Association of personal and systemic factors on intrapartum risk perception and obstetric intervention rates: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Risk perception is fundamental to decision-making; therefore its exploration is essential to gaining a comprehensive understanding of the decision-making process for peripartum interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate associations between personal and systemic factors of the work setting and the risk perception of obstetric healthcare professionals, and in turn how this might influence decisions regarding obstetric interventions. METHODS: Case vignettes were used to measure risk perception. A quantitative cross-sectional online survey was performed within an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design, and an intervention readiness score created. Associations were calculated using location and dispersion measures, t-tests and correlations in addition to multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Risk perception, as measured by the risk assessment score, was significantly lower (average 0.8 points) for midwives than for obstetricians (95%-CI [-0.673; -0.317], p < .001). Statistically significant correlations were found for: years of experience and annual number of births in the current workplace, but this was not clinically relevant; hours worked, with the groups of participants working ≥ 30,5 h showing a statistically significant higher risk perception than participants working 20,5-30 h (p = .005); and level of care of the current workplace, with the groups of participants working in a birth clinic (Level IV) showing a statistically significant lower risk perception than participants working in Level I hospital (highly specialised obstetric and neonatal care; p = .016). The option of midwife-led birthing care showed no correlation with risk perception. The survey identified that risk perception, occupation, years in the profession and number of hours worked (i.e. full or part time) represent significant influences on obstetric healthcare professionals' willingness to intervene. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the survey give rise to the hypothesis that the personal and systemic factors of professional qualification, occupation, number of hours worked and level of acuity of the workplace are related to the risk perception of obstetric healthcare professionals. In turn, risk perception itself made a significant contribution to explaining differences in willingness to intervene, suggesting that it influences obstetricians' and midwives' decision-making. Overall, however, the correlations were weak and should be interpreted cautiously. The significant variations in the use of interventions must be addressed in order to provide the highest quality and best possible care for childbearing women and their families. To this end, developing strategies to improve interdisciplinary relationships and collaboration is of great importance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00017172 (18.06.2019).

The impact of severe perinatal events on maternity care providers: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Severe events during the perinatal period can be experienced as traumatic by pregnant women, their partners or others who are closely involved. This includes maternity care providers who can be affected by being involved in or observing these events. This may have an impact on their personal well-being and professional practice, influencing quality of care. The aim of this study is to map research investigating the impact of severe events during the perinatal period on maternity care providers, and how these experiences affect their well-being and professional practice. METHOD: A scoping review following the manual of the Joanna Briggs Institute was undertaken. The electronic bibliographic databases included PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, SocINDEX, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science and databases for grey literature. Records passing the two-stage screening process were assessed, and their reference lists hand searched. We included primary research papers that presented data from maternity care professionals on the impact of severe perinatal traumatic events. A descriptive content analysis and synthesis was undertaken. RESULTS: Following a detailed systematic search and screening of 1,611 records, 57 papers were included in the scoping review. Results of the analysis identified four categories, which highlighted the impact of traumatic perinatal events on maternity care providers, mainly midwives, obstetricians and nurses: Traumatic events, Impact of traumatic events on care providers, Changes in care providers' practice and Support for care providers; each including several subcategories. CONCLUSION: The impact of traumatic perinatal events on maternity care providers ranged from severe negative responses where care providers moved position or resigned from their employment in maternity care, to responses where they felt they became a better clinician. However, a substantial number appeared to be negatively affected by traumatic events without getting adequate support. Given the shortage of maternity staff and the importance of a sustainable workforce for effective maternity care, the impact of traumatic perinatal events requires serious consideration in maintaining their wellbeing and positive engagement when conducting their profession. Future research should explore which maternity care providers are mostly at risk for the impact of traumatic events and which interventions can contribute to prevention.