Implementing midwifery units in a European country: Situational analysis of an Italian case study.

INTRODUCTION: Strong evidence recommends midwifery-led care for women with uncomplicated pregnancies. International research is now focusing on how to implement midwifery models of care in countries where they are not well established. In Europe, many countries like Italy are promoting midwifery-led care in national guidelines but often struggle to apply this change in practice. METHODS: This study collected data on professional, organisational and service users' levels to conduct a situational analysis of an Italian service which is approaching the implementation of a midwifery unit. Participatory Action Research was used together with the support of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to conduct data collection and analysis. RESULTS: Forty-eight participants amongst professionals (midwives, obstetricians and neonatologists) and at organisational level (midwifery leaders and medical directors) were recruited; secondary data on service users' views was analysed via regional online surveys. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation were identified to assess the readiness of the local context. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to include professionals, managers and service users in a European context such as Italy. Facilitators to the implementation of the alongside midwifery unit were found in national guidelines, allocated funding, collaborative engagement and medical support. Hierarchical structures, a prevalent medical model and lack of trust and awareness of the evidence of safety of midwifery-led models were main barriers.

What are the strategies for implementing primary care models in maternity? A systematic review on midwifery units.

BACKGROUND: Midwifery Units (MUs) are associated with optimal perinatal outcomes, improved service users' and professionals' satisfaction as well as being the most cost-effective option. However, they still do not represent the mainstream option of maternity care in many countries. Understanding effective strategies to integrate this model of care into maternity services could support and inform the MU implementation process that many countries and regions still need to approach. METHODS: A systematic search and screening of qualitative and quantitative research about implementation of new MUs was conducted (Prospero protocol reference: CRD42019141443) using PRISMA guidelines. Included articles were appraised using the CASP checklist. A meta-synthesis approach to analysis was used. No exclusion criteria for time or context were applied to ensure inclusion of different implementation attempts even under different historical and social circumstances. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to reflect the major contribution of higher quality studies. RESULTS: From 1037 initial citations, twelve studies were identified for inclusion in this review after a screening process. The synthesis highlighted two broad categories: implementation readiness and strategies used. The first included aspects related to cultural, organisational and professional levels of the local context whilst the latter synthesised the main actions and key points identified in the included studies when implementing MUs. A logic model was created to synthesise and visually present the findings. CONCLUSIONS: The studies selected were from a range of settings and time periods and used varying strategies. Nonetheless, consistencies were found across different implementation processes. These findings can be used in the systematic scaling up of MUs and can help in addressing barriers at system, service and individual levels. All three levels need to be addressed when implementing this model of care.

'Keeping birth normal': Exploratory evaluation of a training package for midwives in an inner-city, alongside midwifery unit.

OBJECTIVES: to gain understanding about how participants perceived the value and effectiveness of 'Keeping Birth Normal' training, barriers to implementing it in an along-side midwifery unit, and how the training might be enhanced in future iterations. DESIGN: exploratory interpretive. SETTING: inner-city maternity service. PARTICIPANTS: 31 midwives attending a one-day training package on one of three occasions. METHODS: data were collected using semi-structured observation of the training, a short feedback form (23/31 participants), and focus groups (28/31 participants). Feedback form data were analysed using summative content analysis, following which all data sets were pooled and thematically analysed using a template agreed by the researchers. FINDINGS: We identified six themes contributing to the workshop's effectiveness as perceived by participants. Three related to the workshop design: (1) balanced content, (2) sharing stories and strategies and (3) 'less is more.' And three related to the workshop leaders: (4) inspiration and influence, (5) cultural safety and (6) managing expectations. Cultural focus on risk and low prioritisation of normal birth were identified as barriers to implementing evidence-based practice supporting normal birth. Building a community of practice and the role of consultant midwives were identified as potential opportunities. KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: a review of evidence, local statistics and practical skills using active educational approaches was important to this training. Two factors not directly related to content appeared equally important: catalysing a community of practice and the perceived power of workshop leaders to influence organisational systems limiting the agency of individual midwives. Cyclic, interactive training involving consultant midwives, senior midwives and the multidisciplinary team may be recommended to be most effective.

Induction of labour: clinical predictive factors for success and failure.

Induction of labour (IOL) is a widely-used practice in obstetrics. Our aim was to evaluate predictors of vaginal delivery in postdate pregnancies induced with prostaglandins. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study with analytic component. A total of 145 women, admitted for IOL after the 41st week of gestation, were induced with a vaginal pessary releasing prostaglandins. Type of delivery, whether vaginal or caesarean, was the outcome. Several maternal and foetal variables were investigated. The Kaplan-Maier curves, monovariate and a multivariate logistic regression were carried out. In our population, 80.7% of women had vaginal delivery after the induction. Multiparity and a high Bishop score at the beginning of the IOL were protective factors for a vaginal delivery (respectively OR 0.16, p = .028 and OR 0.62, p = .034) while age >35 years, and the foetal birth weight >3500 g at the birth, resulted in being risk factors for caesarean section (respectively OR 4.20, p = .006 and OR 3.63, p = .013). IMPACT STATEMENT What is already known on this subject: Induction of labour (IOL) is a widely used practice in obstetrics. Scientific literature shows several predictors of successful induction, although there is no unanimity except for 'multiparity' and 'favourable Bishop score' which are associated with positive outcome of the induction. The main difficulty in finding other predictive factors is the heterogeneity of this field (different local protocols in each hospital, type of induction, populations and outcomes chosen in each study). In addition to that, populations are not always comparable due to the different gestation. For this reason, we decided to select a specific population of women, such as low risk postterm pregnancies induced with prostaglandins, in order to detect possible predictive factors for the success of the IOL for women with uncomplicated pregnancies. What the results of this study add: Our study agrees with existing literature that 'multiparity' and 'Bishop score' are linked with the success of IOL and adds that 'maternal age' and 'foetal birth weight' are significant risk factors for the population of uncomplicated post term pregnancies induced with prostaglandins. What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research: Our results agreed with the existing literature regarding parity and Bishop score but not for maternal age and birth weight. This adds new precious data to the literature which could be used for systematic reviews and for implementing IOL guidelines and protocols, nationally and internationally. Our findings could be also used for guiding future research in this field. It will be interesting to investigate the existence of not just specific factors but also any combination of variables which could predict the success of the procedure. At the moment these information cannot be used in terms of decision making for healthcare professionals as no variable is 100% predictive but once further research will be added, we may be able to know when is best time to start the IOL, how to facilitate the success of the procedure and how to best support the woman throughout the whole experience.