Adaptation of independent midwives to the COVID-19 pandemic: A national descriptive survey.

OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this survey was to identify how independent midwives, mainly working in primary care, adapted their practices at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in France. Our assumption was that this practice adaptation would vary according to both geographical area (timing of pandemic effect) and whether they practiced alone or in a group. DESIGN: We conducted an online national survey of independent midwives in France from March 16-23, 2020. SETTING: All districts in mainland France and the overseas territories. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents from the population of all independent midwives working in France. MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: The primary outcome measure was the proportion of midwives reporting that they had adapted their practices to the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the rank, in order of frequency, of the postponed or cancelled activities. RESULTS: Of the 1517 midwives who responded, i.e., 20.3% of the independent midwives in France, 90.6% reported adapting one or more of their practices . The main adjustment was the postponement or cancellation of consultations deemed non-essential, listed in descending order: postpartum pelvic floor rehabilitation (n = 1270, 83.7%), birth preparation (n = 1188, 78.3%), non-emergency preventive gynaecology consultation (n = 976, 64.3%), early prenatal interview (n = 170, 11.2%), and postnatal follow-up (n = 158, 10.4%). KEY CONCLUSIONS: Without guidelines, each midwife had to decide individually if and how to adapt her practice. Postpartum pelvic floor rehabilitation and birth preparation have been strongly affected. The results of this national survey indicate that a large majority of midwives have adapted their practices, independently of the local course of the pandemic, and that this reduction of contacts with women raises questions in this period of anxiety about intermediate-term adaptations to guarantee the continuity and safety of care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study's results can be used to develop tools to handle cancelled consultations. Video, also called virtual, visits and coordination between independent practitioners and hospitals are probably the major challenges in the current context.

The European primary care monitor: structure, process and outcome indicators.

BACKGROUND: Scientific research has provided evidence on benefits of well developed primary care systems. The relevance of some of this research for the European situation is limited.There is currently a lack of up to date comprehensive and comparable information on variation in development of primary care, and a lack of knowledge of structures and strategies conducive to strengthening primary care in Europe. The EC funded project Primary Health Care Activity Monitor for Europe (PHAMEU) aims to fill this gap by developing a Primary Care Monitoring System (PC Monitor) for application in 31 European countries. This article describes the development of the indicators of the PC Monitor, which will make it possible to create an alternative model for holistic analyses of primary care. METHODS: A systematic review of the primary care literature published between 2003 and July 2008 was carried out. This resulted in an overview of: (1) the dimensions of primary care and their relevance to outcomes at (primary) health system level; (2) essential features per dimension; (3) applied indicators to measure the features of primary care dimensions. The indicators were evaluated by the project team against criteria of relevance, precision, flexibility, and discriminating power. The resulting indicator set was evaluated on its suitability for Europe-wide comparison of primary care systems by a panel of primary care experts from various European countries (representing a variety of primary care systems). RESULTS: The developed PC Monitor approaches primary care in Europe as a multidimensional concept. It describes the key dimensions of primary care systems at three levels: structure, process, and outcome level. On structure level, it includes indicators for governance, economic conditions, and workforce development. On process level, indicators describe access, comprehensiveness, continuity, and coordination of primary care services. On outcome level, indicators reflect the quality, and efficiency of primary care. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized instrument for describing and comparing primary care systems has been developed based on scientific evidence and consensus among an international panel of experts, which will be tested to all configurations of primary care in Europe, intended for producing comparable information. Widespread use of the instrument has the potential to improve the understanding of primary care delivery in different national contexts and thus to create opportunities for better decision making.