Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37821937›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

The impact of funding models on the integration of Ontario midwives: a qualitative study.

Elizabeth K Darling, Sylvie B Lemay, 'Remi Ejiwunmi, Katherine J Miller, Ann E Sprague, Rohan D'Souza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Elizabeth K DarlingMcMaster Midwifery Research Centre, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, HSC-4H26, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada. darlinek@mcmaster.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2675-3222
Sylvie B LemayMcMaster Midwifery Research Centre, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, HSC-4H26, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.
'Remi EjiwunmiMcMaster Midwifery Research Centre, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, HSC-4H26, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Katherine J MillerDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Ann E SpragueBetter Outcomes Registry and Network (BORN) Ontario, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Rohan D'SouzaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNearly 30 years post legalisation and introduction, midwifery is still not optimally integrated within the health system of Canada's largest province, Ontario. Funding models have been identified as one of the main barriers.

methodsUsing a constructivist perspective, we conducted a qualitative descriptive study to examine how antepartum, intrapartum, and postpartum funding arrangements in Ontario impact midwifery integration. We conceptualized optimal 'integration' as circumstances in which midwives' knowledge, skills, and model of care are broadly respected and fully utilized, interprofessional collaboration and referral support the best possible care for patients, and midwives feel a sense of belonging within hospitals and the greater health system. We collected data through semi-structured telephone interviews with midwives, obstetricians, family physicians, and nurses. The data was examined using thematic analysis.

resultsWe interviewed 20 participants, including 5 obstetricians, 5 family physicians, 5 midwives, 4 nurses, and 1 policy expert. We found that while course-of-care-based midwifery funding is perceived to support high levels of midwifery client satisfaction and excellent clinical outcomes, it lacks flexibility. This limits opportunities for interprofessional collaboration and for midwives to use their knowledge and skills to respond to health system gaps. The physician fee-for-service funding model creates competition for births, has unintended consequences that limit midwives' scope and access to hospital privileges, and fails to appropriately compensate physician consultants, particularly as midwifery volumes grow. Siloing of midwifery funding from hospital funding further restricts innovative contributions from midwives to respond to community healthcare needs.

conclusionsSignificant policy changes, such as adequate remuneration for consultants, possibly including salary-based physician funding; flexibility to compensate midwives for care beyond the existing course of care model; and a clearly articulated health human resource plan for sexual and reproductive care are needed to improve midwifery integration.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareMaternal Health ServicesMidwiferyPhysicians, FamilyFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansOntarioPregnancyQualitative ResearchFees, medicalHealth servicesIntegrationMaternal health servicesMidwiferyOntarioQualitative researchReimbursement mechanismsRemuneration

Identifiers

PMID37821937
PMCPMC10568882

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.