A Lighthouse for Midwifery Practices: Model of Woman-Centred Care

Öz

Midwifery is a health discipline that integrates theory and practice. Models and theories establish a scientific perspective to midwifery and guide clinical work practice. It is also a reference point that distinguishes midwifery from other health professions. Midwifery Model of Woman-Centred Childbirth Care (MiMo), one of the midwifery models that includes a woman-centred care approach, has been developed based on the synthesis of qualitative research findings on childbirth experiences of women and midwives, in Swedish and Icelandic birth settings. This review has been carried out to examine the basic concepts of MiMo. It includes five intertwined themes, three main (basic) and two in the background. The three central intertwined themes are a reciprocal relationship; a birthing atmosphere and grounded knowledge. The remaining two themes are the cultural context (with hindering and promoting norms for a midwifery approach and woman-centred care); and the balancing act of the midwife. The experiences and opinions of health professionals about the application of the model in a hospital labor ward in Sweden have been examined and it has been concluded that the model could be useful to enhance midwifery practice and that it would be interesting to apply MiMo in other cultural contexts. In Turkey as a developed country, maternity care needs to be based woman-centred approach. During pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum using a midwifery model or theory could increase the quality of maternity care services. In addition, midwives can strengthen their professional autonomy in this way.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• childbirth
• midwifery
• woman-centred care
• model

Ebelik Uygulamaları İçin Bir Deniz Feneri: Kadın Merkezli Bakım Modeli

Öz

Ebelik teori ve pratiğin bütünleştiği bir sağlık disiplinidir. Modeller ve teoriler, ebelik için bilimsel bir bakış açısı oluşturur ve klinik uygulamalara rehberlik eder. Aynı zamanda ebeliği diğer sağlık mesleklerinden ayıran bir referans noktasıdır. Kadın merkezli bakım yaklaşımını içeren ebelik modellerinden biri olan Doğumda Kadın Merkezli Ebelik Bakım Modeli (MiMo); İsveç ve İzlanda’da kadınların ve ebelerin doğum deneyimlerine ilişkin nitel araştırma bulgularının sentezine dayalı olarak geliştirilmiştir. Bu derleme, MiMo'nun temel kavramlarını incelemek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Üç ana (temel) ve iki arka plan olmak üzere iç içe geçen beş tema içerir. İç içe geçen üç merkezi tema; karşılıklı ilişki, doğum ortamı ve temellendirilmiş (gömülü) bilgidir. Kalan iki tema kültürel bağlam (ebelik yaklaşımı ve kadın merkezli bakım için engelleyici ve teşvik edici normlarla birlikte); ve ebenin dengeleme eylemleridir. Modelin İsveç'te bir hastanenin doğum ünitesinde uygulanmasına ilişkin sağlık profesyonellerinin deneyimleri ve görüşleri incelenmiş ve modelin ebelik uygulamasını geliştirmek için faydalı olabileceği ve MiMo'nun diğer kültürel alanlarda da uygulanmasının ilginç olacağı sonucuna varılmıştır. Gelişmiş bir ülke olarak Türkiye'de annelik bakım ve hizmetlerinin kadın merkezli olması gereklidir. Gebelik, doğum ve doğum sonrası dönemde ebelik modeli veya teorisinin kullanılması, doğuma ilişkin hizmetlerin kalitesini artırabilir. Ayrıca ebeler mesleki özerkliklerini model kullanımı yoluyla güçlendirebilirler.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• doğum
• ebelik
• kadın merkezli bakım
• model

Kaynakça

1. Andrist, L. (1997). A feminist model for women's health care. Nursing Inquiry, 4(4), 268-274. Antonovsky, A. (1996). The salutogenic model as a theory to guide health promotion. Health Promotion International, 11, 11–18.
2. Bag, B. (2017). Ruh Sağlığı ve Psikiyatri Hemşireliğinde Salutogenez Modeli. Current Approaches in Psychiatry/Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 9(3):284-300.
3. Barol Kurtoğlu, Z. & Kaya, N. Doğumda Defansif Tıp Uygulamalarının Hasta Hakları ve Ebelik Etik Kodları Yönünden Değerlendirilmesi. Sağlık Bilimleri ve Meslekleri Dergisi, 6(3), 610-620.
4. Berg, M., Ólafsdóttir, Ó. A., & Lundgren, I. (2012). A midwifery model of woman-centred childbirth care–in Swedish and Icelandic settings. Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare, 3(2), 79-87.
5. Bryar, R., Sinclair, M. (2011). Theory for midwifery practice. 2nd ed. Chippenham and Eastbourne: Palgrave and Macmillan.
6. Brunstad, A., & Hjälmhult, E. (2014). Midwifery students learning experiences in labor wards: A grounded theory. Nurse Education Today, 34(12), 1474-1479.
7. Crepinsek, M., Bell, R., Graham, I., & Coutts, R. Towards a conceptualization of woman centred care-A global review of professional standards. Women and Birth, S1871-5192.
8. Çiçek Okuyan, Y., Tuna Oran, N. & Öztürk Can, H. Ebelik uygulama alanlarında yapılan teori ve modele dayalı tezler. Life Sciences, 14(1), 20-29.

9. Davison, C., Hauck, Y. L., Bayes, S. J., Kuliukas, L. J., & Wood, J. (2015). The relationship is everything: Women׳ s reasons for choosing a privately practising midwife in Western Australia. Midwifery, 31(8), 772-778.
10. De Labrusse, C., Ramelet, A., Maclennan, S.J. (2016) Patient-centered care in maternity services: A critical appraisal and synthesis of the literature. Women’s Health Issues, 26(1): 100-109. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2015.09.003
11. Dencker, A., Nilsson, C., Begley, C., Jangsten, E., Mollberg, M., Patel, H., ... & Sparud-Lundin, C. (2019). Causes and outcomes in studies of fear of childbirth: a systematic review. Women and Birth, 32(2), 99-111.
12. Downe, S., Finlayson, K., Oladapo, O., Bonet, M., & Gulmezoglu, A.M. (2018). What matters to women during childbirth: A systematic qualitative review. Plos One 13(4): e0194906.
13. Eri, T. S., Berg, M., Dahl, B., Gottfreðsdóttir, H., Sommerseth, E., & Prinds, C. (2020). Models for midwifery care: A mapping review. European Journal of Midwifery, 4(30).
14. Fahy, K. M., & Parratt, J. A. (2006). Birth territory: a theory for midwifery practice. Women and Birth, 19(2), 45-50.
15. Fontein-Kuipers, Y., de Groot, R., & van Staa, A. (2018). Woman-centered care 2.0: Bringing the concept into focus. European Journal of Midwifery, 2(5).
16. Forster, D. A., McLachlan, H. L., Davey, M. A., Biro, M. A., Farrell, T., Gold, L., Flood, M; Shafiei, T. & Waldenström, U. (2016). Continuity of care by a primary midwife (caseload midwifery) increases women’s satisfaction with antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum care: results from the COSMOS randomised controlled trial. BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 16(1), 28.
17. Goodwin, L., Hunter, B., & Jones, A. (2018). The midwife–woman relationship in a South Wales community: Experiences of midwives and migrant Pakistani women in early pregnancy. Health Expectations, 21(1), 347-357.
18. Hodnett, E. D., Gates, S., Hofmeyr, G. J., & Sakala, C. (2013). Continuous support for women during childbirth. Cochrane database of systematic reviews, (7).
19. ICM (2017). Midwifery Led Care, the First Choice for All Women. https://www.internationalmidwives.org/assets/files/statement-files/2018/04/eng-midwifery-led-care-the- first-choice-for-all-women.pdf Access date: 22.07.2019.
20. Leap, N. (2009). Woman-centred or women-centred care: does it matter? British Journal of Midwifery, 17(1), 12-16.
21. Lundgren, I., & Berg, M. (2007). Central concepts in the midwife–woman relationship. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 21(2), 220-228.
22. Lundgren, I., Berg, M., Nilsson, C., & Olafsdottir, O. A. (2020). Health professionals’ perceptions of a midwifery model of woman-centred care implemented on a hospital labour ward. Women and Birth, 33(1), 60-69.
23. MacKenzie Bryers H, van Teijlingen ER. (2010). Risk, theory, social and medical models: a critical analysis of the concept of risk in maternity care. Midwifery, 26(5):488–96.
24. Mander, R. (2011). The partnership model. Theory for Midwifery Practice. Second Edition, New York: Palgrave Macmillan Publisher, 215-240.
25. McLachlan, H. L., Forster, D. A., Davey, M. A., Farrell, T., Flood, M., Shafiei, T., & Waldenström, U. (2016). The effect of primary midwife‐led care on women's experience of childbirth: results from the COSMOS randomised controlled trial. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 123(3), 465-474.
26. Mittelmark, M. B., & Bauer, G. F. (2017). The meanings of salutogenesis. In The handbook of salutogenesis (pp. 7-13). Springer, Cham.
27. OECD (2018). Caesarean sections (indicator). doi: 10.1787/adc3c39f-en Erişim tarihi: 20.06.2019.
28. Shaw, D., Guise, J. M., Shah, N., Gemzell-Danielsson, K., Joseph, K. S., Levy, B., & Main, E. K. (2016). Drivers of maternity care in high-income countries: can health systems support woman-centred care?. The Lancet, 388(10057), 2282-2295.
29. Stockdale, D. J., Sinclair, M., Kernohan, W. G., & Keller, J. (2011). In: Bryar, R., & Sinclair, M. (Eds.). Theory for Midwifery Practice. Second Edition, New York: Palgrave Macmillan Publisher, 115-136.
30. World Health Organization WHO (2018). WHO recommendations intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/260178/9789241550215-eng.pdf;jsessionid=383A4D6E29F72597516A3531274FEEED?sequence=1 Access date: 20.06.2019.
31. Van Teijlingen, E.R. (2017). The medical and social model of childbirth. Kontakt XIX/2:81-82.
32. Vural, G., & Erenel, A.Ş. (2017). Doğumun medikalizasyonu neden artmıştır, azaltabilir miyiz?. Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Nursing, 4(2).