Artikel
Die Umsetzung von „Midwife-led Continuity of Care“ – ein Balanceakt zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik
Suche in Medline nach
Autoren
-
Franka Cadée
| Veröffentlicht: | 28. Juli 2022 |
|---|
Gliederung
Text
If midwifery were a pill, it would have been administered to all people globally immediately. Yet we see that, despite the clear and growing scientific evidence about the positive impact of Midwife-led Continuity of Care (MLCC) to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) [1] implementation is noticeably slow compared to other evidence based interventions.
We do see a wind of change in the global arena, with increasing consensus among global health leaders that there must be more targeted strategies to implement MLCC to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC) by providing high quality, equitable and respectful healthcare to women and girls [2]. It is for this reason that the World Health Organisation (WHO) have in recent years recommended MLCC models for pregnant women in all settings in both their WHO antenatal and intrapartum care guidance for a positive pregnancy and childbirth experience [3]. The International Confederation of Midwives’ (ICM) 2021 – 2023 Strategy and ICM Core documents have MLCC as their top priority [2], [4], [5].
Unlike many medical interventions, MLCC is a long term and sustainable intervention that calls for a systems change. Current power dynamics within the healthcare sector and in society at large are not conducive to the success of MLCC [6], [7]. So to implement MLCC we need to not only be aware of the political will to change the paradigm, we will need to foster a movement that calls for and implements the necessary change.
During this presentation I will share with the audience the evidence for MLCC and what we can do to support its implementation. We have all the evidence, now has come the time to be political!
Ethics and conflicts of interest: A vote on ethics was obtained. There are no conflicts of interest.
Literatur
- 1.
- Renfrew MJ, McFadden A, Bastos MH, Campbell J, Channon AA, Cheung NF, Delage Silva DRA, Downe S, Kennedy HP, Malata A, McCormick F, Wick L, Declercq E. Midwifery and quality care: findings from a new evidence-informed framework for maternal and newborn care. The Lancet. 2014;384(9948):1129-45. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60789-3
- 2.
- White Ribbon Alliance. What Women Want: Demands for Quality Reproductive and Maternal Healthcare from Women and Girls Report. Washington: WRA Global; 2019 [Accessed Oct 2021]. Available from: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5aa813dd3917ee6dd2a0e09e/t/5d1120ccdf7cbc0001b99c57/1561403606693/What-Women-Want_Global-Findings.pdf
- 3.
- World Health Organization. Continuity and Coordination of Care. Geneva: WHO; 2018 [Accessed Oct 2021]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/274628/9789241514033-eng.pdf?ua=1
- 4.
- International Confederation of Midwives. Position Statement Midwife-led Continuity of Care (MLCC). ICM; 2020 [Accessed Oct 2021]. Available from: https://www.internationalmidwives.org/assets/files/statement-files/2021/09/ps2021_en_midwife-led-continuity-of-care-mlcc.pdf
- 5.
- International Confederation of Midwives. ICM Strategic Plan 2021-2023. ICM; 2021 [Accessed Oct 2021]. Available fromt: https://www.internationalmidwives.org/assets/files/general-files/2021/01/2021---2023-icm-strategic-plan-eng-ext_final.pdf
- 6.
- Johanson R, Newburn M, Macfarlane A. Has the medicalisation of birth gone too far? BMJ. 2002;324(7342):892-5. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.324.7342.892
- 7.
- United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA); World Health Organization (WHO); International Confederation of Midwives (ICM). The State of the World’s Midwifery 2021. New York: UNFPA; 2021 [Accessed Oct 2021]. Available from: https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/resource-pdf/21-038-UNFPA-SoWMY2021-FastFacts-ENv4302.pdf
