↓ Skip to main content

Development of quality indicators for low-risk labor care provided by midwives using a RAND-modified Delphi method

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development of quality indicators for low-risk labor care provided by midwives using a RAND-modified Delphi method
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12884-017-1468-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kayo Ueda, Shosuke Ohtera, Misato Kaso, Takeo Nakayama

Abstract

In childbirth, most deliveries are low-risk, defined as spontaneous labor at full term without special high-risk facts or complications, especially in high-resource countries where maternal and perinatal mortality rates are very low. Indeed, the majority of mothers and infants have no serious conditions during labor. However, the quality of care provided is not assured, and performance may vary by birthing facility and provider. The overuse of technology in childbirth in some parts of the world is almost certainly based on assumptions like, "something can go wrong at any minute." There is a need to assess the quality of care provided for mothers and infants in low-risk labor. We aimed to develop specific quality indicators for low-risk labor care provided primarily by midwives in Japan. We used a RAND-modified Delphi method, which integrates evidence review with expert consensus development. The procedure comprises five steps: (1) literature review, including clinical practice guidelines, to extract and develop quality indicator candidates; (2) formation of a multidisciplinary panel; (3) independent panel ratings (Round 1); (4) panel meeting and independent panel ratings (Round 2); and (5) independent panel ratings (Round 3). The three independent panel ratings (Rounds 1-3) were held between July and December 2012. The assembled multidisciplinary panel comprised eight clinicians (two pediatricians, three obstetricians, and three midwives) and three mothers who were nonclinicians. Evidentiary review extracted 166 key recommendations from 32 clinical practice guidelines, and 31 existing quality indicators were added. After excluding duplicate recommendations and quality indicators, the panel discussed 25 candidate indicators. Of these, 18 were adopted, one was modified, six were not adopted, and four were added during the meeting, respectively. We established 23 quality indicators for low-risk labor care provided by midwives in labor units in Japan.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 19%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 4 6%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 19 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 16 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 22%
Psychology 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 23 36%