Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38707446›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Postnatal care provided by UK midwifery units and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey using the UK Midwifery Study System (UKMidSS).

Imogen Whyte, Alessandra Morelli, Ethel Burns, Rachel Rowe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Imogen WhyteOxford School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Alessandra MorelliNIHR Policy Research Unit in Maternal and Neonatal Health and Care, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Ethel BurnsOxford School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Rachel RoweNIHR Policy Research Unit in Maternal and Neonatal Health and Care, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Postnatal care supports healthy transitions to parenthood, mother-infant relationships, and breastfeeding establishment. Highly valued by women and families, it is often an area where parents report low satisfaction compared with other areas of maternity care. Most research about postnatal care is hospital-focused. Little is known about postnatal services provided by midwifery units, and any changes to this provision since the COVID-19 pandemic. Aim: To describe postnatal care services provided by UK midwifery units and examine the extent to which provision was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We carried out a national survey online between January-June 2022 using the United Kingdom Midwifery Study System (UKMidSS). We asked about postnatal care provision in alongside midwifery units (AMU) and freestanding midwifery units (FMU), before the COVID-19 pandemic (July-December 2019) and shortly after restrictions were eased (January-June 2022). Findings: Overall 131 (67 %) midwifery units responded to the survey, 76 (62 %) AMUs and 55 (75 %) FMUs, from 75 % of eligible NHS organisations. In 2022, 66 % of AMUs reported that women typically stayed for 6-24 h after a straightforward birth, while 70 % of FMUs reported typical postnatal stays of <6 h. For 2019, significantly more FMUs reported providing outpatient postnatal services compared with AMUs (98 % vs 57 %, p < 0.001). From 2019 to 2022 there were significant reductions in partners staying overnight in midwifery units (65 %-42 %, p < 0.001), and in the provision of outpatient postnatal breastfeeding groups (23 %-15 %, p < 0.01) and other postnatal groups (7 %-2 %, p = 0.02). Conclusions: The findings document the ways in which postnatal care provision differs between AMUs and FMU, with potential consequences for choice and experience for women. They are also congruent with evidence that maternity care was adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, including a reduction in postnatal visiting for partners and in postnatal group support services.

Identifiers

PMID38707446
PMCPMC11066328

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.