Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

On the same page: a novel interprofessional model of patient-centered perinatal consultation visits

Journal of Perinatology volume 36, pages 932–938 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Objective:

To plan and implement an interprofessional collaborative care clinic for women in midwifery care needing a consultation with a maternal–fetal medicine specialist.

Study Design:

A community-engaged design was used to develop a new model of collaborative perinatal consultation, which was tested with 50 women. Participant perinatal outcomes and semistructured interviews with 15 women (analyzed using qualitative descriptive analysis) and clinic providers were used to evaluate the model.

Results:

Participant perinatal outcomes following a simultaneous consultation visit involving a nurse-midwife and maternal–fetal medicine specialist were similar to practice and hospital averages. Women’s comments on their experience were positive and had the theme ‘on the same page’ with six subcategories: clarity, communication, collaboration, planning, validation and ‘above and beyond’. Providers also were pleased with the model.

Conclusion:

A simultaneous consultation involving the woman, a nurse-midwife and a maternal–fetal medicine specialist improved communication and satisfaction among women and providers.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American College of Nurse-Midwives Core Competencies for Basic Midwifery Practice. American College of Nurse-Midwives: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2012.

  2. D'Angelo D, Williams L, Morrow B, Cox S, Harris N, Harrison L et al. Preconception and Interconception Health Status of Women Who Recently Gave Birth to a Live-Born Infant—Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (Prams), United States, 26 Reporting Areas, 2004. Centers for Disease Control: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2007.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Edwards JG, Feldman G, Goldberg J, Gregg AR, Norton ME, Rose NC et al. Expanded carrier screening in reproductive medicine—points to consider: a joint statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Perinatal Quality Foundation, and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125 (3): 653–662.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Obstetric Care Consensus No. 2: levels of maternal care. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125 (2): 502–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Task Force on Collaborative Practice. Collaboration in Practice: Implementing Team-Based Care. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Washington, DC, USA 2016.

  6. Sandall J, Soltani H, Gates S, Shennan A, Devane D . Midwife-led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 8 (8)CD004667.

  7. International Confederation of Midwives. Essential Competencies for Basic Midwifery Practice: International Confederation of Midwives. International Confederation of Midwives: The Hague, Netherlands, 2013.

  8. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Task Force on Collaborative Practice. Collaboration in practice: implementing team-based care: report of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Task Force on Collaborative Practice. Obstet Gynecol 2016; 127 (3): 612–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. DeJoy S, Burkman RT, Graves BW, Grow D, Sankey HZ, Delk C et al. Making it work: successful collaborative practice. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118 (3): 683–686.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hutchison MS, Ennis L, Shaw-Battista J, Delgado A, Myers K, Cragin L et al. Great minds don’t think alike: collaborative maternity care at San Francisco General Hospital. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118 (3): 678–682.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Waldman RN, Kennedy HP . Collaborative practice between obstetricians and midwives. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118 (3): 503–504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Shaw-Battista J, Fineberg A, Boehler B, Skubic B, Woolley D, Tilton Z . Obstetrician and nurse–midwife collaboration: successful public and private partnership. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118 (3): 663–672.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Darlington A, McBroom K, Warwick S . A northwest collaborative practice model. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118 (3): 673–677.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Skinner JP, Foureur M . Consultation, referral, and collaboration between midwives and obstetricians: lessons from New Zealand. J Midwifery Women’s Health 2010; 55 (1): 28–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nielsen PE, Munroe M, Foglia L, Piecek RI, Backman MP, Cypher R et al. Collaborative practice model: madigan army medical center. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am 2012; 39 (3): 399–410.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice: Report of an Expert Panel. Interprofessional Education Collaborative: Washington, DC, USA, 2011.

  17. Joint Commission. Sentinel event data: root causes by event type, 2004–2013. Available at http://www.jointcommission.org/Sentinel_Event_Statistics/.

  18. Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S . Shared decision making—the pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med 2012; 366 (9): 780–781.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hoang H, Le Q, Ogden K . Women’s maternity care needs and related service models in rural areas: a comprehensive systematic review of qualitative evidence. Women Birth 2014; 27 (4): 233–241.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gee RE, Corry MP . Patient engagement and shared decision making in maternity care. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120 (5): 995–997.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Thomson G, Dykes F, Singh G, Cawley L, Dey P . A public health perspective of women’s experiences of antenatal care: an exploration of insights from a community consultation. Midwifery 2013; 29 (3): 211–216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. MacDorman MF, Declercq E . Trends and characteristics of United States out‐of‐hospital births 2004–2014: new information on risk status and access to care. Birth 2016; 43 (2): 116–124.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hamilton B, Martin J, Osterman M, Curtin S . Births Final Data for 2013. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2015; 64 (12).

  24. American College Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No. 664: Refusal of Medically Recommended Treatment During Pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2016; 127 (6): e175–e182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hattan J, Frohlich J, Sandall J . No decision about me, without me: improving shared decision making when planning place of birth for women with ‘high risk’ pregnancies. International Confederation of Midwives 30th Triennial Congress, Prague, Czech Republic 2014.

  26. Schulte R, Jordan LC, Morad A, Naftel RP, Wellons JC III, Sidonio R . Rise in late onset vitamin K deficiency bleeding in young infants because of omission or refusal of prophylaxis at birth. Pediatr Neurol 2014; 50 (6): 564–568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. MacDorman MF, Declercq E . Trends and characteristics of United States out-of-hospital births 2004–2014: new information on risk status and access to care. Birth 2016; 43: 116–124.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Elo S, Kyngas H . The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs 2008; 62 (1): 107–115.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Graneheim UH, Lundman B . Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004; 24 (2): 105–112.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Walsh D, Evans K . Critical realism: an important theoretical perspective for midwifery research. Midwifery 2014; 30 (1): e1–e6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Applegate M, Gee RE, Martin JN Jr . Improving maternal and infant health outcomes in Medicaid and the children’s health insurance program. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 124 (1): 143–149.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Society for Maternal–Fetal Medicine. Obstetric Care Consensus No. 1: safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123 (3): 693–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Spong CY, Berghella V, Wenstrom KD, Mercer BM, Saade GR . Preventing the first cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120 (5): 1181–1193.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. ten Hoope-Bender P, de Bernis L, Campbell J, Downe S, Fauveau V, Fogstad H et al. Improvement of maternal and newborn health through midwifery. Lancet 2014; 384 (9949): 1226–1235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman M, Curtin SC, Matthews T . Births: final data for 2013: National Center for Health Statistics. Natl Vital Stat Syst 2015; 64: 1–65.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by UL1 TR000445 grant from National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of the United States. The first author also received support from a Vanderbilt University Medical Center Faculty Research Scholars Award. We thank Kate Virostko, CNM, Melissa Allred, CNM, Jennifer L Thompson, MD, Marilee Weingartner, FNP, RN and Lori Cabbage, CNM as their help was instrumental to success.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vanderbilt University School of Nursing, Nashville, TN, USA

    J C Phillippi, S L Holley, M N Schorn & J Lauderdale

  2. Veterans Health Administration, Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, Tennessee Valley Geriatric Research Education Clinical Center (GRECC), Nashville, TN, USA

    C L Roumie

  3. Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA

    C L Roumie

  4. Division of Maternal–Fetal Medicine, Vanderbilt Medical Center, B-1100 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN, USA

    K Bennett

Authors
  1. J C Phillippi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S L Holley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M N Schorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J Lauderdale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. C L Roumie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. K Bennett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J C Phillippi.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Supplementary Information accompanies the paper on the Journal of Perinatology website

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Phillippi, J., Holley, S., Schorn, M. et al. On the same page: a novel interprofessional model of patient-centered perinatal consultation visits. J Perinatol 36, 932–938 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2016.124

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2016.124

Search

Advanced search

Quick links