Abstract

BackgroundDespite the advancement of scientific research in the field of maternity care, midwives face challenges translating latest evidence into evidence-based practice (EBP) and express reticence towards leading practice change in clinical areas. This study aimed to explore midwifery leaders’ views on what factors help or hinder midwives’ efforts to translate latest evidence into everyday practice and consider them in relation to both the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour (COM-B) model and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).MethodsThis qualitative study formed part of a larger action research (AR) project that was designed to improve midwives’ EBP implementation capability. Data were obtained from eight Western Australian midwifery leaders who were employed in either managerial or executive positions within their organisation. Five midwives attended a focus group workshop and three opted for face-to-face interviews. Thematic analysis was used to code the transcribed data and group alike findings into sub-categories, which were collapsed to four major categories and one overarching core finding. These were mapped to a matrix combining the COM-B and TDF to establish the usability of these tools in midwifery contexts.ResultsFour major categories were developed from the data collected in this study. Three reported the hindrances midwives’ experienced when trying to initiate new EBPs: ‘For midwives, medical opposition and workplace culture are the biggest challenges’, ‘Fear can stop change: it’s personal for midwives’ and ‘Midwives are tired of fighting the battle for EBP; they need knowledge and the confidence to bring about practice change.’ The other major category highlighted factors midwives’ considered helpers of EBP: ‘Having stakeholder buy-in and strong midwifery leadership is a huge advantage.’ When mapped to the TDF and COM-B, these findings provided valuable insight into the helpers of and hindrances to evidence-based practice in midwifery.ConclusionMidwives are motivated to initiate evidence-based change yet have limited knowledge of implementation processes or the confidence to lead practice change. Factors such as inter-disciplinary buy-in, clear instruction for midwives and support from midwifery leaders were considered beneficial to implementing practice change in clinical areas. The TDF when used in combination with the COM-B was deemed useful to midwives wanting to lead practice change projects in clinical areas.

Highlights

  • Despite the advancement of scientific research in the field of maternity care, midwives face challenges translating latest evidence into evidence-based practice (EBP) and express reticence towards leading practice change in clinical areas

  • There was unanimous agreement by all eight participants that midwives are passionate about EBP yet reticent towards leading change

  • It was anticipated that combining the behaviour-focused COM-B model with the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) would result in a better understanding of what needs to occur for midwives to successfully implement new EBPs in clinical areas

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Despite the advancement of scientific research in the field of maternity care, midwives face challenges translating latest evidence into evidence-based practice (EBP) and express reticence towards leading practice change in clinical areas. The implementation of strategies that target behaviour change is recognised to be more effective when implementation theory is used, in comparison to those that lack a philosophical approach [9, 10] This is evident in midwifery, where the use of theory has been known to contribute to better understanding evidence implementation processes and projects aimed at behaviour modification [6]. One such theoretical framework, the ‘Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour’ (COM-B) model, recognised as the ‘Behaviour Change Wheel’ (BCW), is widely used to contextualise individual-level change and the underlying determinants of what must occur in order to achieve organisational change [19]. These three domains are further divided into six sub-domains (Fig. 1) that capture the factors known to influence an individual’s capacity to adopt new behaviours [13]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call