Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27459967›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2016

Opinions of maternity care professionals and other stakeholders about integration of maternity care: a qualitative study in the Netherlands.

Hilde Perdok, Suze Jans, Corine Verhoeven, Lidewij Henneman, Therese Wiegers, Ben Willem Mol, François Schellevis, Ank de Jonge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Hilde PerdokDepartment of Midwifery Science, Midwifery Academy Amsterdam/Groningen (AVAG) and EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. h.perdok@vumc.nl.
Suze JansDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Section Community Genetics and EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Corine VerhoevenDepartment of Midwifery Science, Midwifery Academy Amsterdam/Groningen (AVAG) and EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lidewij HennemanDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Section Community Genetics and EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Therese WiegersNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ben Willem MolRobinson Institute, School of Paediatrics and Reproductive Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
François SchellevisNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ank de JongeDepartment of Midwifery Science, Midwifery Academy Amsterdam/Groningen (AVAG) and EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aims to give insight into the opinions of maternity care professionals and other stakeholders on the integration of midwife-led care and obstetrician-led care and on the facilitating and inhibiting factors for integrating maternity care.

methodsQualitative study using interviews and focus groups from November 2012 to February 2013 in the Netherlands. Seventeen purposively selected stakeholder representatives participated in individual semi-structured interviews and 21 in focus groups. One face-to-face focus group included a combined group of midwives, obstetricians and a paediatrician involved in maternity care. Two online focus groups included a group of primary care midwives and a group of clinical midwives respectively. Thematic analysis was performed using Atlas.ti. Two researchers independently coded the interview and focus group transcripts by means of a mind map and themes and relations between them were described.

resultsThree main themes were identified with regard to integrating maternity care: client-centred care, continuity of care and task shifting between professionals. Opinions differed regarding the optimal maternity care organisation model. Participants considered the current payment structure an inhibiting factor, whereas a new modified payment structure based on the actual amount of work performed was seen as a facilitating factor. Both midwives and obstetricians indicated that they were afraid to loose autonomy.

conclusionsAn integrated maternity care system may improve client-centred care, provide continuity of care for women during labour and birth and include a shift of responsibilities between health care providers. However, differences of opinion among professionals and other stakeholders with regard to the optimal maternity care organisation model may complicate the implementation of integrated care. Important factors for a successful implementation of integrated maternity care are an appropriate payment structure and maintenance of the autonomy of professionals.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelContinuity of Patient CarePatient-Centered CarePhysician's RoleCooperative BehaviorFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMidwiferyModels, OrganizationalNetherlandsObstetricsPatient ParticipationPregnancyProfessional AutonomyContinuity of careIntegrated careMaternity careMidwiferyObstetrics

Identifiers

PMID27459967
PMCPMC4962345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.