Audrey Lyndon

Abstract

Background: Analyses of factors that determine quality of perinatal care consistently rely on clinical markers, while failing to assess experiential outcomes. Understanding how model of care and birth setting influence experiences of respect, autonomy, and decision making, is essential for comprehensive assessment of quality. Methods: We examined responses (n = 1771) to an online cross-sectional national survey capturing experiences of perinatal care in the United States. We used validated patient-oriented measures and scales to assess four domains of experience: (1) decision-making, (2) respect, (3) mistreatment, and (4) time spent during visits. We categorized the provider type and birth setting into three groups: midwife at community birth, midwife at hospital-birth, and physician at hospital-birth. For each group, we used multivariate logistic regression, adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics, to estimate the odds of experiential outcomes in all the four domains. Results: Compared to those cared for by physicians in hospitals, individuals cared for by midwives in community settings had more than five times the odds of experiencing higher autonomy (aOR: 5.22, 95% CI: 3.65–7.45), higher respect (aOR: 5.39, 95% CI: 3.72–7.82) and lower odds of mistreatment (aOR: 0.16, 95% CI: 0.10–0.26). We found significant differences across birth settings: participants cared for by midwives in the community settings had significantly better experiential outcomes than those in the hospital settings: high- autonomy (aOR: 2.97, 95% CI: 2.66–4.27), respect (aOR: 4.15, 95% CI: 2.81–6.14), mistreatment (aOR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.11–0.34), time spent (aOR: 8.06, 95% CI: 4.26–15.28). Conclusion: Participants reported better experiential outcomes when cared for by midwives than by physicians. And for those receiving midwifery care, the quality of experiential outcomes was significantly higher in community settings than in hospital settings. Care settings matter and structures of hospital-based care may impair implementation of the person-centered midwifery care model.

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to explore the association of nurses' perceptions of patient safety climate with missed nursing care in labor and delivery (L&D) units. Methods We recruited nurse respondents via email distribution of an electronic survey between February 2018 and July 2019. Hospitals with L&D units were recruited from states with projected availability of 2018 state inpatient data in the United States. Measures included the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire Safety Climate Subscale and the Perinatal Missed Care Survey. We estimated the relationship between safety climate and missed care using Kruskal-Wallis tests and mixed-effects linear regression. Results The analytic sample included 3429 L&D registered nurses from 253 hospitals (response rate, 35%). A majority of respondents (65.7%) reported a perception of good safety climate in their units, with a mean score of 4.12 (±0.73) out of 5. The mean number of aspects of care occasionally, frequently, or always missed on respondents' units was 11.04 (±6.99) out of 25. χ2 Tests showed that six mostly commonly missed aspects of care (e.g., timely documentation) and three reasons for missed care (communications, material resources, and labor resources) were associated with safety climate groups (P < 0.001). The adjusted mixed-effects model identified a significant association between better nurse-perceived safety climate and less missed care (β = -2.65; 95% confidence interval, -2.97 to -2.34; P < 0.001) after controlling for years of experience and highest nursing education. Conclusions Our findings suggest that improving safety climate - for example, through better teamwork and communication - may improve nursing care quality during labor and birth through decreasing missed nursing care. Conversely, it is also possible that strategies to reduce missed care - such as staffing improvements - may improve safety climate.