Professor Maralyn Foureur

© 2019 Australian College of Midwives Background: There is widespread and some unexplained variation in induction of labour rates between hospitals. Some practice variation may stem from variability in clinical guidelines. This review aimed to identify to what extent induction of labour guidelines provide consistent recommendations in relation to reasons for, and timing of, induction of labour and ascertain whether inconsistencies can be explained by variability guideline quality. Method: We conducted a systematic search of national and international English-language guidelines published between 2008 and 2018. General induction of labour guidelines and condition-specific guidelines containing induction of labour recommendations were searched. Guidelines were reviewed and extracted independently by two reviewers. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument. Findings: Forty nine guidelines of varying quality were included. Indications where guidelines had mostly consistent advice included prolonged pregnancy (induction between 41 and 42 weeks), preterm premature rupture of membranes, and term preeclampsia (induction when preeclampsia diagnosed =37 weeks). Guidelines were also consistent in agreeing on decreased fetal movements and oligohydramnios as valid indications for induction, although timing recommendations were absent or inconsistent. Common indications where there was little consensus on validity and/or timing of induction included gestational diabetes, fetal macrosomia, elevated maternal body mass index, and twin pregnancy. Conclusion: Substantial variation in clinical practice guidelines for indications for induction exists. As guidelines rated of similar quality presented conflicting recommendations, guideline variability was not explained by guideline quality. Guideline variability may partly account for unexplained variation in induction of labour rates.

© 2019 Australian College of Midwives Background: Women want greater choice of place of birth in New South Wales, Australia. It is perceived to be more costly to health services for women with a healthy pregnancy to give birth at home or in a birth centre. It is not known how much it costs the health service to provide care for women planning to give birth in these settings. Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the direct cost of giving birth vaginally at home, in a birth centre or in a hospital for women at low risk of complications, in New South Wales. Methods: A micro-costing design was used. Observational (time and motion) and resource use data collection was undertaken to identify the staff time and resources required to provide care in a public hospital, birth centre or at home for women with a healthy pregnancy. Findings: The median cost of providing care for women who plan to give birth at home, in a birth centre and in a hospital were similar (AUD $2150.07, $2100.59 and $2097.30 respectively). Midwifery time was the largest contributor to the cost of birth at home, and overhead costs accounted for over half of the total cost of BC and hospital birth. The cost of consumables was low in all three settings. Conclusion: In this study, we have found there is little difference in the cost to the health service when a woman has an uncomplicated vaginal birth at home, in a birth centre or in a hospital setting.

© 2018 Elsevier Ltd Complementary and Alternative Medicine/Therapies (CAM) options have increasingly been used by pregnant women, however literature describing midwives¿ views and beliefs towards CAM is sparse. This study aimed to investigate Australian midwives¿ views and beliefs about CAM. Methods: A national survey of Australian College of Midwives midwife members (n = 3552) (UTSHREC 2015000614) included questions on midwives¿ views and support of CAM, and beliefs using a validated CAM Health Belief Questionnaire (CHBQ). Results: The response rate was 16%. Most respondents believed women should have the right to choose CAM (93.3%); and didn't view CAM a threat to public health (91.7%). Nearly half (49.5%) believed that their hospital/service did not have guidelines/procedures on CAM. The CHBQ mean score was 45.43 (SD9.98). Conclusion: Most respondents agreed with the fundamental beliefs of CAM. This study confirms the need for a national CAM policy for midwives; and research on midwives¿ CAM training.

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Perinatal mental health problems are linked to poor outcomes for mothers, babies and families. Despite a recognition of the significance of this issue, women often do not receive the care they need and fall between the gap of maternity and mental health services. To address this, there is a call for reform in the way in which perinatal mental healthcare is delivered. This paper responds to this by exploring the role and competence of midwives in delivering mental healthcare. Using a scoping review methodology, quantitative and qualitative evidence were considered to answer the research question ¿what is the nature of the evidence relevant to the provision of mental health interventions by midwives?¿ To identify studies, the databases PubMed, Maternity and Infant Care, Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, Medline, Science Direct and CINAHL were searched from 2011 to 2018, and reference lists of included studies were examined. Studies relevant to the role of midwives in the management and treatment of perinatal mental health issues were included; studies focussed on screening and referral were excluded. Thirty papers met inclusion criteria, including studies about the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of midwives and student midwives; the effectiveness of educational interventions in improving knowledge and skills; the delivery of counselling or psychosocial interventions by midwives; and barriers and enablers to embedding midwife-led mental healthcare in practice. Synthesis of the included studies indicates that midwives are interested in providing mental health support, but lack the confidence, knowledge and training to do so. This deficit can be addressed with appropriate training and organisational support, and there is some evidence that midwife-led counselling interventions are effective. Further research is needed to test midwife-led interventions for women with perinatal mental health problems, and to develop and evaluate models of integrated perinatal mental healthcare.

© 2017 Australian College of Midwives Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) have increasingly been used by pregnant women with a steady rise in interest by midwives. Literature describing CAM and self-help options midwives recommend to women experiencing a post-date pregnancy is sparse. This study aimed to investigate if Australian midwives¿ personal CAM use impacts on discussions and recommendations of CAM/Self-help strategies. Methodology/design: A survey of a national midwifery association midwifery members (n = 3,552) was undertaken at a midwifery conference (October 2015) and via e-bulletins (November 2015¿March 2016). The self-administered survey included questions on what self-help and CAM strategies midwives discuss and recommend to women with a post-date pregnancy, midwives¿ confidence levels on discussing or recommending CAM, midwives¿ own personal use of CAM. Findings: A total of 571 registered midwives completed the survey (16%). Demographics (age, years as a midwife, state of residence) reflected Australian midwives and the midwifery association membership. Most respondents discuss (91.2%) and recommend (88.6%) self-help/CAM strategies to women with a post-date pregnancy. The top five CAM recommended were Acupuncture (65.7%), Acupressure (58.1%), Raspberry Leaf (52.5%), Massage (38.9%) and Hypnosis/Calmbirthing/Hypnobirthing (35.7%). Midwives were more likely to discuss strategies if they personally used CAM (p <.001), were younger (p <.001) or had worked less years as midwives (p =.004). Midwives were more likely to recommend strategies if they used CAM in their own pregnancies (p =.001). Conclusion: Midwives¿ personal use of CAM influenced their discussions and recommendations of CAM/self-help strategies to women experiencing a post-date pregnancy. This study has implications for inclusion of CAM in midwifery education curricula.

© 2018 Australian College of Midwives Background: Asthma affects 12.7% of pregnancies in Australia. Poorly controlled asthma is associated with increased maternal and infant morbidity and mortality. Optimal antenatal management of asthma during pregnancy has the potential to reduce complications relating to asthma. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines help to translate health research findings into practice and when implemented can improve health outcomes. National and International guidelines currently provide recommendations for optimal asthma care in pregnancy. Aim: To appraise the existing asthma in pregnancy guidelines with respect to their evidence for recommendations, consistency of recommendations and appropriateness for clinical practice. Method: The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to appraise four English language asthma in pregnancy guidelines, published or updated between 2007 and 2016. The recommendations, range and level of evidence was analysed. Results: Two of the four guidelines scored highly in most domains of the appraisal. Many of the recommendations made in the appraised guidelines were consistent. Due to the lack of randomised controlled trials involving pregnant women with asthma, most recommendations were evidenced by consensus and expert opinion rather than high quality meta-analysis, systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Conclusion: The recommended antenatal asthma management was generally consistent among the guidelines but lacked clarity in some areas which then leave them open to interpretation. More randomised controlled trials involving pregnant women with asthma are required to fortify the recommendations made and asthma management guidelines should be included in Australian Antenatal Care Guidelines as they currently are not.

© 2017 Elsevier Ltd Background the viability of freestanding midwifery units in Australia is restricted, due to concerns over their safety, particularly for women and babies who, require transfer. Aim to compare the maternal and neonatal birth outcomes of women who planned, to give birth at freestanding midwifery units and subsequently, transferred to a tertiary maternity unit to the maternal and neonatal, outcomes of a low-risk cohort of women who planned to give birth in, tertiary maternity unit. Methods a descriptive study compared two groups of women with low-risk singleton, pregnancies who were less than 28 weeks pregnant at booking: women who, planned to give birth at a freestanding midwifery unit (n=494) who, transferred to a tertiary maternity unit during the antenatal, intrapartum or postnatal periods (n=260) and women who planned to give, birth at a tertiary maternity unit (n=3157). Primary outcomes were mode, of birth, Apgar score of less than 7 at 5¿minutes and admission to, special care nursery or neonatal intensive care. Key findings the proportion of women who experienced a caesarean section was lower, among the freestanding midwifery unit women who transferred during the, intrapartum/postnatal period compared to women in the tertiary maternity, unit group (16.1% versus 24.8% respectively). Other outcomes were, comparable between the cohorts. Rates of primary outcomes in relation to, stage of transfer varied when stratified by parity. discussion these descriptive results support the provision of care in freestanding, midwifery units as an alternative to tertiary maternity units for women, with low risk pregnancies at the time of booking. A larger study, powered, to determine statistical significance of any differences in outcomes, is, required.

© 2017 Elsevier Ltd Objective to identify and describe the design characteristics of hospital birth rooms that support midwives and their practice. Design this study used a qualitative exploratory descriptive methodology underpinned by the theoretical approach of critical realism. Data was collected through 21 in-depth, face-to-face photo-elicitation interviews and a thematic analysis guided by study objectives and the aims of exploratory research was undertaken. Setting the study was set at a recently renovated tertiary hospital in a large Australian city. Participants participants were 16 registered midwives working in a tertiary hospital; seven in delivery suite and nine in birth centre settings. Experience as a midwife ranged from three to 39 years and the sample included midwives in diverse roles such as educator, student support and unit manager. Findings three design characteristics were identified that supported midwifery practice. They were friendliness, functionality and freedom. Friendly rooms reduced stress and increased midwives' feelings of safety. Functional rooms enabled choice and provided options to better meet the needs of labouring women. And freedom allowed for flexible, spontaneous and responsive midwifery practice. Conclusion hospital birth rooms that possess the characteristics of friendliness, functionality and freedom offer enhanced support for midwives and may therefore increase effective care provision. Implications for practice new and existing birth rooms can be designed or adapted to better support the wellbeing and effectiveness of midwives and may thereby enhance the quality of midwifery care delivered in the hospital. Quality midwifery care is associated with positive outcomes and experiences for labouring women. Further research is required to investigate the benefit that may be transmitted to women by implementing design intended to support and enhance midwifery practice.

© 2017 Elsevier Ltd Background Birth in primary midwife-led maternity units has been demonstrated to be a safe choice for well women anticipating a normal birth. The incidence of serious perinatal outcomes for these women is comparable to similarly low risk women, who choose to birth in hospital. New Zealand women have a choice of Lead Maternity Carer (LMC) and birthplace; home, primary birthing unit, or a base hospital, though not all women may have all these choices available locally. Women in rural and rural remote areas can also choose to birth in their rural primary maternity unit. A percentage of these women (approx. 15¿17%) will require transfer during labour, an event which can cause distress and often loss of midwifery continuity of care. Objective To explore retrospectively the choice of birth place decisions and the labour and birth experiences of a sample of women resident in remotely zoned, rural areas of the lower South Island of New Zealand. Design A purposive sample of women living in remote rural areas, recruited by advertising in local newspapers and flyers. Individual semi-structured interviews were digitally recorded using a pragmatic interpretive approach. The data (transcripts and field notes) were analysed using thematic and content analysis. Ethical approval was obtained from the Health and Disability Ethics Committee (HEDC) MEC/06/05/045. Participants Thirteen women consented to participate. Each was resident in a remote rural area having given birth in the previous 18 months. The women had been well during their pregnancies and at the onset of labour had anticipated a spontaneous vaginal birth. Setting Rural remote zoned areas in Otago and Southland in the South Island of New Zealand Findings Five women planned to birth in a regional hospital and eight chose their nearest rural primary maternity unit. All of the women were aware of the possibility of transfer and had made their decision about their birthplace based on their perception of their personal safety, and in consideration of their distance from specialist care. Themes included, deciding about the safest place to give birth; making the decision to transfer; experiencing transfer in labour, and reflecting on their birth experience and considering future birthplace choices. Conclusions and implications for practice and policy The experiences of the women show that for some, distance from a base hospital influences their place of birth decisions in remote rural areas of New Zealand and increases the distress for those needing to transfer over large distances. These experiences can result in women choosing, or needing to make different choices for subsequent births; the consequences of which impact on the future sustainability of midwifery services in remote rural areas, a challenge which resonates with maternity service provision internationally. While choices about birth place cannot be reliably predicted, creative solutions are needed to provide rural midwifery care and birth options for women and more timely and efficient transfer services when required.

© 2016 Australian College of Midwives Background Caseload midwifery is expanding in Denmark. There is a need for elaborating in-depth, how caseload midwifery influences the partner and the woman during childbirth and how this model of care influences the early phases of labour. Aim To follow, explore and elaborate women's and their partner's experiences of caseload midwifery. Methods Phenomenology of practice was the analytical approach. The methodology was inspired by ethnography, and applied methods were field observations followed by interviews. Ten couples participated in the study. Most of the couples were observed from the onset of labour until childbirth. Afterwards, the couples were interviewed. Findings The transition from home to hospital in early labour was experienced as positive. During birth, the partner felt involved and included by the midwife. The midwives remembered and recognized the couple's stories and wishes for childbirth and therefore they felt regarded as ¿more than numbers¿. Irrespective of different kinds of vulnerability or challenges among the participants, the relationship was named a professional friendship, characterised by equality and inclusiveness. One drawback of caseload midwifery was that the woman was at risk of being disappointed if her expectations of having a known midwife at birth were not fulfilled. Key conclusions From the perspective of women and their partners, attending caseload midwifery meant being recognised and cared for as an individual. The partner felt included and acknowledged and experienced working in a team with the midwife. Caseload midwifery was able to solve problems concerning labour onset or gaining access to the labour ward.

© 2016 Australian College of Midwives Background Breastfeeding has many known benefits yet its support across Australian health systems was suboptimal throughout the 20th Century. The World Health Organization launched a global health promotion strategy to help create a ¿breastfeeding culture¿. Research on the programme has revealed multiple barriers since implementation. Aim To analyse the sociopolitical challenges associated with implementing a global programme into a national setting via an examination of the influences on the early period of implementation of the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative in Australia. Methods A focused historical document analysis was attended as part of an instrumental case study. A purposeful sampling strategy obtained a comprehensive sample of public and private documents related to the introduction of the BFHI in Australia. Analysis was informed by a ¿documents as commentary¿ approach to gain insight into individual and collective social practices not otherwise observable. Findings Four major themes were identified: ¿a breastfeeding culture¿; ¿resource implications¿; ¿ambivalent support for breastfeeding and the BFHI¿ and ¿business versus advocacy¿. ¿A breastfeeding culture¿ included several subthemes. No tangible support for breastfeeding generally, or the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative specifically, was identified. Australian policy did not follow international recommendations. There were no financial or policy incentives for BFHI implementation. Conclusions Key stakeholders¿ decisions negatively impacted on the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative at a crucial time in its implementation in Australia. The potential impact of the programme was not realised, representing a missed opportunity to establish and provide sustainable standardised breastfeeding support to Australian women and their families.

© 2016 Australian College of Midwives Objective To identify the predominant culture of an organisation which could then assess readiness for change. Design An exploratory design using the Competing Values Framework (CVF) as a self-administered survey tool. Setting The Maternity Unit in one Australian metropolitan tertiary referral hospital. Subjects All 120 clinicians (100 midwives and 20 obstetricians) employed in the maternity service were invited to participate; 26% responded. Main outcome measure The identification of the predominant culture of an organisation to assess readiness for change prior to the implementation of a new policy. Results The predominant culture of this maternity unit, as described by those who responded to the survey, was one of hierarchy with a focus on rules and regulations and less focus on innovation, flexibility and teamwork. These results suggest that this unit did not have readiness to change. Conclusion There is value in undertaking preparatory work to gain a better understanding of the characteristics of an organisation prior to designing and implementing change. This understanding can influence additional preliminary work that may be required to increase the readiness for change and therefore increase the opportunity for successful change. The CVF is a useful tool to identify the predominant culture and characteristics of an organisation that could influence the success of change.

© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. Objective: this study examined images of birth rooms in developed countries to analyse the messages and visual discourse being communicated through images. Design: a small qualitative study using Kress and van Leeuwen's (2006) social semiotic theoretical framework for image analysis, a form of discourse analysis. Setting/participants: forty images of birth rooms were collected in 2013 from Google Images, Flickr, Wikimedia Commons and midwifery colleagues. The images were from obstetric units, alongside and freestanding midwifery units located in developed countries (Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, United Kingdom and the United States of America). Main findings: findings demonstrated three kinds of birth room images; the technological, the 'homelike', and the hybrid domesticated birth room. The most dominant was the technological birth room, with a focus on the labour bed and medical equipment. The visual messages from images of the technological birth room reinforce the notion that the bed is the most appropriate place to give birth and the use of medical equipment is intrinsically involved in the birth process. Childbirth is thus construed as risky/dangerous. Key conclusions and implications for practice: as images on the Internet inform and persuade society about stereotypical behaviours, the trends of our time and sociocultural norms, it is important to recognise images of the technological birth room on the Internet may be influential in dictating women's attitudes, choices and behaviour, before they enter the birth room.

© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. Objective: the aim of this study is to advance knowledge about the working and living conditions of midwives in caseload midwifery and how this model of care is embedded in a standard maternity unit. This led to two research questions: 1) What constitutes caseload midwifery from the perspectives of the midwives? 2) How do midwives experience working in caseload midwifery? Design and setting: phenomenology of practice was the analytical approach to this qualitative study of caseload midwifery in Northern Denmark. The methodology was inspired by ethnography, and applied methods were field observations followed by interviews. Participants: thirteen midwives working in caseloads were observed during one or two days in the antenatal clinic and were interviewed at a later occasion. Findings: being recognised and the feeling of doing high quality care generate high job satisfaction. The obligation and pressure to perform well and the disadvantages to the midwives' personal lives are counterbalanced by the feeling of doing a meaningful and important job. Working in caseload midwifery creates a feeling of working in a self-governing model within the public hospital, without losing the technological benefits of a modern birth unit. Midwives in caseload midwifery worked on welcoming and including all pregnant women allocated to their care; even women/families where relationships with the midwives were challenging were recognised and respected. Key conclusions: caseload midwifery is a work-form with an embedded and inevitable commitment and obligation that brings forward the midwife's desire to do her utmost and in return receive appreciation, social recognition and a meaningful job with great job satisfaction. There is a balance between the advantages of a meaningful job and the disadvantages for the personal life of the midwife, but benefits were found to outweigh disadvantages. Implications for practice: In expanding caseload midwifery, it is necessary to understand that the midwives' personal lives need to be prepared for this work-form. The number of women per full time midwife has to be surveilled as job-satisfaction is dependent on the midwives' ability of fulfilling expectations of being present at women's births.

© 2016 Elsevier Ltd Background limited efforts have been made to understand the complex relationships between women's experiences of birth and the influence of the design and environment of a birth space. Domestic aesthetics in a birth space are believed to be an important aspect of optimal birth unit design. Aim to explore the concept of domesticity within the birth space. The specific objectives were to explore, describe and compare birth spaces with different domestic characteristics and subsequently, how laboring women worked within these spaces during the labour process. This project was situated within a larger ongoing body of work exploring birth unit design. Method a qualitative approach, using the techniques of video ethnography and reflexive interviewing, was used. Video data consisted of films of the labours of six Australian women who gave birth in 2012. Filming took place in two different tertiary hospitals in Sydney NSW (n=5 women), as well as a stand-alone Birth Centre (n=1 woman). Video footage of a woman labouring at home was used to compare and contrast women's experiences. Latent content analysis was used to analyse the data set. In addition there were 17 one-hour video-reflexive interviews that were audio-taped and fully transcribed (nine interviews with women and/or their support people and eight with midwives). Field note data accompanied both the video recording as well as the reflexive interviews. Findings in general, women labouring in conventional hospital labour and birth rooms acted and interacted with the environment in a passive way. The spaces clearly did not resemble homely or ¿domestic¿ spaces. This forced women to adapt to the space. In essence all but one of the women labouring and birthing in these spaces took on the role of a ¿patient¿. One participant responded quite differently to the conventional hospital space. ¿Domestication of the space¿ was the mechanism this woman used to retain a sense of ownership within the birth space. In contrast, in the domestic birth environments (Birth Centre and home) women effortlessly claimed ownership of the space, expressing their identity in a myriad of ways. In these domestic spaces, women were not required to change or modify their birth spaces as the design, furnishings and semiotics of the space openly encouraged them to be active, creative and take ownership of the space. Conclusion the findings of this study add to the existing literature on birth unit design and more specifically contribute to an understanding of how the features of domesticity within the birth setting may shape the experience of labouring women and their care providers. The evidence gained from the study will assist in the ongoing movement to humanise birth spaces and develop further understandings of how home-like birth spaces should look. Those designing, building, furnishing, managing, accessing and working in Birthing Services could all benefit from the consideration of how environments designed for the care of birthing women, may be affecting the outcomes and experiences of women and their families.

© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Aim: To explore the use and application of case study research in midwifery. Background: Case study research provides rich data for the analysis of complex issues and interventions in the healthcare disciplines; however, a gap in the midwifery research literature was identified. Design: A methodological review of midwifery case study research using recognized¿templates, frameworks and reporting guidelines facilitated comprehensive analysis. Data Sources: An electronic database search using the date range January 2005¿December 2014: Maternal and Infant Care, CINAHL Plus, Academic Search Complete, Web of Knowledge, SCOPUS, Medline, Health Collection (Informit), Cochrane Library Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, Wiley online and ProQuest Central. Review Methods: Narrative evaluation was undertaken. Clearly worded questions reflected the problem and purpose. The application, strengths and limitations of case study methods were identified through a quality appraisal process. Results: The review identified both case study research's applicability to midwifery and its low uptake, especially in clinical studies. Many papers included the necessary criteria to achieve rigour. The included measures of authenticity and methodology were varied. A high standard of authenticity was observed, suggesting authors considered these elements to be routine inclusions. Technical aspects were lacking in many papers, namely a lack of reflexivity and incomplete transparency of processes. Conclusion: This review raises the profile of case study research in midwifery. Midwives will be encouraged to explore if case study research is suitable for their investigation. The raised profile will demonstrate further applicability; encourage support and wider adoption in the midwifery setting.

© 2016, © The Author(s) 2016. Objective: To explore inhibiting and facilitating design factors influencing childbirth supporters¿ experiences. Background: Birthing women benefit from the continuous, cooperative presence of supporters. However, little research has investigated how birth room design facilitates or inhibits supporters¿ role navigation. Methods: We conducted an exploratory video ethnographic single case study of childbirth supporters¿ experiences, within an Australian hospital birth environment. Video, field notes, and video-cued reflexive interviews with the woman, her midwives, and supporters were thematically analyzed using ethnographic/symbolic interactionist perspectives to frame supporters¿ understandings. Results: Findings suggest supporters¿ experiences are complex, made more complicated by sparse understanding or accommodation of their needs in the built environment. Supporters¿ presence and roles are not facilitated by the physical space; they experience ¿an unbelonging paradox¿ of being needed, yet uncertain and ¿in the way¿ during ¿tenuous nest-building¿ activities. Conclusions: Suggested design guidelines to facilitate supporters¿ well-being and their roles in designed hospital birth spaces are provided.

© 2015 The Cochrane Collaboration. Background: Antenatal care is one of the key preventive health services used around the world. In most Western countries, antenatal care traditionally involves a schedule of one-to-one visits with a care provider. A different way of providing antenatal care involves use of a group model. Objectives: 1. To compare the effects of group antenatal care versus conventional antenatal care on psychosocial, physiological, labour and birth outcomes for women and their babies. 2. To compare the effects of group antenatal care versus conventional antenatal care on care provider satisfaction. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2014), contacted experts in the field and reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria: All identified published, unpublished and ongoing randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing group antenatal care with conventional antenatal care were included. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible, and one has been included. Cross-over trials were not eligible. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data; all review authors checked data for accuracy. Main results: We included four studies (2350 women). The overall risk of bias for the included studies was assessed as acceptable in two studies and good in two studies. No statistically significant differences were observed between women who received group antenatal care and those given standard individual antenatal care for the primary outcome of preterm birth (risk ratio (RR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 1.00; three trials; N = 1888). The proportion of low-birthweight (less than 2500 g) babies was similar between groups (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.23; three trials; N = 1935). No group differences were noted for the primary outcomes small-for-gestational age (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.24; two trials; N = 1473) and perinatal mortality (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.25; three trials; N = 1943). Satisfaction was rated as high among women who were allocated to group antenatal care, but this outcome was measured in only one trial. In this trial, mean satisfaction with care in the group given antenatal care was almost five times greater than that reported by those allocated to standard care (mean difference 4.90, 95% CI 3.10 to 6.70; one study; N = 993). No differences in neonatal intensive care admission, initiation of breastfeeding or spontaneous vaginal birth were observed between groups. Several outcomes related to stress and depression were reported in one trial. No differences between groups were observed for any of these outcomes. No data were available on the effects of group antenatal care on care provider satisfaction. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess evidence for seven prespecified outcomes; results ranged from low quality (perinatal mortality) to moderate quality (preterm birth, low birthweight, neonatal intensive care unit admission, breastfeeding initiation) to high quality (satisfaction with antenatal care, spontaneous vaginal birth). Authors' conclusions: Available evidence suggests that group antenatal care is positively viewed by women and is associated with no adverse outcomes for them or for their babies. No differences in the rate of preterm birth were reported when women received group antenatal care. This review is limited because of the small numbers of studies and women, and because one study contributed 42% of the women. Most of the analyses are based on a single study. Additional research is required to determine whether group antenatal care is associated with significant benefit in terms of preterm birth or birthweight.

© eContent Management Pty Ltd. Little is known about how the physical design of a birthing unit can influence the experiences of labour and birth for women, their supporters and midwives. We proposed that an interdisciplinary approach (disciplines of midwifery, architecture, design, communication and public health) was likely to be the most effective way to better understand the complexities and interactions of design, behaviour, communication and experiences. In this methodological paper we aim to provide a roadmap that other researchers may find helpful when considering the use of video as a data collection technique, especially in the study of the powerful and intimate setting of childbirth. The paper also outlines our process for engaging both researchers and participants in reviewing video footage with the aim to contribute multiple perspectives to the analysis process.

Background: The outcomes for women who give birth in hospital compared with at home are the subject of ongoing debate. We aimed to determine whether a retrospective linked data study using routinely collected data was a viable means to compare perinatal and maternal outcomes and interventions in labour by planned place of birth at the onset of labour in one Australian state.Methods: A population-based cohort study was undertaken using routinely collected linked data from the New South Wales Perinatal Data Collection, Admitted Patient Data Collection, Register of Congenital Conditions, Registry of Birth Deaths and Marriages and the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Eight years of data provided a sample size of 258,161 full-term women and their infants. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of neonatal mortality and morbidity as used in the Birthplace in England study.Results: Women who planned to give birth in a birth centre or at home were significantly more likely to have a normal labour and birth compared with women in the labour ward group. There were no statistically significant differences in stillbirth and early neonatal deaths between the three groups, although we had insufficient statistical power to test reliably for these differences.Conclusion: This study provides information to assist the development and evaluation of different places of birth across Australia. It is feasible to examine perinatal and maternal outcomes by planned place of birth using routinely collected linked data, although very large data sets will be required to measure rare outcomes associated with place of birth in a low risk population, especially in countries like Australia where homebirth rates are low. © 2014 Homer et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Studies have identified that the practices of maternity facilities and health professionals are crucial to women's experience of support and breastfeeding 'success'. The Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) was launched globally in 1991 to protect, promote and support breastfeeding. While a direct causal effect has not been established and critics suggest the rhetoric conflicts with women's lived experiences as new mothers, a positive association between the Initiative and breastfeeding prevalence is apparent. Internationally, impact studies have demonstrated that where the Initiative is well integrated, there is an increase in rates of breastfeeding initiation and, to a lesser extent, duration. In consideration of the known health risks associated with the use of artificial baby milks this would suggest that BFHI implementation and accreditation should be a desirable strategy for committed health facilities. However, a variation in both BFHI uptake and breastfeeding prevalence between nations has been reported. This narrative review critically discusses a variety of issues relevant to the uptake and support of breastfeeding and the BFHI, utilising Australia as a case study. Whilst it enjoys 'in principle' policy support, Australia also suffers from a lack of uniformity in uptake and perception of the benefits of BFHI at all levels of the health system. Australian and international studies have identified similar enablers and barriers to implementation.

Background Women at low risk of pregnancy complications benefit from continuity of midwifery care, but no trial evidence exists for women with identifi ed risk factors. We aimed to assess the clinical and cost outcomes of caseload midwifery care for women irrespective of risk factors. Methods In this unblinded, randomised, controlled, parallel-group trial, pregnant women at two metropolitan teaching hospitals in Australia were randomly assigned to either caseload midwifery care or standard maternity care by a telephone-based computer randomisation service. Women aged 18 years and older were eligible if they were less than 24 weeks pregnant at the fi rst booking visit. Those who booked with another care provider, had a multiple pregnancy, or planned to have an elective caesarean section were excluded. Women allocated to caseload care received antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal care from a named caseload midwife (or back-up caseload midwife). Controls received standard care with rostered midwives in discrete wards or clinics. The participant and the clinician were not masked to assignment. The main primary outcome was the proportion of women who had a caesarean section. The other primary maternal outcomes were the proportions who had an instrumental or unassisted vaginal birth, and the proportion who had epidural analgesia during labour. Primary neonatal outcomes were Apgar scores, preterm birth, and admission to neonatal intensive care. We analysed all outcomes by inten tion to treat. The trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12609000349246. Findings Publicly insured women were screened at the participating hospitals between Dec 8, 2008, and May 31, 2011. 1748 pregnant women were randomly assigned, 871 to caseload and 877 to standard care. The proportion of caesarean sections did not differ between the groups (183 [21%] in the caseload group vs 204 [23%] in the standard care group; odds ratio [OR] 0¿88, 95% CI 0¿70-1¿10; p=0¿26). The proportion of women who had elective caesarean sections (before onset of labour) diff ered signifi cantly between caseload and standard care (69 [8%] vs 94 [11%]; OR 0¿72, 95% CI 0¿52-0¿99; p=0¿05). Proportions of instrumental birth were similar (172 [20%] vs 171 [19%]; p=0¿90), as were the proportions of unassisted vaginal births (487 [56%] vs 454 [52%]; p=0¿08) and epidural use (314 [36%] vs 304 [35%]; p=0¿54). Neonatal outcomes did not diff er between the groups. Total cost of care per woman was AUS$566¿74 (95% 106¿17-1027¿30; p=0¿02) less for caseload midwifery than for standard maternity care. Interpretation Our results show that for women of any risk, caseload midwifery is safe and cost-effective.