Mueller Antonia N, Grylka-Baeschlin Susanne
School of Health Sciences, Research Institute of Midwifery and Reproductive Health, ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Katharina-Sulzer-Platz 9, CH-8401, Winterthur, Switzerland.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Dec 21;24(1):1633. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-12096-4.
Interventions in maternity health care settings often need to be studied within everyday clinical work and with the contributions of the staff. Therefore, the health care workers on-site play an important role for research success. This explains why it is necessary not only to focus on the outcomes of the research project itself, but also to study the whole process.
This study aimed to evaluate maternity care providers' satisfaction with the use of a preliminary long version of a standardised tool for supporting shared decision making in women during early labour.
A cross-sectional survey was distributed to n = 607 maternity care professionals working in the study sites which applied a tool to support shared decision making in primiparous women in early labour. The data was collected using RedCap®. It was analysed descriptively, and logistic regression modelling was applied to find associations between the application of the tool and care as well as work organisation.
A total of 110 health care professionals answered the online survey including 95 (86.4%) midwives and 15 (15.3%) obstetricians. N = 36 (43.9%) midwives stated that they found the tool helpful in the provision of care, whereas 46 (56.1%) did not agree. There was great dissatisfaction with the length of the preliminary tool. The tool adversely impacted the timely management of early labour care. Midwives with greater work experience (OR 0.82, p = 0.02) and a higher workload (OR 0.97, 0.02) were less likely to agree that the tool facilitates their work organisation. Additionally, midwives with more work experience (OR 0.86) and a higher workload (OR 0.96) found the tool less likely to be useful for care provision. The implementation of the tool was challenging for many midwives (40.2%) and some feel their competencies are threatened by the tool (20.7%).
The involvement of maternity care providers in research is crucial for the success of projects, but they face challenges. Implementing a preliminary tool in clinical practice led to dissatisfaction mainly due to lack of time and partial understanding of its purpose. Providing adequate training and supportive leadership can help improve their understanding and satisfaction.
产科保健机构中的干预措施通常需要在日常临床工作中并借助工作人员的力量进行研究。因此,现场医护人员对研究的成功起着重要作用。这就解释了为什么不仅要关注研究项目本身的结果,还要研究整个过程。
本研究旨在评估产科护理人员对使用一份初步的较长版本标准化工具的满意度,该工具用于在产妇分娩早期支持共同决策。
对在研究地点工作的n = 607名产科护理专业人员进行了横断面调查,这些地点应用了一种工具来支持初产妇分娩早期的共同决策。数据使用RedCap®收集。进行了描述性分析,并应用逻辑回归模型来找出工具的应用与护理以及工作组织之间的关联。
共有110名医护人员回答了在线调查,其中包括95名(86.4%)助产士和15名(15.3%)产科医生。n = 36名(43.9%)助产士表示他们发现该工具对提供护理有帮助,而46名(56.1%)不同意。对初步工具的长度存在很大不满。该工具对分娩早期护理的及时管理产生了不利影响。工作经验更丰富的助产士(OR 0.82,p = 0.02)和工作量更大的助产士(OR 0.97,0.02)不太可能同意该工具有助于他们的工作组织。此外,工作经验更丰富的助产士(OR 0.86)和工作量更大的助产士(OR 0.96)认为该工具对提供护理不太有用。对许多助产士来说,该工具的实施具有挑战性(40.2%),一些人觉得他们的能力受到该工具的威胁(20.7%)。
产科护理人员参与研究对项目的成功至关重要,但他们面临挑战。在临床实践中实施初步工具导致不满,主要原因是时间不足和对其目的的部分理解。提供充分的培训和支持性领导有助于提高他们的理解和满意度。