Development of quality indicators for low-risk labor care provided by midwives using a RAND-modified Delphi method

• Main Authors: Kayo Ueda, Shosuke Ohtera, Misato Kaso, Takeo Nakayama
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2017-09-01
• Series: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
• Subjects: Low-risk labor; Quality indicator; Clinical practice guidelines; RAND-modified Delphi method
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12884-017-1468-4

Abstract Background In childbirth, most deliveries are low-risk, defined as spontaneous labor at full term without special high-risk facts or complications, especially in high-resource countries where maternal and perinatal mortality rates are very low. Indeed, the majority of mothers and infants have no serious conditions during labor. However, the quality of care provided is not assured, and performance may vary by birthing facility and provider. The overuse of technology in childbirth in some parts of the world is almost certainly based on assumptions like, “something can go wrong at any minute.” There is a need to assess the quality of care provided for mothers and infants in low-risk labor. We aimed to develop specific quality indicators for low-risk labor care provided primarily by midwives in Japan. Methods We used a RAND-modified Delphi method, which integrates evidence review with expert consensus development. The procedure comprises five steps: (1) literature review, including clinical practice guidelines, to extract and develop quality indicator candidates; (2) formation of a multidisciplinary panel; (3) independent panel ratings (Round 1); (4) panel meeting and independent panel ratings (Round 2); and (5) independent panel ratings (Round 3). The three independent panel ratings (Rounds 1–3) were held between July and December 2012. Results The assembled multidisciplinary panel comprised eight clinicians (two pediatricians, three obstetricians, and three midwives) and three mothers who were nonclinicians. Evidentiary review extracted 166 key recommendations from 32 clinical practice guidelines, and 31 existing quality indicators were added. After excluding duplicate recommendations and quality indicators, the panel discussed 25 candidate indicators. Of these, 18 were adopted, one was modified, six were not adopted, and four were added during the meeting, respectively. Conclusions We established 23 quality indicators for low-risk labor care provided by midwives in labor units in Japan.