Apple Tree Maternity: A Qualitative Exploration of the Development of a Rural Collaborative Interprofessional Maternity Care Service
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: There is currently a maternity care crisis in Canada, with many of the obstetricians and family physicians reaching retirement age in the next 10 years. Primary midwifery care services may offer solutions. However, due to the many constraints and difficulties faced by midwives practicing in rural settings, there is an emerging interest in exploring interprofessional collaborative models of maternity care as a possible solution to the crisis. This study documents the process and experiences of care providers in establishing and providing collaborative interprofessional maternity care in rural British Columbia. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with key stakeholders (primary care providers and allied health professionals) working at Apple Tree Maternity. Interviewees spoke to both the process of establishing a new collaborative interprofessional model of care and the experience of working and providing care within the model. Findings: Four main themes emerged through the dialogue with the stakeholders: motivation for collaboration; challenges and barriers to collaborative care; attributes and benefits of collaborative care; and core qualities and recommendations for successful interprofessional collaboration. Based on their experience of establishing and working within a new model of collaborative, interprofessional, rural maternity care, the study participants identified core qualities and recommendations for successful interprofessional collaboration in a rural community to be mutual trust and respect; common philosophy of care, mutual commitment, and genuine desire to collaborate; clear and effective communication; ensuring the collaborative model is responsive to the unique needs of specific communities; community support; supportive institutional culture; and alternative payment plans and billing structures. Conclusion and implications for practice: This study revealed a number of attributes to collaboration that mirror those identified by others. In addition, study participants identified particular challenges unique to the rural context. Further research documenting the care provider experiences of interprofessional collaboration in other rural settings is warranted. In addition, there is also a need to explore and document the experiences of collaborative practice, in both rural and urban settings, from the client perspective. It is only when this is achieved that significant policy change suggestions should be made that will facilitate both collaborative practice and an improvement in care to women in rural settings. The need for this research is vital given the maternity care crisis in British Columbia and the need for supporting sustainable rural maternity care models. This article has been peer reviewed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».