“I Wasn't Alone”—A Study of Group Prenatal Care in the Military

The military has recognized that health and quality of life for service members are closely tied to the resources for their families, including how they are cared for during pregnancy and childbirth. However, there has been little examination of women's experience with different models of prenatal care (PNC) in military settings. The purpose of this article is to describe the results of a qualitative study of women's experiences with the CenteringPregnancy model of group PNC compared to individual PNC in two military health care settings. This clinical trial enrolled 322 women who were randomized into group or individual PNC at two military treatment facilities. Qualitative interviews were completed with 234 women during the postpartum period. Interpretative narrative and thematic analysis was used to identify three themes: 1) “I wasn't alone”—the experience with group PNC; 2) “I liked it but…”—recommendations to improve group PNC; and 3) “They really need to listen”—general concerns across the sample about PNC. Greatest concerns of women in individual PNC included lack of continuity and time with the provider. Our military families must be assured that their health care system meets their needs through personal and family‐centered care. Group PNC offers the potential for continuity of provider while also offering community with other women. In the process, women gain knowledge and power as a health care consumer.     

Women as Consumers of Maternity Care: Measuring “Satisfaction” or “Dissatisfaction”?

ABSTRACT: The measurement of “satisfaction” has been intrinsic to the models of evaluation of health care. However, a thoughtful approach to its use has not always been evident in which this concept is understood to represent a complex group of theoretical constructs involving attitudes, expectations, and perceptions that may be both positive and critical. These constructs require investigation and evaluation using recognized and developed methodologies. At the same time the importance of listening to patients and to women and their partners in evaluating and carrying out research on maternity care cannot be underestimated if the instruments used are to have construct and face validity. Qualitative data of this kind have a dual function of contributing to a more complex picture of women’s experience and of suggesting that researchers need to explore the issues related to “dissatisfaction” at least as much as those arising from a positive overall view of care. (BIRTH 35:1 March 2008)     

Improving Quality and Safety in Maternity Care: The Contribution of Midwife‐Led Care

This article draws on findings from a recent Cochrane systematic review of midwife‐led care and discusses its contribution to the safety and quality of women's care in the domains of safety, effectiveness, woman‐centeredness, and efficiency. According to the Cochrane review, women who received models of midwife‐led care were nearly eight times more likely to be attended at birth by a known midwife, were 21% less likely to experience fetal loss before 24 weeks' gestation, 19% less likely to have regional analgesia, 14% less likely to have instrumental birth, 18% less likely to have an episiotomy, and significantly more likely to have a spontaneous vaginal birth, initiate breastfeeding, and feel in control. In addition to normalizing and humanizing birth, the contribution of midwife‐led care to the quality and safety of health care is substantial. The implications are that policymakers who wish to improve the quality and safety of maternal and infant care, particularly around normalizing and humanizing birth, should consider midwife‐led models of care and how financing of midwife‐led services can support this. Suggestions for future research include exploring why fetal loss is reduced under 24 weeks' gestation in midwife‐led models of care, and ensuring that the effectiveness of midwife‐led models of care on mothers' and infants' health and well‐being are assessed in the longer postpartum period.     

Self‐Rated “No‐” and “Low‐” Risk Pregnancy: A Comparison of Outcomes for Women in Obstetric‐Led and Midwife‐Led Units in England

ABSTRACT: Background: Debate in the United Kingdom about place of birth often concerns obstetric‐led units and midwife‐led units and relates to notions of risk and safety. Outcomes for these two types of unit are often not comparable because of the restricted selection criteria for midwife‐led units. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes for women intending to give birth in these different types of unit and whose self‐rated pregnancy risk level was “none” or “low.” Methods: Self‐completion questionnaires were distributed to mothers 8 days after the birth in 9 units (6 midwife led 3 obstetric led) over a 6‐month period. Results: Completed questionnaires were received from 432 women (midwife led = 294, obstetric led = 138). Mothers in midwife‐led units spent shorter times in labor in the unit (p < 0.01), received less analgesia (p < 0.01) and had fewer interventions (p < 0.01), and were more likely to have a normal delivery (p < 0.01) than women in obstetric‐led units. Similar differences were found for both primiparous and multiparous women. In terms of the number of midwives attending each woman, analysis of covariance suggested different models of care depending on type of unit (p < 0.05) and parity (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Since these mothers’ self‐rated risk level was none or low, some comparability of outcomes is permissible. It appears that models of care are significantly different in obstetric‐led units compared with midwife‐led units, leading to greater likelihood of intrapartum intervention, need for analgesia, and assisted or operative delivery. A randomized controlled trial examining such units would permit a conclusive examination of these outcomes. (BIRTH 34:4 December 2007)     

“Universal Precautions”: Perinatal Touch and Examination after Childhood Sexual Abuse

Background: Childhood sexual abuse is a common experience of Australian women with 1 woman in 3 reporting unwanted sexual activity, and 1 in 10 reporting attempted or penetrative sexual abuse before 16 years of age. The objective of this study was to explore women's responses to perinatal professional touch and examination of themselves and their babies. Methods: Eighteen women were interviewed using an in‐depth semistructured qualitative method. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. The interviews were coded and thematically analyzed, using NVivo to assist with data management. To ensure rigor, four initial interviews were coded by a second researcher and discrepancies resolved. Results: Two key themes were identified by childhood sexual abuse survivors as important in improving service provision: safety issues for survivors and their babies in the clinical encounter and ways of making service provision safer. Conclusions: Childhood sexual abuse survivors experienced pain, dissociation, fear, blame, helplessness, and guilt in their encounters with health care practitioners. These experiences led to the development of a set of “Universal Precautions” for perinatal professionals responding to women and their children.     

The American College of Nurse‐Midwives Clarity in Collaboration Project: Describing Midwifery Care in Interprofessional Collaborative Care Models

In 2014, the American College of Nurse‐Midwives (ACNM) launched a project called Clarity in Collaboration to develop data definitions related to midwifery and maternity care delivery processes. These definitions are needed to ensure midwifery care delivered in collaborative care models is accurately and consistently captured in clinical documentation systems, data registries, and systems being developed as part of health care restructuring and payment reform. The Clarity in Collaboration project builds on the efforts of the Women's Health Registry Alliance (WHRA), which was recently established by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Clarity in Collaboration mirrored the process used by ReVITALize, WHRA's first maternity data standardization project, which focused on establishing standardized clinical data definitions for obstetrics. The ACNM Clarity in Collaboration project brought together maternity and midwifery care experts to complete a year‐long consensus process, including a period of public comment, resulting in development of 20 concept definitions. These definitions can be used to describe midwifery care within the context of collaborative care models. This article provides a summary of the ACNM Clarity in Collaboration process with discussion of implications for maternity data collection.