TY - JOUR
T1 - Understanding how midwife-led continuity of care can be implemented and under what circumstances
T2 - a realist review
AU - Simmelink, Renate
AU - Neppelenbroek, Elise
AU - Pouwels, Anneke
AU - van der Lee, Nadine
AU - Pajkrt, Eva
AU - Ziesemer, Kirsten A.
AU - Harmsen van der Vliet-Torij, Hanneke W.
AU - Verhoeven, Corine J.M.
AU - de Jonge, Ank
AU - Nieuwenhuijze, Marianne
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025.
PY - 2025/2/20
Y1 - 2025/2/20
N2 - Objectives To understand how and under what circumstances midwife-led continuity of care (MLCC) can be implemented in high-income countries. Design A realist review was conducted to examine interactions between contexts, mechanisms and outcomes. Methods An initial programme theory described a hypothesis of how MLCC might be implemented successfully. Literature from a systematic search on the implementation of MLCC was synthesised and supplemented with unstructured searches to identify literature that reinforced the emerging concepts. The synthesis was an iterative process, endorsed in consultation with stakeholders, leading to a refined programme theory. Results A total of 45 documents were included. The mechanisms identified can be grouped around macrolevel challenges, leadership, role ambiguity and conflict, and personal and professional boundaries. Despite strong evidence supporting MLCC, diverse stakeholder interests and power dynamics hinder its implementation. Implementing MLCC disrupts established roles and power structures, creating uncertainty and anxiety at all levels. To successfully navigate healthcare providers through the transition, both formal and informal leaders must demonstrate the courage and vision to challenge existing norms. Conclusions Realist methodology allowed the identification of mechanisms that often remain unnoticed but significantly impact the implementation of MLCC. Concrete policies and guidelines are essential to ensure consistency in care delivery. Collaborative efforts and a shared philosophy among all stakeholders, combined with strong leadership that builds trust and addresses anxiety, can create a supportive environment for MLCC implementation.
AB - Objectives To understand how and under what circumstances midwife-led continuity of care (MLCC) can be implemented in high-income countries. Design A realist review was conducted to examine interactions between contexts, mechanisms and outcomes. Methods An initial programme theory described a hypothesis of how MLCC might be implemented successfully. Literature from a systematic search on the implementation of MLCC was synthesised and supplemented with unstructured searches to identify literature that reinforced the emerging concepts. The synthesis was an iterative process, endorsed in consultation with stakeholders, leading to a refined programme theory. Results A total of 45 documents were included. The mechanisms identified can be grouped around macrolevel challenges, leadership, role ambiguity and conflict, and personal and professional boundaries. Despite strong evidence supporting MLCC, diverse stakeholder interests and power dynamics hinder its implementation. Implementing MLCC disrupts established roles and power structures, creating uncertainty and anxiety at all levels. To successfully navigate healthcare providers through the transition, both formal and informal leaders must demonstrate the courage and vision to challenge existing norms. Conclusions Realist methodology allowed the identification of mechanisms that often remain unnoticed but significantly impact the implementation of MLCC. Concrete policies and guidelines are essential to ensure consistency in care delivery. Collaborative efforts and a shared philosophy among all stakeholders, combined with strong leadership that builds trust and addresses anxiety, can create a supportive environment for MLCC implementation.
KW - Midwifery
KW - OBSTETRICS
KW - Quality in health care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85218802467&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-091968
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-091968
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85218802467
SN - 2044-6055
VL - 15
JO - BMJ Open
JF - BMJ Open
IS - 2
M1 - e091968
ER -