How does the use of continuous electronic fetal monitoring influence women's experiences of labour? A systematic integrative review of the literature from high income countries.

BACKGROUND: A variety of technologies are used to monitor fetal wellbeing in labour. Different types of fetal monitoring devices impact women's experiences of labour and birth. AIM: This review aims to understand how continuous electronic fetal monitoring (CEFM) influences women's experiences, with a focus on sense of control, active decision-making and mobility. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was conducted. Findings from qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies were analysed to provide a review of current evidence. FINDINGS: Eighteen publications were included. The findings were synthesised into three themes: 'Feeling reassured versus anxious about the welfare of their baby', 'Feeling comfortable and free to be mobile versus feeling uncomfortable and restricted', and 'Feeling respected and empowered to make decisions versus feeling depersonalised with minimal control '. Women experienced discomfort and a lack of mobility as a result of some CEFM technologies. They often felt anxious and had mixed feelings about their baby's welfare whilst these were in use. Some women valued the data produced by CEFM technologies about the welfare of their baby. Many women experienced a sense of depersonalisation and lack of control whilst CEFM technologies were used. DISCUSSION: Fetal monitoring technologies influence women's experiences of labour both positively and negatively. Wireless devices were associated with the most positive response as they enabled greater freedom of movement. CONCLUSION: The design of emerging fetal monitoring technologies should incorporate elements which foster freedom of movement, are comfortable and provide women with a sense of choice and control. The implementation of fetal monitoring that enables these elements should be prioritised by health professionals.

Tending to the machine: The impact of intrapartum fetal surveillance on women in Australia.

Qualitative research about women and birthing people's experiences of fetal monitoring during labour and birth is scant. Labour and birth is often impacted by wearable or invasive monitoring devices, however, most published research about fetal monitoring is focused on the wellbeing of the fetus. This manuscript is derived from a larger mixed methods study, 'WOmen's Experiences of Monitoring Baby (The WOMB Study)', aiming to increase understanding of the experiences of women and birthing people in Australia, of being monitored; and about the information they received about fetal monitoring devices during pregnancy. We constructed a national cross-sectional survey that was distributed via social media in May and June, 2022. Responses were received from 861 participants. As far as we are aware, this is the first survey of the experiences of women and birthing people of intrapartum fetal monitoring conducted in Australia. This paper comprises the analysis of the free text survey responses, using qualitative and inductive content analysis. Two categories were constructed, Tending to the machine, which explores participants' perceptions of the way in which clinicians interacted with fetal monitoring technologies; and Impressions of the machine, which explores the direct impact of fetal monitoring devices upon the labour and birth experience of women and birthing people. The findings suggest that some clinicians need to reflect upon the information they provide to women and birthing people about monitoring. For example, freedom of movement is an important aspect of supporting the physiology of labour and managing pain. If freedom of movement is important, the physical restriction created by a wired cardiotocograph is inappropriate. Many participants noticed that clinicians focused their attention primarily on the technology. Prioritising the individual needs of the woman or birthing person is key to providing high quality woman-centred intrapartum care. Women should be provided with adequate information regarding the risks and benefits of different forms of fetal monitoring including how the form of monitoring might impact her labour experience.

Do women have a choice when it comes to fetal monitoring? Perceptions of information provided and choice of fetal monitoring in Australia: A national survey.

INTRO: In Australia, little research has examined how women and people participate in decision-making about types of fetal monitoring, or their perceptions of information provided by caregivers. METHODS: A national cross-sectional survey, the 'Women's experiences Of Monitoring Baby' (WOMB) Study, explored women's experiences of intrapartum fetal monitoring. This study reports on selected results. RESULTS: There were 861 responses. Of respondents, 20 % reported receiving enough information about types of fetal monitoring from care providers and childbirth education, 35 % recalled being asked for consent, and 34 % were unaware they had a choice in monitoring. Most women (86 %) obtained information via 'other' sources or own reading, and where monitoring was discussed, it was most likely a 'brief discussion' with a midwife (43 %). Women who were monitored via wired CTG (35 %) were more likely to report facing barriers to choosing their preferred monitoring type, (p<0.001). Wired CTG was significantly associated with hospital type and primiparity and 70 % indicated they would not choose it again (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Women did not know they had a choice in the type of intrapartum monitoring received, and felt they had insufficient information to make informed decisions. While monitoring via intermittent doppler and wireless CTG was preferred, women experienced barriers to receiving these, especially in public hospitals in rural/regional areas and private metropolitan hospitals. Antenatal models of care and childbirth education are underutilised avenues for providing information however, it is incumbent on maternity systems to provide adequate information resources, access to equipment and appropriate models of woman-centred and humane care.

Enabling the context for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Controlled Birthing on Country services: Participatory action research.

PROBLEM: Establishment of Birthing on Country services owned and governed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Controlled Health Services has been slow. BACKGROUND: Birthing on Country services have demonstrated health and cost benefits and require redesign of maternity care. During the Building On Our Strengths feasibility study, use of endorsed midwives and licensing of birth centres has proven difficult. QUESTION: What prevents Community Controlled Health Services from implementing Birthing on Country services in Queensland and New South Wales? METHODS: Participatory action research identified implementation barriers. We conducted iterative document analysis of instruments to inform government lobbying through synthesis of policy, economic, social, technological, legal, and environmental factors. FINDINGS: Through cycles of participatory action research, we analysed 17 documents: 1) policy barriers prevent Community Controlled Health Services from employing endorsed midwives to provide intrapartum care in public hospitals; 2) economic barriers include lack of sustainable funding stream and inadequate Medicare-billing for endorsed midwives; and 3) legal barriers require a medical practitioner in a birth centre. While social barriers (e.g., colonisation, medicalisation) underpin regulations, these were beyond the scope; technological and environmental barriers were not identified. DISCUSSION: Findings are consistent with the literature on barriers to midwifery practice. Recommendations include a national audit of barriers to Birthing on Country services including healthcare practice insurance, and development of a funding stream. Additionally, private maternity facility regulation must align with evidence on safe birth centre operation. CONCLUSION: Government can address barriers to scale-up of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Controlled Birthing on Country services.

Publicly funded homebirth in Australia: a review of maternal and neonatal outcomes over 6 years.

OBJECTIVE: To report maternal and neonatal outcomes for Australian women planning a publicly funded homebirth from 2005 to 2010. DESIGN, SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Retrospective analysis of data on women who planned a homebirth and on their babies. Data for 2005-2010 (or from the commencement of a program to 2010) were requested from the 12 publicly funded homebirth programs in place at the time. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Maternal outcomes (mortality; place and mode of birth; perineal trauma; type of management of the third stage of labour; postpartum haemorrhage; transfer to hospital); and neonatal outcomes (early mortality; Apgar score at 5 minutes; birthweight; breastfeeding initially and at 6 weeks; significant morbidity; transfer to hospital; admission to a special care nursery). RESULTS: Nine publicly funded homebirth programs in Australia provided data accounting for 97% of births in these programs during the period studied. Of the 1807 women who intended to give birth at home at the onset of labour, 1521 (84%) did so. 315 (17%) were transferred to hospital during labour or within one week of giving birth. The rate of stillbirth and early neonatal death was 3.3 per 1000 births; when deaths because of expected fetal anomalies were excluded it was 1.7 per 1000 births. The rate of normal vaginal birth was 90%. CONCLUSION: This study provides the first national evaluation of a significant proportion of women choosing publicly funded homebirth in Australia; however, the sample size does not have sufficient power to draw a conclusion about safety. More research is warranted into the safety of alternative places of birth within Australia.

Australian women's experiences of wearing a non-invasive fetal electrocardiography (NIFECG) device during labour.

BACKGROUND: Continuous electronic fetal monitoring devices can restrict women's freedom of movement and choice of positioning during labour and birth. Despite the use of continuous electronic fetal monitoring for the past 50 years, little attention has been paid to women's experiences of wearing different fetal monitoring devices in labour. AIM: To explore women's views and experiences of wearing a beltless continuous electronic fetal monitoring device, the non-invasive fetal electrocardiogram during labour. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive approach was taken. Recruitment was via a larger clinical feasibility study. Some women who consented to take part in the clinical feasibility study also consented to being interviewed during the postnatal period. Transcripts were thematically analysed. FINDINGS: Women reported improved comfort when wearing the non-invasive fetal electrocardiogram device. They appreciated how it enabled freedom of movement and an ability to actively participate in labour. They compared their experience with previous use of cardiotocography which they felt compromised their bodily autonomy. All forms of continuous electronic fetal monitoring experienced by women resulted in the unwelcome experience of 'Poking and prodding' by the midwife. DISCUSSION: Continuous electronic fetal monitoring can negatively impact women's labour and birth experience, particularly when the measurement of fetal wellbeing is prioritised. CONCLUSION: The way in which continuous electronic fetal monitoring technology is designed and used is an important component of optimising physiological processes and positive experiences for women during labour and birth for women with complex pregnancies. Non-invasive fetal electrocardiograpy is a promising additional option for women.

Getting kicked off the program: Women's experiences of antenatal exclusion from publicly-funded homebirth in Australia.

PROBLEM: Eligibility criteria for publicly-funded homebirth models are strict and, as such, many women who initially plan a homebirth later become excluded. BACKGROUND: Fifteen publicly-funded homebirth programs are operating in Australia, offering eligible women the opportunity to give birth at home at no cost, with the care of a hospital-employed midwife. AIM: To explore the experiences of women who planned a publicly-funded homebirth and were later excluded due to pregnancy complications or risk factors. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive approach was taken. Recruitment was via social media sites specifically related to homebirth in Australia. Data collection involved semi-structured telephone interviews. Transcripts were thematically analysed. FINDINGS: Thirteen women participated. They were anxious about 'Jumping through hoops' to maintain their low-risk status. After being 'Kicked off the program', women carefully 'negotiated the system' in order to get the birth they wanted in hospital. Some women felt bullied and coerced into complying with hospital protocols that did not account for their individual needs. Maintaining the midwife-woman relationship was a protective factor, decreasing negative experiences. DISCUSSION: Women plan a homebirth to avoid the medicalised hospital environment and to gain access to continuity of midwifery care. To provide maternity care that is acceptable to women, hospital institutions need to design services that enable continuity of the midwife-woman relationship and assess risk on an individual basis. CONCLUSION: Exclusion from publicly-funded homebirth has the potential to negatively impact women who may feel a sense of loss, uncertainty or emotional distress related to their planned place of birth.

Assessment of childbirth-related post traumatic stress disorder in Australian mothers: Psychometric properties of the City Birth Trauma Scale.

BACKGROUND: The City Birth Trauma Scale (BiTS; Ayers, Wright & Thornton, 2018) is self-report measure of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms following childbirth, based on DSM-5 criteria. We report on the first study of the psychometric properties of the BiTS in the Australian population. METHODS: Participants were mothers of infants aged 0-12 months (N = 705), who completed the BiTS and measures of related constructs. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to assess the factor structure of the BiTS. Examination of the reliability, convergent, divergent and discriminant validity and acceptability of the BiTS was also examined. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis supported a bi-factor model of Birth-related Symptoms (BRS) and General Symptoms (GS) of post-partum PTSD as well as a global CB-PTSD factor. Internal consistency was found for the BiTS total scale and two proposed subscales (BRS and GS). BiTS total scores were significantly associated with an established measure of PTSD, providing support for convergent validity. Evidence of discriminant validity was examined by comparing the BiTS to an established measure of postpartum depression. LIMITATIONS: The present sample may over-represent participants with traumatic birth experiences in comparison to the general public. Furthermore, use of self-report measures limits the capacity to confirm the diagnostic status of participants. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the BiTS is a valid and reliable measure of childbirth-related PTSD, suited for use in postpartum populations. Total scores on the measure may be informative for clinical and research purposes, while evidence suggests strong support for interpretation of subscale scores.

Midwifery continuity of care for women with complex pregnancies in Australia: An integrative review.

BACKGROUND: All women require access to quality maternity care. Continuity of midwifery care can enhance women's experiences of childbearing and is associated with positive outcomes for women and infants. Much research on these models has been conducted with women with uncomplicated pregnancies; less is known about outcomes for women with complexities. AIM: To explore the outcomes and experiences for women with complex pregnancies receiving midwifery continuity of care in Australia. METHODS: This integrative review used Whittemore and Knafl's approach. Authors searched five electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and MAG Online) and assessed the quality of relevant studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) appraisal tools. FINDINGS: Fourteen studies including women with different levels of obstetric risk were identified. However, only three reported outcomes separately for women categorised as either moderate or high risk. Perinatal outcomes reported included mode of birth, intervention rates, blood loss, perineal trauma, preterm birth, admission to special care and breastfeeding rates. Findings were synthesised into three themes: 'Contributing to safe processes and outcomes', 'Building relational trust', and 'Collaborating and communicating'. This review demonstrated that women with complexities in midwifery continuity of care models had positive experiences and outcomes, consistent with findings about low risk women. DISCUSSION: The nascency of the research on midwifery continuity of care for women with complex pregnancies in Australia is limited, reflecting the relative dearth of these models in practice. CONCLUSION: Despite favourable findings, further research on outcomes for women of all risk is needed to support the expansion of midwifery continuity of care.

Wanting to be 'with woman', not with machine: Midwives' experiences of caring for women being continuously monitored in labour.

PROBLEM: Some continuous electronic fetal monitoring (CEFM) devices restrict women's bodily autonomy by limiting their mobility in labour and birth. BACKGROUND: Little is known about how midwives perceive the impact of CEFM technologies on their practice. AIM: This paper explores the way different fetal monitoring technologies influence the work of midwives. METHODS: Wireless and beltless 'non-invasive fetal electrocardiogram' (NIFECG) was trialled on 110 labouring women in an Australian maternity hospital. A focus group pertaining to midwives' experiences of using CTG was conducted prior to the trial. After the trial, midwives were asked about their experiences of using NIFECG. All data were analysed using thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Midwives felt that wired CTG creates barriers to physiological processes. Whilst wireless CTG enables greater freedom of movement for women, it requires constant 'fiddling' from midwives, drawing their attention away from the woman. Midwives felt the NIFECG better enabled them to be 'with woman'. DISCUSSION: Midwives play a pivotal role in mediating the influence of CEFM on women's experiences in labour. Exploring the way in which different forms of CEFM impact on midwives' practice may assist us to better understand how to prioritise the woman in order to facilitate safe and satisfying birth experiences. CONCLUSION: The presence of CEFM technology in the birth space impacts midwives' ways of working and their capacity to be woman-centred. Current CTG technology may impede midwives' capacity to be 'with woman'. Compared to the CTG, the NIFECG has the potential to enable midwives to provide more woman-centred care for those experiencing complex pregnancies.

The use of continuous foetal monitoring technologies that enable mobility in labour for women with complex pregnancies: A survey of Australian and New Zealand hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Freedom of movement and choice of positioning in labour and birth is known to enhance physiological processes and positive experiences for women during childbirth. Continuous foetal monitoring technologies that enable mobility in labour for women with complex pregnancies, such as wireless CTG, have been marketed for clinical use in most high resource settings since 2003 but there is a paucity of midwifery literature about its clinical use. The aim of this survey was to determine how often, and for whom, wireless and beltless technologies are being used in maternity settings across Australia and New Zealand and to identify any barriers to their uptake. DESIGN: A survey tool developed by Watson et al. (2018) for use in the United Kingdom was adapted for the Australian/New Zealand context. One Maternity Unit Manager or key midwifery clinician from each of 208 public and private hospitals across Australia and New Zealand was invited by email to participate in an online survey between October 2019 and January 2020. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the characteristics of the facilities and the frequency of availability of the monitors. Free text responses were thematically analysed. FINDINGS: The survey received a high (71%) response rate from a range of public and private hospitals in urban and rural settings. Women's freedom of movement and sense of choice and control in labour were seen by most respondents to be positively influenced by wireless monitoring technology. Most facilities reported having at least one wireless or beltless foetal monitor available, however, results suggest that many women consenting to continuous monitoring still do not have access to technology that enables freedom of movement. KEYCONCLUSIONS: Further research is required to explore the barriers and facilitators to enabling freedom of movement and positioning to all women in childbirth, including those women with complex pregnancies who may consent to continuous foetal monitoring.

Harnessing technology to enable all women mobility in labour and birth: feasibility of implementing beltless non-invasive fetal ECG applying the NASSS framework.

BACKGROUND: A new wireless and beltless monitoring device utilising fetal and maternal electrocardiography (ECG) and uterine electromyography, known as 'non-invasive fetal ECG' (NIFECG) was registered for clinical use in Australia in 2018. The safety and reliability of NIFECG has been demonstrated in controlled settings for short periods during labour. As far as we are aware, at the time our study commenced, this was globally the first trial of such a device in an authentic clinical setting for the entire duration of a woman's labour. METHODS: This study aimed to assess the feasibility of using NIFECG fetal monitoring for women undergoing continuous electronic fetal monitoring during labour and birth. Women were eligible to participate in the study if they were at 36 weeks gestation or greater with a singleton pregnancy, planning to give birth vaginally and with obstetric indications as per local protocol (NSW Health Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring Guideline GL2018_025. 2018) for continuous intrapartum fetal monitoring. Written informed consent was received from participating women in antenatal clinic prior to the onset of labour. This single site clinical feasibility study took place between January and July 2020 at the Royal Hospital for Women in Sydney, Australia. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected to inform the analysis of results using the NASSS (Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale up, Spread and Sustainability) framework, a validated tool for analysing the implementation of new health technologies into clinical settings. RESULTS: Women responded positively about the comfort and freedom of movement afforded by the NIFECG. Midwives reported that when no loss of contact occurred, the device enabled them to focus less on the technology and more on supporting women's physical and emotional needs during labour. Midwives and obstetricians noticed the benefits for women but expressed a need for greater certainty about the reliability of the signal. CONCLUSION: The NIFECG device enables freedom of movement and positioning for labouring women and was well received by women and the majority of clinicians. Whilst measurement of the uterine activity was reliable, there was uncertainty for clinicians in relation to loss of contact of the fetal heart rate. If this can be ameliorated the device shows potential to be used as routinely as cardiotocography (CTG) for fetal monitoring. This is the first time the NASSS framework has been used to synthesise the implementation needs of a health technology in the care of women during labour and birth. Our findings contribute new knowledge about the determinants for implementation of a complex technology in a maternity care setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Universal Trial Number is reU1111-1228-9845 and the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registration Number is 12619000293167p. Trial registration occurred on the 20 February, 2019. The trial protocol may be viewed at http://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377027.

Exploring the qualities of midwifery-led continuity of care in Australia (MiLCCA) using the quality maternal and newborn care framework.

PROBLEM: Midwifery-led continuity of care has well documented evidence of benefits for mothers and babies, however uptake of these models by Australian maternity services has been slow. BACKGROUND: It is estimated that only 10% of women have access to midwifery-led continuity of care in Australia. The Quality Maternal Newborn Care (QMNC) Framework has been developed as a way to implement and upscale health systems that meet the needs of childbearing women and their infants. The Framework can be used to explore the qualities of existing maternity services. AIM: We aimed to use the QMNC Framework to explore the qualities of midwifery-led continuity of care in two distinct settings in Australia with recommendations for replication of the model in similar settings. METHODS: Data were collected from services users and service providers via focus groups. Thematic analysis was used to develop initial findings that were then mapped back to the QMNC Framework. FINDINGS: Good quality care was facilitated by Fostering connection, Providing flexibility for women and midwives and Having a sense of choice and control. Barriers to the provision of quality care were: Contested care and Needing more preparation for unexpected outcomes. DISCUSSION: Midwifery-led continuity of carer models shift the power dynamic from a hierarchical one, to one of equality between women and midwives facilitating informed decision making. There are ongoing issues with collaboration between general practice, obstetrics and midwifery. Organisations have a responsibility to address the challenges of contested care and to prepare women for all possible outcomes to ensure women experience the best quality care as described in the framework. CONCLUSION: The QMNC Framework is a useful tool for exploring the facilitators and barriers to the widespread provision of midwifery-led continuity of care.

Seeing birth in a new light: The transformational effect of exposure to homebirth for hospital-based midwives.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to explore hospital-based midwives' experiences of providing publicly-funded homebirth services in Australia. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive study using a constructivist grounded theory methodology was undertaken. SETTING: Five different states or territories of Australia where publicly-funded homebirth services were operating. PARTICIPANTS: Interviews were conducted with 21 midwives and midwifery managers from eight different public hospitals who had recent experience of working in, or with, publicly-funded homebirth models. FINDINGS: Witnessing undisturbed birth in the home setting transformed midwives' attitudes towards birth. Following exposure to homebirth, many midwives felt they were seeing undisturbed birth for the first time. This led them to question their current understanding of physiological birth and develop a new awareness of the powerful influence that the environment has on labouring women. This new understanding resulted in changes to their practice. KEY CONCLUSIONS: For midwives accustomed to working in hospital settings, exposure to homebirth deepened their understanding of physiological birth, resulting in a perspective transformation and subsequent shift in practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Exposure to homebirth may motivate midwives to alter their practice in both home and hospital settings in order to shift the power dynamic between women and caregivers and protect women from unnecessary disturbance during labour.

From hospital to home: Australian midwives' experiences of transitioning into publicly-funded homebirth programs.

BACKGROUND: Over the past two decades, 14 publicly-funded homebirth models have been established in Australian hospitals. Midwives working in these hospitals now have the opportunity to provide homebirth care, despite many having never been exposed to homebirth before. The transition to providing homebirth care can be daunting for midwives who are accustomed to practising in the hospital environment. AIM: To explore midwives' experiences of transitioning from providing hospital to homebirth care in Australian public health systems. METHODS: A descriptive, exploratory study was undertaken. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with 13 midwives and midwifery managers who had recent experience transitioning into and working in publicly-funded homebirth programs. Thematic analysis was conducted on interview transcripts. FINDINGS: Six themes were identified. These were: skilling up for homebirth; feeling apprehensive; seeing birth in a new light; managing a shift in practice; homebirth-the same but different; and the importance of mentoring and support. DISCUSSION: Midwives providing homebirth work differently to those working in hospital settings. More experienced homebirth midwives may provide high quality care in a relaxed environment (compared to a hospital setting). Midwives acceptance of homebirth is influenced by their previous exposure to homebirth. CONCLUSION: The transition from hospital to homebirth care required midwives to work to the full scope of their practice. When well supported by colleagues and managers, midwives transitioning into publicly-funded homebirth programs can have a positive experience that allows for a greater understanding of and appreciation for normal birth.