The role of midwifery and other international insights for maternity care in the United States: An analysis of four countries

Abstract

Background: The United States (US) spends more on health care than any other high-resource country. Despite this, their maternal and newborn outcomes are worse than all other countries with similar levels of economic development. Our purpose was to describe maternal and newborn outcomes and organization of care in four high-resource countries (Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, and United Kingdom) with consistently better outcomes and lower health care costs, and to identify opportunities for emulation and improvement in the United States. Method: We examined resources that described health care organization and financing, provider types, birth settings, national, clinical guidelines, health care policies, surveillance data, and information for consumers. We conducted interviews with country stakeholders representing the disciplines of obstetrics, midwifery, pediatrics, neonatology, epidemiology, sociology, political science, public health, and health services. The results of the analysis were compared and contrasted with the US maternity system. Results: The four countries had lower rates of maternal mortality, low birthweight, and newborn and infant death than the United States. Five commonalities were identified as follows: (1) affordable/ accessible health care, (2) a maternity workforce that emphasized midwifery care and interprofessional collaboration, (3) respectful care and maternal autonomy, (4) evidence-based guidelines on place of birth, and (5) national data collections systems. Conclusions: The findings reveal marked differences in the other countries compared to the United States. It is critical to consider the evidence for improved maternal and newborn outcomes with different models of care and to examine US cultural and structural failures that are leading to unacceptable and substandard maternal and infant outcomes.

Factors that impact on women's decision‐making around prenatal genomic tests: An international discrete choice survey

“…Varying attitudes towards the importance of receiving SFs and VUS may also reflect differing views around ownership of genomic data 55 and whether the costs of prenatal tests are covered by state or out‐of‐pocket expenses 56 ; in a recent international study, some HPs felt that they had a responsibility to return VUS when patients had paid out‐of‐pocket 39 . Differences in preferences towards who explains the test results may be related to whether or not there is easy access to genetic services, 57 genetic health literacy 58,59 or the role played by midwives in different countries 60 . Overall, our findings support the development of guidance around return of uncertain results that take into account cultural and health system differences.…”

Are perinatal quality collaboratives collaborating enough? How including all birth settings can drive needed improvement in the United States maternity care system

“…As noted previously, in countries where midwives are well integrated into the health care system, the safety and the benefits of midwifery care are clearly documented. Compared with countries such as Australia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Canada, midwifery in the United States is rather poorly integrated into the maternity care system 1 . A major conclusion of Birth Settings in America is that the lack of reliable integration across providers and settings in the United States contributes to inferior birth outcomes relative to peer nations 38 .…”

Current Resources for Evidence‐Based Practice, January/February 2021

“…First, the good news is the scope of practice for certified midwives and certified nurse‐midwives is quite wide compared with the rest of the world, and US midwives are well educated to provide the range of serves identified by Nove and colleagues. Kennedy and colleagues’ comparison of perinatal care outcomes in the United States with those in 4 other high‐income countries with better outcomes identified 4 shared characteristics, most of which are in the critical synthesis 11 . Besides ready access to affordable care, other commonalties were a perinatal workforce primarily of midwives working in interprofessional collaboration with physicians; respectful care and women's autonomy, including evidence‐based guidelines on place of birth; and national data collection systems.…”