5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessment of interprofessional obstetric and midwifery care from the midwives’ perspective using the Interprofessional Collaboration Scale (ICS)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Interprofessional collaboration of physicians and midwives is essential for appropriate and safe care of pregnant and parturient women as well as their newborns. The complexity of woman-centered care settings requires the continuous exchange of information and the coordinated implementation of multi-and interprofessional care concepts. To analyze the midwives’ perspective on the multi-and interprofessional care process during pregnancy, birth and postpartum period, we aimed to adapt and psychometrically evaluate the Interprofessional Collaboration Scale (ICS).

          Methods

          The ICS (13 items) was answered by 299 midwives for (i) prenatal and postpartum care as well as (ii) perinatal care. Three items on equitable communication (EC) identified in qualitative interviews with N = 6 midwives were added as further aspects of quality in collaborative midwifery care. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test competing theoretically hypothesized factorial model structures, including both care settings simultaneously, i.e., birth and prenatal/postpartum.

          Results

          A two-dimensional structure assuming the 13 original ICS items and the 3 items on EC as psychometric distinct item groups accounts for the data best. After deleting 5 ICS items with insufficient indicator reliability, a very good-fitting model structure was obtained for both prenatal/postpartum as well as perinatal care: χ 2 df = 192 = 226.35, p = 0.045, CFI = 0.991, RMSEA = 0.025 (90%CI: [0.004; 0.037]). Both the reduced ICS-R and the EC scale (standardized response mean = 0.579/1.401) indicate significantly higher interprofessional collaboration in the birth setting. Responsibility in consulting, attitudes toward obstetric care and frequency of collaboration with other professional groups proved to be associated with the ICS-R and EC scale as expected.

          Discussion

          For the adapted ICS-R and the EC scale a good construct validity could be confirmed. Thus, the scales can be recommended as a promising assessment for recording the collaboration of midwives with physicians working in obstetric care from the perspective of midwives. The instrument provides a validated assessment basis in midwifery and obstetric care to identify potentially divergent perspectives within interprofessional care teams in woman’s centered care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references69

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Missing data: our view of the state of the art.

            Statistical procedures for missing data have vastly improved, yet misconception and unsound practice still abound. The authors frame the missing-data problem, review methods, offer advice, and raise issues that remain unresolved. They clear up common misunderstandings regarding the missing at random (MAR) concept. They summarize the evidence against older procedures and, with few exceptions, discourage their use. They present, in both technical and practical language, 2 general approaches that come highly recommended: maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian multiple imputation (MI). Newer developments are discussed, including some for dealing with missing data that are not MAR. Although not yet in the mainstream, these procedures may eventually extend the ML and MI methods that currently represent the state of the art.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Quality of care for pregnant women and newborns-the WHO vision.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                22 May 2023
                2023
                : 14
                : 1143110
                Affiliations
                Research Methods in the Health Sciences, University of Education Freiburg , Freiburg, Germany
                Author notes

                Edited by: Julia Carolin Seelandt, University Hospital Zürich, Switzerland

                Reviewed by: Keri L. Heitner, Saybrook University, United States; York Hagmayer, University of Göttingen, Germany

                *Correspondence: Anja Alexandra Schulz, anja.schulz@ 123456ph-freiburg.de
                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1143110
                10240080
                79fb7ca2-dd63-44f1-acd0-bf5b2972bc07
                Copyright © 2023 Schulz and Wirtz.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 12 January 2023
                : 03 May 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 4, Equations: 0, References: 73, Pages: 14, Words: 10986
                Funding
                Funded by: Ministry of Agriculture
                Award ID: 2817LEO15
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                Organizational Psychology

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                interprofessional collaboration,midwifery care,woman-centered care,psychometric evaluation,confirmatory factor analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article