↓ Skip to main content

Barriers and facilitators related to implementation of regulated midwifery in Manitoba: a case study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Barriers and facilitators related to implementation of regulated midwifery in Manitoba: a case study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1334-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kellie Thiessen, Maureen Heaman, Javier Mignone, Patricia Martens, Kristine Robinson

Abstract

In 2000, midwifery was regulated in the Canadian Province of Manitoba. Since the establishment of the midwifery program, little formal research has analyzed the utilization of regulated midwifery services. In Manitoba, the demand for midwifery services has exceeded the number of midwives in practice. The specific objective of this study was to explore factors influencing the implementation and utilization of regulated midwifery services in Manitoba. The case study design incorporated qualitative exploratory descriptive methods, using data derived from two sources: interviews and public documents. Twenty-four key informants were purposefully selected to participate in semi-structured in-depth interviews. All documents analyzed were in the public domain. Content analysis was employed to analyze the documents and transcripts of the interviews. The results of the study were informed by the Behavioral Model of Health Services Use. Three main topic areas were explored: facilitators, barriers, and future strategies and recommendations. The most common themes arising under facilitators were funding of midwifery services and strategies to integrate the profession. Power and conflict, and lack of a productive education program emerged as the most prominent themes under barriers. Finally, future strategies for sustaining the midwifery profession focused on ensuring avenues for registration and education, improving management strategies and accountability frameworks within the employment model, enhancing the work environment, and evaluating both the practice and employment models. Results of the document analysis supported the themes arising from the interviews. These findings on factors that influenced the implementation and integration of midwifery in Manitoba may provide useful information to key stakeholders in Manitoba, as well as other provinces as they work toward successful implementation of regulated midwifery practice. Funding for new positions and programs was consistently noted as a successful strategy. While barriers such as structures of power within Regional Health Authorities and inter and intra-professional conflict were identified, the lack of a productive midwifery education program emerged as the most prominent barrier. This new knowledge highlights issues that impact the ongoing growth and capacity of the midwifery profession and suggests directions for ensuring its sustainability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 1%
Unknown 86 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 20 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 25 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 16%
Social Sciences 9 10%
Environmental Science 4 5%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 22 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 March 2016.
All research outputs
#18,812,604
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,636
of 7,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,931
of 300,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#92
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,637 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.