Assessment of Interprofessional Obstetric and Midwifery Care from the Midwives' Perspective Using the Interprofessional Collaboration Scale (ICS)

Overview

Journal Front Psychol

Date 2023 Jun 7

PMID 37284468

Authors

Anja Alexandra Schulz

Markus Antonius Wirtz

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Interprofessional collaboration of physicians and midwives is essential for appropriate and safe care of pregnant and parturient women as well as their newborns. The complexity of woman-centered care settings requires the continuous exchange of information and the coordinated implementation of multi-and interprofessional care concepts. To analyze the midwives' perspective on the multi-and interprofessional care process during pregnancy, birth and postpartum period, we aimed to adapt and psychometrically evaluate the Interprofessional Collaboration Scale (ICS).

Methods: The ICS (13 items) was answered by 299 midwives for (i) prenatal and postpartum care as well as (ii) perinatal care. Three items on equitable communication (EC) identified in qualitative interviews with = 6 midwives were added as further aspects of quality in collaborative midwifery care. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test competing theoretically hypothesized factorial model structures, including both care settings simultaneously, i.e., birth and prenatal/postpartum.

Results: A two-dimensional structure assuming the 13 original ICS items and the 3 items on EC as psychometric distinct item groups accounts for the data best. After deleting 5 ICS items with insufficient indicator reliability, a very good-fitting model structure was obtained for both prenatal/postpartum as well as perinatal care: = 226.35, = 0.045, CFI = 0.991, RMSEA = 0.025 (90%CI: [0.004; 0.037]). Both the reduced ICS-R and the EC scale (standardized response mean = 0.579/1.401) indicate significantly higher interprofessional collaboration in the birth setting. Responsibility in consulting, attitudes toward obstetric care and frequency of collaboration with other professional groups proved to be associated with the ICS-R and EC scale as expected.

Discussion: For the adapted ICS-R and the EC scale a good construct validity could be confirmed. Thus, the scales can be recommended as a promising assessment for recording the collaboration of midwives with physicians working in obstetric care from the perspective of midwives. The instrument provides a validated assessment basis in midwifery and obstetric care to identify potentially divergent perspectives within interprofessional care teams in woman's centered care.

References

Bloxsome D, Ireson D, Doleman G, Bayes S . Factors associated with midwives' job satisfaction and intention to stay in the profession: An integrative review. J Clin Nurs. 2018; 28(3-4):386-399. DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14651. View

Hojat M, Fields S, Rattner S, Griffiths M, Cohen M, Plumb J . Attitudes toward physician-nurse alliance: comparisons of medical and nursing students. Acad Med. 1997; 72(10 Suppl 1):S1-3. DOI: 10.1097/00001888-199710001-00001. View

Behruzi R, Klam S, Dehertog M, Jimenez V, Hatem M . Understanding factors affecting collaboration between midwives and other health care professionals in a birth center and its affiliated Quebec hospital: a case study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017; 17(1):200. PMC: 5485546. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-017-1381-x. View

Lee J, McCutcheon L, Fazel M, Cooley J, Slack M . Assessment of Interprofessional Collaborative Practices and Outcomes in Adults With Diabetes and Hypertension in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2021; 4(2):e2036725. PMC: 7881360. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.36725. View

Lingard L, Vanstone M, Durrant M, Fleming-Carroll B, Lowe M, Rashotte J . Conflicting messages: examining the dynamics of leadership on interprofessional teams. Acad Med. 2012; 87(12):1762-7. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318271fc82. View

Kristensen T, Hannerz H, Hogh A, Borg V . The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire--a tool for the assessment and improvement of the psychosocial work environment. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2006; 31(6):438-49. DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.948. View

Hansson M, Lundgren I, Hensing G, Carlsson I . Veiled midwifery in the baby factory - A grounded theory study. Women Birth. 2018; 32(1):80-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.wombi.2018.04.012. View

Reeves S, Goldman J, Gilbert J, Tepper J, Silver I, Suter E . A scoping review to improve conceptual clarity of interprofessional interventions. J Interprof Care. 2010; 25(3):167-74. DOI: 10.3109/13561820.2010.529960. View

Smith D . Midwife-physician collaboration: a conceptual framework for interprofessional collaborative practice. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2014; 60(2):128-39. DOI: 10.1111/jmwh.12204. View

10.

Downe S, Finlayson K, Fleming A . Creating a collaborative culture in maternity care. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2010; 55(3):250-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2010.01.004. View

11.

Walters S, Stern C, Robertson-Malt S . The measurement of collaboration within healthcare settings: a systematic review of measurement properties of instruments. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016; 14(4):138-97. DOI: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-2159. View

12.

Weller J, Boyd M, Cumin D . Teams, tribes and patient safety: overcoming barriers to effective teamwork in healthcare. Postgrad Med J. 2014; 90(1061):149-54. DOI: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2012-131168. View

13.

Hunter B . Conflicting ideologies as a source of emotion work in midwifery. Midwifery. 2004; 20(3):261-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2003.12.004. View

14.

Cornthwaite K, Edwards S, Siassakos D . Reducing risk in maternity by optimising teamwork and leadership: an evidence-based approach to save mothers and babies. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013; 27(4):571-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2013.04.004. View

15.

Ushiro R . Nurse-Physician Collaboration Scale: development and psychometric testing. J Adv Nurs. 2009; 65(7):1497-508. PMC: 2738564. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05011.x. View

16.

Schafer J, Graham J . Missing data: our view of the state of the art. Psychol Methods. 2002; 7(2):147-77. View

17.

Dinius J, Philipp R, Ernstmann N, Heier L, Goritz A, Pfisterer-Heise S . Inter-professional teamwork and its association with patient safety in German hospitals-A cross sectional study. PLoS One. 2020; 15(5):e0233766. PMC: 7259596. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233766. View

18.

Wirtz M . [On the problem of missing data: How to identify and reduce the impact of missing data on findings of data analysis]. Rehabilitation (Stuttg). 2004; 43(2):109-15. DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-814839. View

19.

Aquino M, Olander E, Needle J, Bryar R . Midwives' and health visitors' collaborative relationships: A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016; 62:193-206. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.08.002. View

20.

Tuncalp , Were W, MacLennan C, Oladapo O, Gulmezoglu A, Bahl R . Quality of care for pregnant women and newborns-the WHO vision. BJOG. 2015; 122(8):1045-9. PMC: 5029576. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13451. View