Search

Aims: To outline the theoretical, philosophical, and major assumptions associated with phenomenography and then address the application of a phenomenographical approach within the context of midwifery research. Background: Phenemonography is a little‐known qualitative research approach amongst the main design traditions of phenomenology, grounded theory, case study, and ethnography more typically used within midwifery research. Phenomenography aims to describe the qualitatively different ways that people perceive, conceptualize, or experience a phenomenon. Phenemonography has a distinctly different approach from other qualitative methods as it places emphasis on the 'collective' meaning over individual experience. Methodology: Phenomenography, as an approach, rests within the interpretivist paradigm recognizing that there are multiple interpretations of reality. Phenomenography emphasizes the various ways that people experience the same phenomenon, including both the similarities and differences. The second‐order perspective embraced by phenomenography suggests that the researcher directs themselves towards people's understanding of the world; essentially the world is described as it is understood rather than as it is. It is the reporting about how these different realities appear at a collective level that is the output of phenomenographic research. Findings: A framework for conducting phenomenographic research is illustrated by outlining the steps within the methodological approach required to undertake a research study using phenemonography. Conclusion: Phenomenography is a qualitative research approach that can usefully be applied in many midwifery contexts where a collective understanding of a phenomena is required. Using a phenomenographic approach can provide the midwifery profession with knowledge about variations in how women and midwives think, and how aspects of different phenomena are experienced in within a midwifery setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To investigate Group B Streptococcus (GBS) colonization in pregnancy; adherence to antenatal GBS screening and adherence to the intrapartum antibiotics protocol within two models of care (midwifery and non‐midwifery led). Design: This retrospective quantitative study has employed a descriptive design using administrative health data. Methods: Data from five maternity hospitals in metropolitan and regional Western Australia that included 22,417 pregnant women who gave birth between 2015 and 2019 were examined, applying descriptive statistics using secondary data analysis. Results: The study revealed an overall GBS colonization rate of 21.7% with similar rates in the different cohorts. A lower adherence to screening was found in the midwifery led model of care (MMC, 68.76%, n = 7232) when compared with the non‐midwifery led model of care (NMMC, 90.49%, n = 10,767). Over the 5 years, screening rates trended down in the MMC with stable numbers in the counterpart. Adherence in relation to intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis revealed discrepant findings between the study groups. Conclusion: Adherence to screening and management guidelines of maternal GBS colonization in pregnancy is lower within the MMC when compared with the NMMC. Impact This is the first cohort study to describe the adherence to the recommended Western Australian GBS screening guidelines in the two different models of care. Findings may assist in the guidance and improvement of clinical protocols as well as the planning of clinical care in relation to GBS screening to reduce the risk of neonatal GBS infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To test whether infrared non‐touch forehead thermometry (FNTT) obtains comparable temperature readings in adults compared with common, non‐invasive thermometry methods such as axillary (DAT), oral (DOT) and infrared tympanic (ITT). Design: A prospective, repeated‐measures comparative diagnostic test study design was used for this study. Methods: Data were collected from a convenience sample of 169 nursing students over 3 months (March 2019 to May 2019). Participants had their temperature measured once with each of the four thermometers. Agreement between thermometers was assessed using repeated‐measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni post hoc testing. Results/findings: One hundred and sixty‐one participants were included in the final analysis. A repeated‐measures ANOVA showed statistically significant differences between the four thermometer temperature readings. Post hoc pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment revealed infrared non‐touch forehead thermometry demonstrated statistically significant higher mean temperatures compared with digital oral thermometry MD = 0.466℃ (95% CI, 0.357–0.576, p <.001) and digital axillary thermometry MD = 0.897℃ (95% CI, 0.752–1.043, p <.001), but not with infrared tympanic MD = 0.069℃ (95% CI, −0.025–0.162, p =.307). Conclusions: This study found that infrared non‐touch forehead thermometry consistently produced higher temperature readings in adults compared with other common forms of peripheral thermometry. Caution should be taken when using forehead non‐touch thermometer readings interchangeably with digital oral and digital axillary readings unless corrections for bias are made. More research is needed into whether infrared non‐touch forehead thermometry and infrared tympanic could be used interchangeably. Impact statement: This study aimed to address whether non‐touch forehead could be used interchangeably with other common forms of non‐invasive thermometry. Our result revealed inconsistencies in temperature readings between the different thermometers. Consequently, healthcare professionals should exercise caution when monitoring temperature trends where readings have been taken by different types of peripheral thermometers. This study could impact healthcare clinicians responsible for the monitoring and recording of peripheral temperatures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To explore women's experiences of breech pregnancy and birth to identify areas in practice for improvement. Design: A descriptive exploratory study was conducted involving 20 women who had experienced a breech birth between 2013 and 2018. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were examined using a free‐form 'circling and parking' style of analysis. Foucault's concepts of power/knowledge were utilized to describe existing power relations. Results: Women experienced varying degrees of disciplinary power throughout their experiences. Knowledge was used as a means of enforcing disciplinary power by some clinicians and by women to 'arm' themselves and 'fight' to regain what they perceived as a loss of power and autonomy. Midwives were seen as navigators of a restrictive, medicalized healthcare system. Conclusion: By better understanding the power dynamics which exist as well as the stages women go through when experiencing a breech presentation, there remains the potential to identify areas in practice which need improving, and aid clinicians in better supporting women through what can be a very difficult time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: To synthesise international research that relates to midwives' use of best available evidence in practice settings and identify key issues relating to the translation of latest evidence into everyday maternity care. Background: Midwifery is a research‐informed profession. However, a gap persists in the translation of best available evidence into practice settings, compromising gold standard maternity care and delaying the translation of new knowledge into everyday practice. Design: A five‐step integrative review approach, based on a series of articles published by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) for conducting systematic reviews, was used to facilitate development of a search strategy, selection criteria and quality appraisal process, and the extraction and synthesis of data to inform an integrative review. Methods: The databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Implementation Science Journal and Scopus were searched for relevant articles. The screening and quality appraisal process complied with the PRISMA 2009 checklist. Narrative analysis was used to develop sub‐categories and dimensions from the data, which were then synthesised to form two major categories that together answer the review question. Results: The six articles reviewed report on midwives' use of best available evidence in Australia, the UK and Asia. Two major categories emerged that confirm that although midwifery values evidence‐based practice (EBP), evidence‐informed maternity care is not always employed in clinical settings. Additionally, closure of the evidence‐to‐practice gap in maternity care requires a multidimensional approach. Conclusion: Collaborative partnerships between midwives and researchers are necessary to initiate strategies that support midwives' efforts to facilitate the timely movement of best available evidence into practice. Relevance to clinical practice: Understanding midwives' use of best available evidence in practice will direct future efforts towards the development of mechanisms that facilitate the timely uptake of latest evidence by all maternity care providers working in clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Aim Design Methods Results Conclusion Reporting Method Patient or Public Contribution To conduct a comprehensive review of Undergraduate Nursing and Midwifery Curricula leading to registration in Ireland.A mixed methods approach using a curriculum evaluation framework that was underpinned by the philosophy and principles of appreciative inquiry.Five separate workstreams completed an evaluation of national policy documents and international curriculum documents, a literature review and two phases of stakeholder engagement including a graduate survey and peer‐grouped stakeholder focus groups. The workstreams were emulated for the professions of nursing and midwifery.National policy indicates a significant shift in healthcare delivery to the community environment, with a strong focus on the social determinants of health and a flexible interprofessional workforce. International curricula review revealed that nursing and midwifery education was split equally between academia and clinical practice at bachelor's degree level. Graduates were assessed for clinical competence with a variance of four to seven domains of competence evident for nurses and five principles for midwives. Direct entry midwifery was not widely available. The graduate survey identified that students were satisfied with the academic components of the curriculum; however, significant challenges in clinical placement were reported. Stakeholder focus groups reported a need for a learner‐focused approach to the curricula, increased access to education, a deeper understanding and appreciation of the various roles required to educate nurses and midwives and a recognition of midwifery as a separate profession.There is a need for a significant revision of the current nursing and midwifery curricula to meet the future healthcare needs of the diverse patient population with a community‐focused delivery.The good reporting of a mixed methods study was used to guide the development of this manuscript.An Expert Advisory Group (EAG) was appointed to oversee the conduct of the research project and advise the research team as requested. There were five service user representatives included in the membership of the EAG. This included one representative from each of the divisions of the nursing and midwifery register in Ireland. A separate stakeholder engagement focus group was also conducted for the research upon the request from the service users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]