Search

Evidence-based and sustainable intrapartum care policies are essential for safer, effective, and positive birth experiences. This scoping review aimed to map intrapartum care policies for pregnant women at low-risk of complications, in high-income countries with a universal health system. The study followed Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and PRISMA-ScR. Search was conducted on CINAHL-EBSCO, Scopus, MEDLINE-Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials-EBSCO, and, Academic Search Complete-EBSCO. Grey literature was searched, references screened and experts contacted for additional studies/policies. Data were extracted/analysed by two independent reviewers and results were presented in tabular and narrative format. The concept was governmental intrapartum care policies, the context were OECD high-income countries with a health-financing system founded on the Beveridge Model and the participants were low-risk pregnant women From the 561 records screened, 22 were selected, concerning intrapartum care policies from Australia, Denmark, Spain, Finland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom. All the included records were retrieved in the grey literature. No intrapartum care governmental policies were found for Greece, Iceland, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, and Sweden. Some countries do not refer to all the analysed care aspects and there are differences in detail, depth, range, and scientific. The policies show general similarities but differ in the timing and the content of the recommended intrapartum care. Not all of the analysed countries have intrapartum care policies and those who have shown differences between recommendations. These results can be used to create/revise intrapartum care policies., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The COVID-19 social restrictions have increased the risk for depression compared to the previous period in Italian women with Low-Risk Pregnancy (LRP). lLess is known about the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on High-Risk Pregnancy (HRP). This study aimed: 1) to explore levels of depression in women who become pregnant before and during COVID-19 pandemic, distinguishing between LRP and HRP; 2) to analyze the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on pregnancy experience in LRP and HRP., Methods: A before-during COVID-19 pandemic cross-sectional study was carried out on 155 pregnant women (Mean age = 34.18), between 23 and 32 weeks of gestation. 77 women were recruited before COVID-19 pandemic (51.9% LRP; 48.1% HRP) and 78 women were recruited during COVID-19 pandemic (51.3% LRP; 48.7% HRP). HRP group was enrolled during hospitalization for high-risk pregnancy. Participants filled out Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Moreover, only COVID-19 group answered an open-ended question about the impact of restriction on pregnancy experience., Results: HRP women reported higher levels of depressive symptoms than LRP. No difference emerged for COVID (before/during) but an interaction effect between COVID-19 and obstetric condition was found. The qualitative results showed the impact of restrictions on emotions and concerns., Conclusion: Respect to the previous period, LRP women during COVID-19 presented an increased risk for depressive symptoms than HRP. The HRP women during COVID-19 seemed to use hospitalization as a resource to find a social support network with other pregnant women and to be reassured on the clinical ongoing of pregnancy., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Problem: It is unknown if client experiences with perinatal healthcare differ between low-risk and high-risk women., Background: In the Netherlands, risk selection divides pregnant women into low- and high-risk groups. Receiving news that a pregnancy or childbirth has an increased likelihood of complications can cause elevated levels of emotional distress., Aim: The purpose of this study is to describe client experiences with perinatal healthcare and to determine which, if any, background characteristics, pregnancy circumstances, childbirth or follow-up care characteristics are explaining variables of differences in client experiences between high-risk and low-risk women., Methods: Client experiences were measured with a validated questionnaire completed by 1388 women within 12 weeks after childbirth., Findings: Women rated their experiences with perinatal healthcare with a mean score of 3.78 on a scale of 1-4; 5.5% of the women rated their experiences as "notably bad". Client experiences with perinatal healthcare show small variations, with a lower mean score for women who were at high risk (3.75) compared to low-risk women (3.84). This difference is partially due to more unplanned medical interventions and pain relief during childbirth in the high-risk group. Also, single mothers and non-Dutch women were more susceptible to less positive experiences., Conclusion: Given the potential negative impact of adverse client experiences, this study highlights the need for healthcare professionals to be aware of what women are susceptible for having had negative experiences. It is advised that healthcare provision be altered to tailor to the needs of these women., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Current clinical guidelines and national policy in England support offering 'low risk' women a choice of birth setting, but despite an increase in provison of midwifery units in England the vast majority of women still give birth in obstetric units and there is uncertainty around how best to configure services. There is therefore a need to better understand women's birth place preferences. The aim of this review was to summarise the recent quantitative evidence on UK women's birth place preferences with a focus on identifying the service attributes that 'low risk' women prefer and on identifying which attributes women prioritise when choosing their intended maternity unit or birth setting., Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index, Social Science Index, CINAHL and ASSIA to identify quantitative studies published in scientific journals since 1992 and designed to describe and explore women's preferences in relation to place of birth. We included experimental stated preference studies, surveys and mixed-methods studies containing relevant quantitative data, where participants were 'low risk' or 'unselected' groups of women with experience of UK maternity services., Results: We included five experimental stated preference studies and four observational surveys, including a total of 4201 respondents. Most studies were old with only three conducted since 2000. Methodological quality was generally poor. The attributes and preferences most commonly explored related to pain relief, continuity of midwife, involvement/availability of medical staff, 'homely' environment/atmosphere, decision-making style, distance/travel time and need for transfer. Service attributes that were almost universally valued by women included local services, being attended by a known midwife and a preference for a degree of control and involvement in decision-making. A substantial proportion of women had a strong preference for care in a hospital setting where medical staff are not necessarily involved in their care, but are readily available., Conclusions: The majority of women appear to value some service attributes while preferences differ for others. Policy makers, commissioners and service providers might usefully consider how to extend the availability of services that most women value while offering a choice of options that enable women to access services that best fit their needs and preferences.

Objective: In the Netherlands, antenatal cardiotocography (aCTG) to assess fetal well‐being is performed in obstetrician‐led care. An innovative initiative was started to evaluate whether aCTG for specific indications—reduced fetal movements, external cephalic version, or postdate pregnancy—is feasible in non‐obstetrician‐led care settings by independent primary care midwives. Quality assessment is essential when reorganizing and shifting tasks and responsibilities. Therefore, we aimed to assess the inter‐ and intraobserver agreement for aCTG assessments between and within four professional groups involved in Dutch maternity care regarding the overall classification and assessment of the various components of aCTG. Method: This was a prospective study among 47 Dutch primary care midwives, hospital‐based midwives, residents, and obstetricians. Ten aCTG traces were assessed twice at a 1 month interval. To ensure a representative sample, we used two different sets of 10 aCTG traces each. We calculated the degree of agreement using the proportions of agreement. Results: The proportions of agreement for interobserver agreement on the classification of aCTG between and within the four professional groups varied from 0.82 to 0.94. The proportions of agreement for each professional group were slightly higher for intraobserver (0.86–0.94) than for interobserver agreement. For the various aCTG components, the proportions of agreement for interobserver agreement varied from 0.64 (presence of contractions) to 0.98 (baseline heart frequency). Conclusion: The proportion of agreement levels between and within the maternity care professionals in the classification of aCTG traces among healthy women were comparable. This means that these professional groups are equally well able to classify aCTGs in healthy pregnant women. Synopsis: The proportion of agreement levels between and within professionals in midwife‐led and obstetrician‐led care in the classification of antenatal cardiotocography traces among healthy women are comparable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In recent decades, medical supervision of the labor and delivery process has expanded beyond its boundaries to the extent that in many settings, childbirth has become a medical event. This situation has influenced midwifery care. One of the significant barriers to midwives providing care to pregnant women is the medicalization of childbirth. So far, the policies and programs of the Ministry of Health to reduce medical interventions and cesarean section rates have not been successful. Therefore, the current study aims to be conducted with the purpose of "Designing a Midwife-Led Birth Center Program Based on the MAP-IT Model". Methods/design: The current study is a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design by using the MAP-IT model includes 5 steps: Mobilize, Assess, Plan, Implement, and Track, providing a framework for planning and evaluating public health interventions in a community. It will be implemented in three stages: The first phase of the research will be a cross-sectional descriptive study to determine the attitudes and preferences towards establishing a midwifery-led birthing center focusing on midwives and women of childbearing age by using two researcher-made questionnaires to assess the participants' attitudes and preferences toward establishing a midwifery-led birthing center. Subsequently, extreme cases will be selected based on the participants' average attitude scores toward establishing a midwifery-led birthing center in the quantitative section. In the second stage of the study, qualitative in-depth interviews will be conducted with the identified extreme cases from the first quantitative phase and other stakeholders (the first and second steps of the MAP-IT model, namely identifying and forming a stakeholder coalition, and assessing community resources and real needs). In this stage, the conventional qualitative content analysis approach will be used. Subsequently, based on the quantitative and qualitative data obtained up to this stage, a midwifery-led birthing center program based on the third step of the MAP-IT model, namely Plan, will be developed and validated using the Delphi method. Discussion: This is the first study that uses a mixed-method approach for designing a midwife-led maternity care program based on the MAP-IT model. This study will fill the research gap in the field of improving midwife-led maternity care and designing a program based on the needs of a large group of pregnant mothers. We hope this program facilitates improved eligibility of midwifery to continue care to manage and improve their health easily and affordably. Ethical code: IR.MUMS.NURSE.REC. 1403. 014. Plain English summary: In recent decades, medical management of the labor and delivery process has extended beyond its limitations to the extent that in many settings, childbirth has become a medical event. This situation has influenced midwifery care. The global midwifery situation indicates that one in every five women worldwide gives birth without the support of a skilled attendant. One of the significant barriers to midwives providing care to pregnant women is the medicalization of childbirth. In industrialized countries, maternal and infant mortality rates have decreased over the past 60 years due to medical or social reasons. So far, the policies and programs of the Ministry of Health to diminish medical interventions and cesarean section rates have not been successful. Midwifery models in hospital care contain midwives who support women's choices and diverse ideas about childbirth on the one hand, and on the other hand, they must adhere to organizational guidelines as employees, primarily based on a medical and pathological approach rather than a health-oriented and midwifery perspective. Therefore, the current study aims to be conducted with the purpose of "Designing a midwifery-led birth centered maternity program based on the MAP-IT model". It is a Model for Implementing Healthy People 2030, (Mobilize, Assess, Plan, Implement, Track), a step-by-step method for creating healthy communities. Using MAP-IT can help public health professionals and community changemakers implement a plan that is tailored to a community's needs and assets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: Patient- or woman-centered care, prioritizing women's perspectives, needs, and preferences, is a widely recommended approach to enhance the quality of maternity care services. It aligns with the broader principles of patient-centered care, emphasizing the importance of a collaborative and respectful relationship between healthcare providers and women. This study evaluates low-risk pregnancies managed by midwives and obstetrician-gynecologists in Lithuania using patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures. Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted between September 2022 and April 2023. Data were collected through patient-reported questionnaires. Results: A total of 153 pregnant women who had singleton, low-risk pregnancies participated in the study, of whom 24.8% had their pregnancies supervised by a midwife, and 75.2% of the participants had their pregnancies supervised by an obstetrician-gynecologist. The study found no statistically significant differences in assessed patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures between both models of care. Conclusions: Adopting patient-centered approaches enables healthcare systems to understand and address women's specific needs and preferences, fostering high-quality and woman-centered care. This research adds to the growing evidence supporting midwife-led care and emphasizes the importance of personalized, woman-centered approaches in maternity care, ultimately enhancing maternal health outcomes and promoting positive experiences for low-risk pregnant women. The quality of care provided by midwives remains uncompromised and equivalently proficient compared to the care provided by collaborative teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background With computerized analysis of fetal heart rate(FHR) data from long-range monitoring, we aimed to comprehensively clarify the characteristics of FHR with increasing gestational age in low-risk pregnant women during the third trimester of pregnancy. Methods This was an observational study. 85 fetuses of low-risk pregnant women were included. The data covered 28 ∼ 40 weeks of gestation, and 125 cases of FHR monitoring from 85 fetuses were totally collected. The FHR baseline rate, variability, and acceleration were computationally calculated, analyzed and compared. Results The average effective monitoring time for each case was 13.9 ± 4.3 h. FHR baseline gradually decreased as the gestational age progressed, and the maximum FHR baseline appeared at 28–29 weeks, which was 137.5 (133.0, 141.3) bpm, whereas the minimum FHR baseline appeared at 38–39 weeks, that was 132.8 (128.1, 138.4) bpm. FHR variability fluctuated in (4–12）bpm. It gradually increased from 28 to 33 weeks of gestation, reached the maximum of 7.6 (6.0–9.4) bpm, and then decreased until full-term pregnancy. The moderate variability proportion of FHR gradually increased from 28 weeks of gestation, peaked at 32–33 weeks as 65.8%, and then gradually decreased to 56.2% at 37 weeks, which was maintained at this level until 39 weeks. The variation tendency of minimal variability proportion was opposite to moderate variability proportion. When it reached 40 weeks, the minimal and moderate variability proportions were 50.0% and 49.0%, respectively. The FHR acceleration area showed no trend change during the third trimester, while fluctuated in (29.5–42.4) lattices/h. Conclusion This study revealed that the characteristics of FHR gradually changed with increasing gestational age, and the most obvious change was observed at 32–33 weeks, demonstrating that the specific gestational weeks may be an important period for the physiological bias of FHR tends to mature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the psychological health associated with prenatal screening in low‐risk pregnancy for chromosomal aneuploidy. Methods: This longitudinal study was performed on 310 low‐risk pregnancies for chromosomal aneuploidies. Using the standard DASS‐21 questionnaire, levels of stress, anxiety, and depression were assessed—prior to the recommended time for the first‐trimester screening test (T1), after the first‐trimester tests on the second referral (T2) concurrently with the request for the second‐trimester tests (T3)—and compared between women undergoing the prenatal screening and in women refusing it. Results: The results showed that the mean of stress, anxiety, and depression levels were not different between groups at T1; but the level of the stress, depression, and anxiety were higher in the screening group than the non‐screening group. The effect of group on changes in the stress, depression, and anxiety levels was significant. Conclusion: The results revealed that the prenatal screening program in low‐risk pregnancies for chromosomal aneuploidy can be followed by rising psychological symptoms and this psychological burden should be conceded on prenatal screening tests for pregnant women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Our aim was to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes of women with a low‐risk pregnancy attending the "Cocoon," an alongside midwifery‐led birth center and care pathway, with women with a low‐risk pregnancy attending the traditional care pathway in a tertiary care hospital in Belgium. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of maternal and neonatal outcomes of women with a low‐risk pregnancy who chose to adhere to the Cocoon pathway of care (n = 590) and women with a low‐risk pregnancy who chose the traditional pathway of care (n = 394) from March 1, 2014, to February 29, 2016. We performed all analyses using an intention‐to‐treat approach. Results: In this setting, the cesarean birth rate was 10.3% compared with 16.0% in the traditional care pathway (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] 0.42 [95% CI 0.25‐0.69]), the induction rate was 16.3% compared with 30.5% (0.46 [0.30‐0.69]), the epidural analgesia rate was 24.9% compared with 59.1% (0.15 [0.09‐0.22]), and the episiotomy rate was 6.8% compared with 14.5% (0.31 [0.17‐0.56]). There was no increase in adverse neonatal outcomes. Intrapartum and postpartum transfer rates to the traditional pathway of care were 21.1% and 7.1%, respectively. Conclusions: Women planning their births in the midwifery‐led unit, the Cocoon, experienced fewer interventions with no increase in adverse neonatal outcomes. Our study gives initial support for the introduction of similar midwifery‐led care pathways in other hospitals in Belgium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To establish a curve of amniotic fluid index [AFI] measurements from the 20th to the 42nd week of pregnancy. Methods: A prospective and descriptive study was performed, in which an independent sample of 2,868 low-risk pregnant women were studied using routine ultrasound, including fetal biometry and measurement of AFI. Data were analysed using multiple linear regression, and constructing a curve using 2.5th, 10th, 50th, 90th and 97.5th percentiles of the AFI measurements, according to gestational age, and after submitting values to smoothing process using quadratic polynomial adjustment. Results: There was a significant variation in AFI measurements at the different gestational ages. The 50th percentile remained practically constant at approximately 150 mm between the 20th and 33rd week, after which there was a decline in volume, which became evident after the 38th week. At the 40th week, the 10th percentile was around 62 mm and the 2.5th percentile around 33 mm. Conclusions: The curve of percentiles of AFI measurements in low-risk pregnant women showed significant decrease with gestational age, especially after the 33rd week. These data should be validated for a diagnosis of increased or decreased volumes of amniotic fluid at specific gestational ages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]