Preparing midwifery students to provide continuity of care

Continuity of midwifery care provides superior maternal and neonatal outcomes (Sandall et al., 2016). Access to continuity of care models is limited, both for women and for midwifery students who have the opportunity to gain direct experience of such models. There is also concern that placing students in a continuity of care model rather than a standard hospital model of care may reduce their learning.

New research from Professor Kathleen Baird, Ms Carolyn Hastie, Ms Paula Stanton and Emeritus Professor Jenny Gamble of the Transforming Maternity Care Collaborative focussed on the learning experiences of students who complete an extended placement in a midwifery group practice providing continuity of care at one university (Baird et al., 2021). Final year midwifery students were able to elect to take part in a six-month placement in a midwifery group practice team. The research team conducted focus group interviews to explore the experiences of fifteen students who had taken part in the placement.

Students reported that their placement in the midwifery group practice was the highlight of their degree and was not as demanding as they had anticipated. Being able to develop skills in providing relationship-based care was highly valued by students and was enabled and supported by the midwives they were working with. The culture of the midwifery group practice in which students were placed provided a supportive environment were students learned to take care of themselves and their team members, and to collaborate with other members of the team. Students felt that they were valued members of the team. Returning back to the hospital shift-based system was challenging for most students. They were aware of a loss of autonomy and a faster pace of care. Some were supported well in this transition, while others were criticised for their choice to spend time in the midwifery group practice.

This research enables midwifery educators to feel confident that prolonged immersive student placements in midwifery continuity of care models provides positive learning experiences. The students described feeling and acting like a “real midwife” during their placement, with six being adamant that they would apply for a position in a midwifery group practice immediately after graduation. Increased access to midwifery continuity of care models for women would provide more opportunities for midwifery students to gain experience of working in this model.

 

Baird, K., Hastie, C. R., Stanton, P., & Gamble, J. (2021). Learning to be a midwife: Midwifery students’ experiences of an extended placement within a midwifery group practice. Women and Birth. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2021.01.002

 

Sandall, J., Soltani, H., Gates, S., Shennan, A., & Devane, D. (2016, Apr 28). Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women. [Meta-Analysis]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 4(11), CD004667. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004667.pub5

 

This précis of our research has been reproduced from the Transforming Maternity Care Collaborative website 

King hit on the funny bone: Labia room

I love humour.
I love those people who have a great sense of humour. I'm always amazed when someone can come out with just the right response to a situation. I love it when something someone says is so funny, I laugh til tears roll down my face. Quirky, off beat, clever humour like that of the Monty Python team really appeals to me. I can watch their skits and movies over and over again.

However, unkind and derogatory put downs or sling offs aimed at those who are vulnerable I find rude, offensive and inappropriate, not funny.

I also love social media. I love the way the various forms of social media provide an easy and quick way to keep in touch and gain and share information. Twitter, for example, was invaluable to many as a tool of communication during the recent natural disasters. The ability to communicate over huge distances with a minumum of fuss has meant that social media is increasingly used as a tool for health promotion. With that ease of communication enabled by the various social media platforms has come concerns about privacy, online behaviour and confidentiality. A code of conduct for online behaviour, coined 'netiquette' has emerged.

Unfortunately for many, they think their conversations on social media are the same as in the tea room, pub or corridor.

They are not.

They are permanently recorded and therefore able to be read by anyone for all time. A good way to think about it is to consider that what you say on a social media platform is like writing it on the front page of a national newspaper. If you wouldn't want what you are going to say recorded in that way, then don't use social media for that conversation.

Many of us have written about the use of social media for health professionals. I wrote an article earlier this year for midwives in our college newsletter. Still I see indiscretion amongst my colleagues posts at times that I feel concerned about. I do wonder how those who use health care think about some of the comments that are made; how would prospective employers perceive such comments if they were to look.  My understanding is that human resource departments are using social media platforms to find out more about applicants.

So a blogpost about an interaction on twitter between male doctors by Ann Marie Cunningham, a GP and lecturer in Wales UK with an interest in social media caught my attention when she said:

"I came across a discussion between several male doctors on twitter which caused me to reflect on this very topic. The doctors were using slang, which I have not come across before, to refer to the wards in which they might have been working. The terms used were 'labia ward' and 'birthing sheds' to refer to the delivery suite where women give birth, and "cabbage patch" to refer to the intensive care ward where many patients are unconscious.

I was shocked at this and angry and did query the doctors about some of the other things they said, but I felt I couldn't challenge them directly at that time about this language. One of the doctors referred to midwifes as 'madwives'"

The blogpost "Social media, black humour and professionals" and the responses are well worth reading to get a sense of what the doctors themselves and the readers of Ann Marie's blog thinks about these remarks.  There are some very interesting comments on Ann Marie's blog itself, but by far the most fascinating reaction has come on Facebook on the The Medical Registrar's fanpage.

Alongside the link to Ann Marie's blog are the words:

The medical registrar " makes no comment, other than anyone who uses terms like "space" to describe a blog is a humourless old trout until proven otherwise"

The medical registrar didn't need to say anymore, because the readers have made up for it with 72 comments at the time of writing this post. These comments are also worth reading.

The attitudes and values of the people responding are clearly discernable. A former CEO of a large Boston hospital, Paul Levy, has discussed the response to Ann Marie's post on his blog.

Paul Levy wrote that he is 'left aghast' at the some of the comments and found the mindset of a few medical colleagues 'extremely upsetting'.

According to the good doctors however, using those terms "labia wards" and "birthing sheds" for rooms where women give birth and "cabbage patch" for ICU where people are unconscious is just good old fashioned humour, a way to let off steam in a stressful environment. Others, like me, find them offensive and degrading.

Is it purely a case of 'humorless old trouts'? or something else?

What do you think?

Strengthening Midwifery in PNG

Giving birth and being born is dangerous in Papua New Guinea.

According to the National Department of Health Ministerial Taskforce on Maternal Health in Papua New Guinea the staggering rate of maternal mortality in PNG is a national emergency.

Every day, at least five women die of preventable childbirth related causes. Sixty per cent of childbearing women do not have access to skilled birth attendants and because there are only 270 registered midwives in the whole country, outside of the understaffed and under resourced regional hospitals, maternity and newborn care falls on the shoulders of community health workers and nurses.

In  September 2000, Papua New Guinea committed to combat poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy, environmental degradation and discrimination against women and signed the United Nations Millenium Declaration, along with the other 190 UN member states. Eight Millenium Development Goals  were derived from this declaaration with specific targets and indicators. The PNG National Department of Health is targetting the 4th (reduction of infant mortality) and fifth goal (reduction in maternal mortality).

Midwives are internationally recognised as the number one primary health care professional for optimal safety for mothers and babies at birth. Even though there is recogntion of the vital role of midwives in optimising maternal and infant wellbeing and thereby reducing maternal mortality and morbidity in Papua New Guinea, the capacity to produce midwives too low and the number of midwives has remained stagnant. The midwifery workforce is aging and the registered midwives, few as they are, are rapidly approaching retirement.  Over the last five years, reports on the state of Midwifery Education and Maternal Health together with the National Health Plan have all focussed on increasing the midwifery workforce with the aim of having a midwife in every health centre and a skilled birth attendant for every childbearing women.

The reality is harsh. Too many women. A failing health system. Not enough midwives.

A sobering article in the Sydney Morning Herald in 2009 captured the issues and conditions succinctly on this date two years ago. Those issues and conditions are unchanged or worse.

Against this backdrop, the National Government of Papua New Guinea has partnered with the Australian Government to strengthen midwifery and capacity build the existing educational systems. Eight midwives started a month ago to work in pairs in four university programs with the educators and students to ensure the PNG National Standards and Competencies are achieved.

I'm fortunate to be one of the midwives, based at Pacific Adventist University (PAU) and working clinically with students and educators in the women and babies wing of Port Moresby Hospital.

The midwifery facilitation team, minus one and plus two!
From right to left Sue Englend (visiting Port Moresby), Lois Berry (based at Madang) Tarryn Sharp and her daughter Willoughby (PAU), Marie Treloar (based at Goroka) Alison Moores (University of PNG at Port Moresby), Glenda Gleeson (Mandang) Annie Yates (the Kiwi: University of PNG) and yours truly (PAU).  Missing from the photo is Heather Gulliver, who is also at Goroka with Marie.

Today, there was another big step in the right direction of strengthening midwifery in PNG.

The PNG Midwifery Society had their inaugural meeting in the conference room of the women and babies wing of the Port Moresby Hospital.

Fifty one midwives, nurses with midwifery education (unregistered) and student midwives crowded into the conference room to discuss professional midwifery matters.

Student midwives from PAU.

We booked a bus to bring the students and educators from PA University (about 30 minutes away from the hospital) and take them home again after the meeting. The students loved the experience. A very new experience for everybody.

The students are great fun and keen to learn. The educators are amazing people who are very welcoming and want their programs to meet the profession's needs and the Council's regulations. The midwives are appreciative of the students' work on clinical days as the midwifery workforce is scanty and the workload is huge. There is a lot to do to get things right in PNG.

Following the business of the meeting, the buzz was electric as the society member's shared food and conversation

                                                           

As part of the Australian College of Midwives committment to supporting and strengthening midwifery in our closest neighbour nation, four members of the society, two from Port Moresby and two from Goroka have been sponsored by the College to attend the Biennial Australian College of Midwives Conference in Sydney. Another initiative in strengthening midwifery in PNG is the  International Midwives Twinning Project. Two members of the PNG society are being sponsored by the Australian College of Midwives to go to the Hague, with two Australian College members to discuss and explore professional matters at the end of the month.

We know that when there is a strong and autonomous midwifery profession, mothers and their babies do well. The PNG Midwifery Society has the potential to play an enormous role in strengthening midwifery and creating a proud and powerful professional group for midwives, which in turn, creates a safety net for the  mothers and newborns of PNG.


Judging by today's conversation and the turn out for the meeting, the Society is well and truly up for the job!

Knowing about birth and interventions: Women's role

A recent study by Klein et al, sought to discover the knowledge and attitudes of women pregnant for the first time to their own roles in their pregnancy and towards the use of technology in birth. The report was written up in the Los Angeles times as Pregnant women show an amazing lack of knowledge about childbirth options, study shows - latimes.com . You could be forgiven for thinking that modern childbearing women were obviously failing in their duty to be informed and either submissive or unintelligent.

So who were these women that Klein et al studied?

The sample of 1318 women was a convenience broad based sample of "mainly well-educated, middle-class women" whose planned place of birth

"ranged from home to hospital, and from rural centres to large city hospitals ... 13.2% of respondents were in the first trimester, 39.8% were in the second trimester, and 47.0% in the third"

A good range of sites for birth, so who was their primary care giver?

"Overall, 42.6% were under the care of an obstetrician, 29.3% a family physician, and 28.1% a registered midwife; 18% planned to engage a doula."

OK, nearly half had a private obstetrician, plus nearly 30% who had family physicians makes nearly 3/4 of the total number of women 'under' the care of a medical practitioner.

Now here is something very interesting in this study:

"Women attending obstetricians reported attitudes more favourable to the use of birth technology and less supportive of women’s roles in their own delivery, regardless of the trimester in which the survey was completed"

What do you suppose could be going on there? There is no doubt that some women access medical care because they want the assurance of the ready availability of intervention if they 'need it'. Some choose to have intervention from the start, but that number is considerably less than is touted by mainstream media or medical rhetoric. Part of that orientation however, comes from the steady undermining that goes on at every antenatal visit with many of our medical colleagues. Comments such as 'small pelvis', 'large baby', 'getting stuck', 'bleeding to death', plus the steady supply of 'horror stories' and hype about birth danger that women are regaled with by the doctors as they seek to validate their interventionist perspective are ubiquitous. The orientation that 'doctor knows best' is also very much alive in our community and the way that antenatal care is organised so that the women wait for hours and get seen for minutes feeds the belief system that doctors are 'so busy' and 'don't have time for women's petty concerns' - so women don't raise them in visits - that silence from the women aided and abetted by the 'not wanting to be a bother' stereotypical stance of many women.

Another lens on this phenomenon is provided by this study from 1995 which reported that privately insured pregnant women were more likely to experience interventions and surgical birth than comparable women in the public hospital system, but that the rate of intervention was greater for those women:

"who in late pregnancy were thinking clearly, had high self esteem, mature means of dealing with anxiety, were confident in their knowledge of childbirth procedures and in secure relationships with highly educated men"

A paper in 2000 by Roberts, Tracy and Tracy explored the differences in intervention between public and private hospitals maternity services offers some insights for the higher level of intervention for women in private medical care. Litigation fears, physician convenience factors and theatre staff availability are suggested as reasons for the increased rate of interventions and surgical birth in private hospitals. But what if there is something more 'underbelly' about the way intelligent, articulate women with supportive, educated husbands are subjected to increased rates of intervention? What if it is a situation of putting uppity self assured women in their place? Women will always preference their baby's well-being over their own, so it is easy to undermine them and when they are told that the 'fluid around the baby' is 'suspect' therefore induction is a good idea "I'll book you in for tomorrow" or "you have a placenta praevia (actually low lying) and I'll take the baby at 37 weeks because we don't want the placenta ripping and the baby being short of oxygen" how many women are going to challenge that? So many of the women who are induced for spurious reasons are told after 8 hours of desultory but painful contractions that they aren't going anywhere and may as well have the baby now rather than later when they are even more tired and the baby gets stuck  " I can just take you upstairs/downstairs/across the hall and it will be all over and you'll have your baby in your arms" - who is going to argue then? Anyone who has worked or is working at a private maternity unit can relate similar stories.

This comment is interesting:

"Women attending midwives reported attitudes less favourable to the use of technology at delivery and more supportive of women’s roles"

The fact that these women have a better understanding of women's roles in childbirth is heartening and affirming, as midwifery care is all about capacity building and information sharing. The fact that women who access midwives as primary care givers are less interested in technology comes as no surprise as that is usually one of the reasons women seek out midwifery care. Another important point is that midwives use stories too. Midwives use stories to inspire and instill confidence in a woman's sense of self and ability to birth and parent well. 

The finding that women attending family practices had opinions that "fell between the other two groups" is encouraging, but could clearly be better:

Now, this final finding that:

"For eight of the questions, “I don’t know” (IDK) responses exceeded 15%. These IDK responses were most frequent for questions regarding risks and benefits of epidural analgesia, Caesarean section, and episiotomy".

is very concerning. There is some comfort in the fact that:

"Women in the care of midwives consistently used IDK options less frequently than those cared for by physicians".

as that demonstrates that midwives role in information sharing and discussion about labour and birth is clearly occurring, even though there is scope for improvement. One of the benefits of midwifery care is the longer time for antenatal visits, where thoughts, feelings, stories and information can be shared and discussed. Perhaps the room for improvement here is with models of midwifery care that have short antenatal visit times scheduled and discussions are limited.

The conclusion of the Klein et al study that"

"women held different views across a range of childbirth issues, suggesting that the three groups of providers were caring for different populations with different attitudes and expectations"

is true in many regards, but not in all cases and not for all women. I've met many women who were privately insured and cared for by obstetricians, who were genuinely bemused and upset that they had unplanned intervention, I've seen others who argued that the doctor saved their lives (or the baby's) having (in my view based on observation and experience) created the problem in the first place.

Most people aren't that interested in finding out about pregnancy and birth until it becomes an immediate reality. School, parents and friends provide a particular perspective and background to people's information and knowledge about birth and babies, the media certainly provides another. Many women and their partners have never held a newborn baby until they hold their own. The primary care provider, be it midwife, family physician or obstetrician has a duty of care to provide opportunities to explore information, knowledge, understandings and experiences with pregnant women/couples who access their services.

To say that women are ignorant of options and interventions says volumes about their health care provider. What do you think? 

Programming the future

My friend came back from England yesterday.  I picked up her daughter in the early hours and we drove to the airport together to meet her mum. Her daughter is in year 12. Studying is her major activity. The sunrise was stunning. Intensely pink and orange light filled the sky over Sydney as we made our way towards the airport. We chatted about her studies and what she hoped to do in the future. I was impressed with her clarity and vision.

Next week, as part of her family and children studies, all her group are being given a 'baby' to take home. The students all have to pretend it is a real baby and do all the things that mothers do when they have a new baby.  As many new mothers have never even held  a baby until they give birth to their own, this initiative is an effective way to help address that deficit in embodied knowledge.

I asked about feeding the baby. "oh, I have to give it a bottle and make up the formula" was the answer.

The conversation that followed explored the damaging message that this very creative and innovative exercise was unwittingly sending about how babies are fed.

The well intentioned, but ill advised, baby care education promotes bottle feeding as 'normal'. Young girls get that message early, for example, when given a baby doll complete with bottle as a gift for their birthday or Christmas. Have you noticed how those dolls all have bottles?

I went to the NSW Department of Education's website and looked up the curriculum for the "Exploring Early Childhood" program. 

The syllabus is very comprehensive.

Infant feeding, including a thorough section on breastfeeding is there, but no mention about how these subjects are taught. The practical application of knowledge to behaviour by providing a baby model for each student to take care of and feed is excellent. However, teachers need to ensure that students are able to 'breastfeed' the 'baby' as a matter of course.

Then young adults will get the right message: that breastfeeding is 'normal'.

As we pulled into the airport car park, my friend's daughter said she was grateful for the conversation, because she 'hadn't thought of it like that'. 

Neither would she.

Why would she? 

People don't know something until they know there is something to know!  When all society's clues and subliminal messages point to bottle feeding as 'normal', for a counter truth to have traction, you need other experiences or input, perhaps from a breastfeeding aunt, friend, neighbour or mother to enable you to think differently to the crowd, to be able to challenge the 'status quo'.

 La Leche Materna

After the event is a terrible time to learn the truth about what you can do to give your baby the optimal start in life.