Home Survey of alongside midwifery-led care in North Rhine-Westfalia, Germany
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Survey of alongside midwifery-led care in North Rhine-Westfalia, Germany

  • Waltraut M. Merz , Andrea Heep , Pirathayini Kandeepan , Sophia L. Tietjen EMAIL logo and Andreas Kocks
Published/Copyright: December 7, 2019
Journal of Perinatal Medicine
From the journal Journal of Perinatal Medicine Volume 48 Issue 1

Abstract

Background

Alongside midwifery-led care (AMC) was introduced in Germany in 2003. The aim of our study was to collect data about the utilization of AMC within North Rhine-Westfalia (NRW), Germany’s most populous state, and to collect information regarding the approach used for implementation of AMC and providers’ experiences in day-to-day work.

Methods

Quantitative data were collected by questionnaire, telephone interview and comparative analysis of documents created for use in AMC. Qualitative data were compiled by questionnaire and workshop.

Results

Seven obstetric departments offer AMC in NRW. On average, 3.4% of women gave birth in these AMC units, corresponding to 0.3% of all births in NRW. For the establishment of AMC, institutional, organizational, professional and formal arrangements were undertaken. An eligibility and transfer checklist was agreed upon between midwives and obstetricians. Both professions were faced with skepticism. Daily work in AMC resulted in improved teamwork between the two professions and increased job satisfaction for midwives. Acquisition of manual skills and time constraints were the major challenges.

Conclusion

The low utilization of AMC is not due to the concept of care itself or difficulties with its implementation, nor to a lack of eligible women. Reasons may be insufficient awareness about AMC or a lack of interest in this type of care.

Keywords: Germany; job satisfaction; midwifery; midwifery-led care; parturition; quality of health care; surveys and questionnaires

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: This study was funded by the “Landeszentrum Gesundheit” North Rhine-Westfalia (LZG.NRW).

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.

  6. Ethical approval: The Ethics Committee of the University Bonn Medical School approved the research project (number 254/18).

  7. Conflict of interest: The authors report no conflict of interest.

References

1. Bundesministerium für Gesundheit. Nationales Gesundheitsziel: Gesundheit rund um die Geburt [gesundheitsziele.de]. Berlin; 2017.Search in Google Scholar

2. Bauer N, Kehrbach A, Krahl A, von Rahden O, zu Sayn-Wittgenstein F. Handbuch Hebammenkreißsaal: Von der Idee zur Umsetzung. Osnabrück: Verbund Hebammenforschung; 2007.Search in Google Scholar

3. Deutscher Hebammenverband e.V. Hebammen-Kreißsäle – Deutscher HebammenVerband e.V. [cited 2019 Apr 27]. Available from: URL: https://www.hebammenverband.de/familie/hebammen-kreisssaele/.Search in Google Scholar

4. Geschäftsstelle Qualitätssicherung NRW. Jahresauswertung 2017 Geburtshilfe: Nordrhein-Westfalen Gesamt [2017 – D17453-L109283-P52546]. Berlin; 2017.Search in Google Scholar

5. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Intrapartum care for healthy women and babies (CG190) 2018. Available from: URL: nice.org.uk/guidance/cg190.Search in Google Scholar

6. Chappell LC, Seed PT, Myers J, Taylor RS, Kenny LC, Dekker GA, et al. Exploration and confirmation of factors associated with uncomplicated pregnancy in nulliparous women: prospective cohort study. Br Med J. 2013;347:f6398.10.1097/01.aoa.0000455575.72200.eaSearch in Google Scholar

7. NHS Trust, The Shrewbury and Telford Hospital. Clinical Risk Assessment (Antenatal): Version 11; 2015.Search in Google Scholar

8. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Mutterpass; 2015 [cited 2019 Jun 4]. Available from: URL: https://www.g-ba.de/downloads/83-691-386/Mu-RL_Anl3_Mutterpass_2015-11-10.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

9. Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen. Bundesauswertung zum Erfassungsjahr 2017 Geburtshilfe Qualitätsindikatoren; 2018.Search in Google Scholar

10. Ministerium für Gesundheit, Emanzipation, Pflege und Alter des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. Gesundheitsbericht Spezial Schwangerschaft und Geburt in Nordrhein-Westfalen: Gesundheitliche Lage und Versorgung von Frauen in Nordrhein-Westfalen während der Schwangerschaft und rund um die Geburt [Veröffentlichungsnummer 145]; 2013.Search in Google Scholar

11. Kolip P, Nolting H-D, Zich K. Faktencheck Gesundheit – Kaiserschnittgeburten: Entwicklung und regionale Verteilung. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung; 2012.Search in Google Scholar

12. Larkin P, Begley CM, Devane D. Women’s preferences for childbirth experiences in the Republic of Ireland; a mixed methods study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2017;17:19.10.1186/s12884-016-1196-1Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

13. Bohren MA, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C, Fukuzawa RK, Cuthbert A. Continuous support for women during childbirth (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;7:CD003766.10.1002/14651858.CD003766.pub6Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

14. Sandall J, Soltani H, Gates S, Shennan A, Devane D. Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;4:CD004667.10.1002/14651858.CD004667.pub5Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

15. McLachlan HL, Forster DA, Davey MA, Farrell T, Gold L, Biro MA, et al. Effects of continuity of care by a primary midwife (caseload midwifery) on caesarean section rates in women of low obstetric risk: the COSMOS randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2012;119:1483–92.10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03446.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

16. Brocklehurst P, Hardy P, Hollowell J, Linsell L, Macfarlane A, McCourt C, et al. Perinatal and maternal outcomes by planned place of birth for healthy women with low risk pregnancies: the Birthplace in England national prospective cohort study. Br Med J 2011;343:d7400.10.1136/bmj.d7400Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Received: 2019-08-16
Accepted: 2019-10-27
Published Online: 2019-12-07
Published in Print: 2019-12-18

©2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. 10.1515/jpm-2020-frontmatter1
  2. Review
  3. Delivery room handling of the newborn
  4. Original Articles – Obstetrics
  5. Examining the validity of a predictive model for vaginal birth after cesarean
  6. Correlation between endometrial thickness and perinatal outcome for pregnancies achieved through assisted reproduction technology
  7. Significance of the routine first-trimester antenatal screening program for aneuploidy in the assessment of the risk of placenta accreta spectrum disorders
  8. A decade’s experience in primipara, term, singleton, vertex parturients with a sustained low rate of CD
  9. Survey of alongside midwifery-led care in North Rhine-Westfalia, Germany
  10. Correlation between aneuploidy pregnancy and the concentration of various hormones and vascular endothelial factor in follicular fluid as well as the number of acquired oocytes
  11. Bacteriuria in pregnancy varies with the ambiance: a retrospective observational study at a tertiary hospital in Doha, Qatar
  12. Microarray findings in pregnancies with oligohydramnios – a retrospective cohort study and literature review
  13. Lifestyle characteristics of parental electronic cigarette and marijuana users: healthy or not?
  14. Influence of maternal HIV infection on fetal thymus size
  15. Original Articles – Fetus
  16. Clinical outcome of prenatally suspected cardiac rhabdomyomas of the fetus
  17. Original Articles – Newborns
  18. Prolonged ventilation and postnatal growth of preterm infants
  19. Letter to the Editor
  20. Neonatal sepsis associated with Lactobacillus supplementation
https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2019-0313
Keywords for this article
Germany; job satisfaction; midwifery; midwifery-led care; parturition; quality of health care; surveys and questionnaires

Articles in the same Issue

  1. 10.1515/jpm-2020-frontmatter1
  2. Review
  3. Delivery room handling of the newborn
  4. Original Articles – Obstetrics
  5. Examining the validity of a predictive model for vaginal birth after cesarean
  6. Correlation between endometrial thickness and perinatal outcome for pregnancies achieved through assisted reproduction technology
  7. Significance of the routine first-trimester antenatal screening program for aneuploidy in the assessment of the risk of placenta accreta spectrum disorders
  8. A decade’s experience in primipara, term, singleton, vertex parturients with a sustained low rate of CD
  9. Survey of alongside midwifery-led care in North Rhine-Westfalia, Germany
  10. Correlation between aneuploidy pregnancy and the concentration of various hormones and vascular endothelial factor in follicular fluid as well as the number of acquired oocytes
  11. Bacteriuria in pregnancy varies with the ambiance: a retrospective observational study at a tertiary hospital in Doha, Qatar
  12. Microarray findings in pregnancies with oligohydramnios – a retrospective cohort study and literature review
  13. Lifestyle characteristics of parental electronic cigarette and marijuana users: healthy or not?
  14. Influence of maternal HIV infection on fetal thymus size
  15. Original Articles – Fetus
  16. Clinical outcome of prenatally suspected cardiac rhabdomyomas of the fetus
  17. Original Articles – Newborns
  18. Prolonged ventilation and postnatal growth of preterm infants
  19. Letter to the Editor
  20. Neonatal sepsis associated with Lactobacillus supplementation
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 5.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jpm-2019-0313/html
Scroll to top button