Strengthening global midwifery education to improve quality maternity care: Co-designing the World Health Organization Midwifery Assessment Tool for Education (MATE).

AIMS: To describe a three-phase co-designed project to develop a culturally appropriate and relevant education assessment tool, and report on pilot and field-testing phases. BACKGROUND: High-quality midwifery education is essential for high-quality maternity care (WHO 2019); however midwifery education and maternity care vary in quality throughout Europe. To support countries in strengthening their midwifery education, World Health Organization (WHO) European Region commissioned development of the Midwifery Assessment Tool for Education (MATE). The tool was developed over three years, using an iterative, collaborative process with regional experts. Published by WHO in May 2020, MATE provides focused questions and evidence-informed resources to stimulate and inform discussions within country. DESIGN: Three-phase co-design approach to develop, pilot and field-test an education assessment tool. METHODS: Phase 1: initial development of MATE with expert midwifery support; Phase 2: MATE piloting workshops in Czech Republic and Lithuania focusing on clarity, usability and relevance; Phase 3: MATE field-testing workshop in Bulgaria exploring the process of using MATE and its effectiveness for generating discussion. Purposive selection of workshop participants ensured a broad range of perspectives: clinicians, educators, students, policy makers and service users. All participants were invited to give narrative feedback during workshops and via completion of a post-workshop online survey. The XX University Research Ethics Committee advised that formal ethical review was unnecessary. RESULTS: Feedback from collaborators in all phases indicated that engaging with MATE co-design and testing was a positive experience. A 'bottoms up' approach ensured that MATE content was relevant to regional needs, culturally acceptable and appropriate. Seventy-nine individuals participated in Phases 2 and 3 and all were sent a post-workshop online survey, with 31 responses (39 %). Qualitative and quantitative data indicated that the aim of MATE was well understood, and its usability and relevance were evaluated positively. In Phase 2, improvements to wording and format were suggested. MATE was subsequently amended prior to field testing. Phase 3 feedback indicated that MATE was highly effective for generating in-country dialogue and frank discussions about the future of midwifery education and practice. CONCLUSIONS: Using a co-design approach has ensured that MATE is culturally relevant, accessible and appropriate. This initial evaluation indicates that MATE can facilitate in-country dialogue and support the strengthening of midwifery education in accordance with WHO aims. Next steps are a fully evaluated trial of MATE in a selected partner country, where we will continue to work collaboratively to optimise engagement and ensure cultural appropriateness.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on midwifery-led service provision in the United Kingdom in 2020-21: Findings of three national surveys.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic required all healthcare systems to adapt quickly. There is some evidence about the impact of the pandemic on United Kingdom maternity services overall, but little is known about the impact on midwifery-led services, including midwifery units and home birth services. OBJECTIVE: To describe changes to midwifery-led service provision in the United Kingdom and the Channel Islands during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Three national surveys were circulated using the United Kingdom Midwifery Study System (UKMidSS) and the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) Heads and Directors of Midwifery Network. The UKMidSS surveys took place in wave 1 (April to June 2020) and in wave 2 (February to March 2021). The RCM survey was conducted in April 2020. FINDINGS: The response rate to the UKMidSS surveys was 84% in wave 1 and 70% in wave 2, while 48% of Heads and Directors of Midwifery responded to the RCM survey. Around 60% of midwifery units reported being open as usual in wave 1, with the remainder affected by closures. Fewer unit closures (15%) were reported in the wave 2 survey. Around 40% of services reported some reduction in home birth services in wave 1, compared with 15% in wave 2. The apparent impact of the pandemic varied widely across the four nations of the United Kingdom and within the English regions. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic led to increased centralisation of maternity care and the disruption of midwifery-led services, especially in the first wave. Further research should focus on the reasons behind closures, the regional variation and the impact on maternity care experience and outcomes.

Establishing a Europe-wide foundation for high quality midwifery education: The role of the European Midwives Association (EMA).

A cornerstone of European policy involves freedom of movement of individuals between member countries, which applies equally to those who use and provide maternity care. To promote and support safe, high quality maternity care, minimum standards for midwifery education and practice have been published, including Directives EEC/80/154 and EEC/80/155 which support the recognition of professional qualifications. These Directives established a minimum standard for midwifery education, including the duration and content of theoretical and practical education. Annex V of the Directives established a framework of professional activities to define and guide the scope of midwifery practice in EU member countries. The Directives were updated in 2013, with the European Midwives Association (EMA) an important partner in this process. While the degree of implementation of the Directives at individual country level varies, EMA has an ongoing role in ensuring, promoting and advancing high quality midwifery education and practice throughout the EU.