Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a midwifery-led care model: a qualitative systematic review

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Andreia Soares Goncalves , Márcia Pestana-Santos , Christine McCourt , Ana Paula Prata
{"title":"Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a midwifery-led care model: a qualitative systematic review","authors":"Andreia Soares Goncalves ,&nbsp;Márcia Pestana-Santos ,&nbsp;Christine McCourt ,&nbsp;Ana Paula Prata","doi":"10.1016/j.midw.2025.104514","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Problem</h3><div>Despite the overwhelming benefits of midwifery-led care models, in many countries, for several reasons, there is a resistance to their implementation.</div></div><div><h3>Background</h3><div>These care models provide both short-term and long-term advantages for mothers and newborn, demonstrate sustainability, and offer economic benefits.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This qualitative systematic review explores and synthesises evidence on stakeholders’ perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to implementing a shift from doctor-led or shared-care models to midwifery-led models of care.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The review followed Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for qualitative systematic reviews, including a comprehensive database search, study selection, quality appraisal by two independent reviewers, data extraction using a tool for qualitative findings, and thematic synthesis. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the organisation and presentation of results, and the credibility and dependability of findings were assessed using ConQual.</div></div><div><h3>Results and Discussion</h3><div>Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen findings, five facilitators and nine barriers, were identified by stakeholders including women, midwives, doctors and educators. These relate to four implementation domains: innovation, outer setting, inner setting, and individuals. Key themes included cost, local attitudes, local attitudes and conditions, laws and policies, tension for change, relationships, infrastructure, compatibility, access to knowledge, client-centeredness and capability. The review underscores the need for evidence-based strategies to overcome barriers and enhance facilitators.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Context-specific strategies informed by implementation science must be developed to support the sustainable integration of midwifery-led care models, with a particular emphasis on policy development and stakeholder engagement.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":18495,"journal":{"name":"Midwifery","volume":"148 ","pages":"Article 104514"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Midwifery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266613825002323","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Problem

Despite the overwhelming benefits of midwifery-led care models, in many countries, for several reasons, there is a resistance to their implementation.

Background

These care models provide both short-term and long-term advantages for mothers and newborn, demonstrate sustainability, and offer economic benefits.

Aim

This qualitative systematic review explores and synthesises evidence on stakeholders’ perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to implementing a shift from doctor-led or shared-care models to midwifery-led models of care.

Methods

The review followed Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for qualitative systematic reviews, including a comprehensive database search, study selection, quality appraisal by two independent reviewers, data extraction using a tool for qualitative findings, and thematic synthesis. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided the organisation and presentation of results, and the credibility and dependability of findings were assessed using ConQual.

Results and Discussion

Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen findings, five facilitators and nine barriers, were identified by stakeholders including women, midwives, doctors and educators. These relate to four implementation domains: innovation, outer setting, inner setting, and individuals. Key themes included cost, local attitudes, local attitudes and conditions, laws and policies, tension for change, relationships, infrastructure, compatibility, access to knowledge, client-centeredness and capability. The review underscores the need for evidence-based strategies to overcome barriers and enhance facilitators.

Conclusion

Context-specific strategies informed by implementation science must be developed to support the sustainable integration of midwifery-led care models, with a particular emphasis on policy development and stakeholder engagement.
实施助产士主导的护理模式的障碍和促进因素:一项定性系统审查
尽管助产士主导的护理模式带来了巨大的好处,但在许多国家,由于种种原因,对其实施存在阻力。这些护理模式为母亲和新生儿提供了短期和长期的优势,具有可持续性,并提供了经济效益。目的:本定性系统综述探讨并综合了利益相关者对从医生主导或共享护理模式向助产士主导的护理模式转变的障碍和促进因素的看法。方法本综述遵循乔安娜·布里格斯研究所对定性系统评价的指导,包括全面的数据库检索、研究选择、由两名独立评论者进行质量评价、使用定性发现工具提取数据以及专题综合。《实施研究综合框架》指导了结果的组织和呈现,并使用conquest评估了结果的可信度和可靠性。结果与讨论7项研究符合纳入标准。包括妇女、助产士、医生和教育工作者在内的利益攸关方确定了14项发现、5项促进因素和9项障碍。这些涉及到四个实现领域:创新、外部环境、内部环境和个人。关键主题包括成本、当地态度、当地态度和条件、法律和政策、变革的压力、关系、基础设施、兼容性、获取知识、以客户为中心和能力。该审查强调需要以证据为基础的战略来克服障碍和加强促进因素。结论:必须制定基于实施科学的具体情况战略,以支持助产士主导的护理模式的可持续整合,特别强调政策制定和利益相关者的参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Midwifery
Midwifery 医学-护理
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
221
审稿时长
13.4 weeks
期刊介绍: Midwifery publishes the latest peer reviewed international research to inform the safety, quality, outcomes and experiences of pregnancy, birth and maternity care for childbearing women, their babies and families. The journal’s publications support midwives and maternity care providers to explore and develop their knowledge, skills and attitudes informed by best available evidence. Midwifery provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for the publication, dissemination and discussion of advances in evidence, controversies and current research, and promotes continuing education through publication of systematic and other scholarly reviews and updates. Midwifery articles cover the cultural, clinical, psycho-social, sociological, epidemiological, education, managerial, workforce, organizational and technological areas of practice in preconception, maternal and infant care. The journal welcomes the highest quality scholarly research that employs rigorous methodology. Midwifery is a leading international journal in midwifery and maternal health with a current impact factor of 1.861 (© Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports 2016) and employs a double-blind peer review process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信