Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35263377›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

It was tough, but necessary. Organizational changes in a community based maternity care system during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative analysis in the Netherlands.

Iris F Appelman, Suzanne M Thompson, Lauri M M van den Berg, Janneke T Gitsels van der Wal, Ank de Jonge, Martine H Hollander

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. COVID-19 Pandemic- Ethical Challenges for Healthcare Workers Practicing in Resource-Limited Settings.Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association
    Review
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

6 authors.

Iris F AppelmanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7745-1182
Suzanne M ThompsonDepartment of Midwifery Science, AVAG/Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lauri M M van den BergDepartment of Midwifery Science, AVAG/Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Janneke T Gitsels van der WalDepartment of Midwifery Science, AVAG/Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5742-7246
Ank de JongeDepartment of Midwifery Science, AVAG/Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Martine H HollanderDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2pandemic necessitated several changes in maternity care. We investigated maternity care providers' opinions on the positive and negative effects of these changes and on potential areas of improvement for future maternity care both in times of crisis and in regular maternity care.

methodsWe conducted nineteen semi-structured in-depth interviews with obstetricians, obstetric residents, community-based and hospital-based midwives and obstetric nurses. The interviews were thematically analysed using inductive Thematic analysis.

resultsFive themes were generated: '(Dis)proportionate measures', 'A significant impact of COVID-19', 'Differing views on inter-provider cooperation', 'Reluctance to seek help' and 'Lessons learnt'. The Central Organizing Concept was: 'It was tough but necessary'. The majority of participants were positive about most of the measures that were taken and about their proportionality. These measures had a significant impact on maternity care providers, both mentally and on an organizational level. Most hospital-based care providers were positive about professional cooperation and communication, but some community-based midwives indicated that the cooperation between different midwifery care practices was suboptimal. Negative effects mentioned were a higher threshold for women to seek care, less partner involvement and perceived more fear among women and their partners, especially around birth. The most significant positive effect mentioned was increased use of eHealth tools. Recommendations for future care were to consider the necessity of prenatal and postnatal care more critically, to replace some face-to-face visits with eHealth and to provide more individualised care.

conclusionMaternity care providers experienced measures and organizational changes during the first wave of the COVID19-pandemic as tough, but necessary. They believed that a more critical consideration of medically necessary care, increased use of e-health and more individualised care might contribute to making maternity care more sustainable during and after the pandemic.

Indexed as

AdultCOVID-19FemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMaternal Health ServicesNetherlandsNursesOrganizational InnovationPhysiciansPregnancySARS-CoV-2Surveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID35263377
PMCPMC8906583

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.