labour at 41 weeks improves perinatal and maternal outcomes in women with a low risk pregnancy compared with expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks. DESIGN: Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled superiority trial. SETTING: 14 hospitals in Sweden, 2016-18. PARTICIPANTS: 2760 women with a low risk uncomplicated singleton pregnancy randomised (1:1) by the Swedish Pregnancy Register. 1381 women were assigned to the induction group and 1379 were assigned to the expectant management group. INTERVENTIONS: Induction of labour at 41 weeks and expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite perinatal outcome including one or more of stillbirth, neonatal mortality, Apgar score less than 7 at five minutes, pH less than 7.00 or metabolic acidosis (pH <7.05 and base deficit >12 mmol/L) in the umbilical artery, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, intracranial haemorrhage, convulsions, meconium aspiration syndrome, mechanical ventilation within 72 hours, or obstetric brachial plexus injury. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: The study was stopped early owing to a significantly higher rate of perinatal mortality in the expectant management group. The composite primary perinatal outcome did not differ between the groups: 2.4% (33/1381) in the induction group and 2.2% (31/1379) in the expectant management group (relative risk 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.73; P=0.90). No perinatal deaths occurred in the induction group but six (five stillbirths and one early neonatal death) occurred in the expectant management group (P=0.03). The proportion of caesarean delivery, instrumental vaginal delivery, or any major maternal morbidity did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study comparing induction of labour at 41 weeks with expectant management and induction at 42 weeks does not show any significant difference in the primary composite adverse perinatal outcome. However, a reduction of the secondary outcome perinatal mortality is observed without increasing adverse maternal outcomes. Although these results should be interpreted cautiously, induction of labour ought to be offered to women no later than at 41 weeks and could be one (of few) interventions that reduces the rate of stillbirths. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN26113652.