Swedish midwives' rating of risks during labour progress and their attitudes toward performing intrapartum interventions: a web-based survey

Abstract

Objective: to study how Swedish midwives working in low-risk labour ward units rate intrapartum risks compared to their midwifery colleagues working in standard care labour wards. A second aim was to describe midwives' attitudes toward performing different types of interventions during a normal labour.

Design: an explorative study was carried out in 2009, using a web-based questionnaire containing 31 questions on midwives' risk ratings and attitudes to interventions during labour, as well as personal comments.

Setting: four labour ward units in Stockholm, Sweden. Two labour ward units with expected normal deliveries ('low-risk') and two standard care units with all types of deliveries.

Participants: seventy-seven registered clinically practicing midwives.

Findings: midwives in all units stated that factors to be considered for risk estimation were: previous delivery outcome, result of cardiotocography test (CTG) on admission to labour ward and quality of amniotic fluid. Midwives working at the low-risk units preferred to be more expectant during normal birth than their colleagues working at the standard care units. Examples of this were regarding second vaginal examination during labour (p=0.001) and/or amniotomy (p=0.012). Furthermore, midwives working at the low-risk units more often considered that first-time mothers could give birth without epidural analgesia during labour (p=0.019) and that the labouring woman should be encouraged to push according to her own spontaneous urge (p=0.040). Midwives at low-risk units were more reluctant to use an intravenous vein catheter than their colleagues at standard care units (p=0.001) and also to use oxytocin in order to augment contractions (p=0.013). Further, the open-ended question showed that attitudes to different types of interventions differed between midwives working at low-risk units or the standard care units working with all types of deliveries.

Conclusion: the Swedish midwives estimated risks similarly regardless of whether they worked in low-risk or in standard care units, but midwives working at low-risk units reported that they perform less routine interventions and have a more expectant attitude towards performing interventions.