Home
Issues
Aim & Scope
Open Access
Editorial Board
Indexing
Supporting Midwifery Associations
Contact us
Manuscript Types
Manuscript Formatting
How to submit
Special publications and Reprints
Authorship & COI
Principles of Transparency Checklist
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
CONFERENCE PROCEEDING
One million more midwives – One hundred (or more) midwifery quality indicators: Results from an international scoping review and modified Delphi study
1
Edith Cowan Univrersity, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Perth, Australia
2
Metro South Health, Office of the Executive Director of Nursing and Midwifery, Brisbane, Australia
3
Queensland Department of Health, Office of the Chief Midwife Officer, Brisbane, Australia
Eur J Midwifery 2026;10(Supplement 1):A79
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
Nursing sensitive indicators are widely used to determine the quality of nursing care; they have been the subject of two recent systematic reviews. Midwifery quality indicators, however, are an emerging area of research with no published reviews. Midwifery quality indicators promise to demonstrate the value of midwifery care and indicate where strategies are needed to drive quality improvement.
OBJECTIVES:
To develop an evidence-informed, consensus-based set of midwifery quality indicators that can be measured using routinely collected health service data.
METHODS:
Scoping review: We conducted a systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Maternity and Infant Care databases. Results were imported into Covidence for independent screening by two reviewers. Data from included studies will be extracted and results synthesised into a list of potential indicators. Modified Delphi: We will invite midwifery experts across clinical, research, education, and leadership to complete an electronic survey to rate the appropriateness of each indicator using a Likert scale (Round 1). Participants will attend a virtual workshop to review Round 1 ratings, discuss areas of disagreement, modify the indicators, and individually re-rate each indicator until consensus is reached (Round 2).
RESULTS:
Our scoping review is underway. Preliminary results have identified at least 20 relevant studies from seven high-resource settings. Data will be extracted to develop a list of 100 or more potential quality indicators for consideration by the expert panel. The final results of scoping review and agreed set of midwifery quality indicators will be available for presentation at the conference.
CONCLUSIONS:
Midwifery quality indicators designed to measure routinely collected data is a streamlined way to benchmark, improve, and evaluate the quality of midwifery practice and models of care.
KEY MESSAGE:
Implementation of a set of evidence-informed, consensus-based midwifery quality indicators can improve the safety, effectiveness, equity, and efficiency of midwifery care. Data collection (including three-minute presentation competition)
Nursing sensitive indicators are widely used to determine the quality of nursing care; they have been the subject of two recent systematic reviews. Midwifery quality indicators, however, are an emerging area of research with no published reviews. Midwifery quality indicators promise to demonstrate the value of midwifery care and indicate where strategies are needed to drive quality improvement.
OBJECTIVES:
To develop an evidence-informed, consensus-based set of midwifery quality indicators that can be measured using routinely collected health service data.
METHODS:
Scoping review: We conducted a systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Maternity and Infant Care databases. Results were imported into Covidence for independent screening by two reviewers. Data from included studies will be extracted and results synthesised into a list of potential indicators. Modified Delphi: We will invite midwifery experts across clinical, research, education, and leadership to complete an electronic survey to rate the appropriateness of each indicator using a Likert scale (Round 1). Participants will attend a virtual workshop to review Round 1 ratings, discuss areas of disagreement, modify the indicators, and individually re-rate each indicator until consensus is reached (Round 2).
RESULTS:
Our scoping review is underway. Preliminary results have identified at least 20 relevant studies from seven high-resource settings. Data will be extracted to develop a list of 100 or more potential quality indicators for consideration by the expert panel. The final results of scoping review and agreed set of midwifery quality indicators will be available for presentation at the conference.
CONCLUSIONS:
Midwifery quality indicators designed to measure routinely collected data is a streamlined way to benchmark, improve, and evaluate the quality of midwifery practice and models of care.
KEY MESSAGE:
Implementation of a set of evidence-informed, consensus-based midwifery quality indicators can improve the safety, effectiveness, equity, and efficiency of midwifery care. Data collection (including three-minute presentation competition)
| eISSN: | 2585-2906 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
