Article
Integrating midwives’ perspectives in defining core competencies in academic midwifery education in Germany – development and psychometric testing of an assessment instrument
Search Medline for
Authors
-
Angela Kranz
- University Tübingen, Department of Midwifery, Tübingen, Germany
-
Anja Alexandra Schulz
- University of Education Freiburg, Department of Research Methods, Freiburg, Germany
-
Markus Antonius Wirtz
- University of Education Freiburg, Department of Research Methods, Freiburg, Germany
-
Claudia Plappert
- University of Tübingen, Institute for Health Sciences, Section of Midwifery Science, Tübingen, Germany
-
Harald Abele
- University of Tübingen, Institute for Health Sciences, Section of Midwifery Science, Tübingen, Germany; University Hospital Tübingen, Department of Women’s Health, Tübingen, Germany
| Published: | February 7, 2024 |
|---|
Outline
Text
Background: The academisation of midwifery requires an empirical evidence of acquired competencies according to DQR level 6. The identification and definition of core competencies in academic midwifery education is fundamental. This should be negotiated in a collaborative process by all involved actors.
Aim: To analyse midwives’ (academic and non-academic) perceptions of core competencies in academic midwifery education, the aim was to adapt an existing assessment instrument to the German context and to evaluate the psychometric properties.
Methods: In a cross-sectional analysis, N=193 (prospective) midwives answered the questionnaire. Considering the recommendations of the International Confederation of Midwives as well as the German Association of Midwives, 3 items (evidence-based practice, digital competencies) were added as additional core competencies. The dimensional structure of the final assessment instrument (63 items, 8 domains) was tested using exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The perceptions of core competencies from academic versus non-academic midwives were analysed using mean differences.
Results: In contrast to previous theoretical assumptions (8 domains), the unidimensional structure proved to be most appropriate (eigenvalue=18.36, explained variance=29.6%). After eliminating 20 items due to insufficient item-construct association, the remaining 43 items (λ=.495–.721) form a homogeneous item pool (Cronbach’s alpha=.954, rit=.460–.692). The analysis of the perception of core competencies from academic versus non-academic midwives (tdf=106=–0.035; p=.97), as well as students of midwifery science versus midwifery trainees (tdf=6.66=0.18; p=.86) revealed no significant mean differences.
Relevancy: The negotiation process of competence-based academic midwifery education involves different actors throughout Germany. To align this process, an assessment tool for all involved (professional) groups is useful that reliably and validly captures the assessed relevance of academic core competencies in midwifery.
Conclusion: The adapted instrument is a reliable and valid tool to measure the assessed relevance of academic midwifery competencies from (prospective) midwives. To gain a comprehensive overview and for the purpose of further validation, further research of this instrument should include perceptions of more involved actors, such as medical professionals and laypersons. Finally, further psychometric testing should take place.
Ethics and conflicts of interest: An ethics vote was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Faculty of Medicine at University Hospital and University in Tübingen (ethical approval number 972/2021BO2, date 30 March 2022). The research was financed by own resources. There are no conflicts of interest.
