Search:
Computing and Library Services - delivering an inspiring information environment

An action research study exploring midwives' support needs and the effect of group clinical supervision

Deery, Ruth (2005) An action research study exploring midwives' support needs and the effect of group clinical supervision. Midwifery, 21 (2). pp. 161-176. ISSN 0266-6138

[img] PDF
Restricted to Registered users only

Download (264kB)

    Abstract

    Objective: to explore community midwives' views and experiences of their support needs in clinical practice, and then to identify how they would wish to receive such support. Further objectives were to redress the imbalance identified by planning and facilitating a model of clinical supervision devised by the participating midwives. Design: a qualitative study using an action-research approach based on collaboration and participation. Action research has the potential to facilitate understanding of, and is able to adapt to, changing situations within clinical practice. Data were collected in three phases using in-depth interviews and focus groups. Setting: a large maternity unit in the north of England, UK. Participants: eight National Health Service (NHS) community midwives working in the same team. Findings: recent and ongoing organisational change and increased demands placed on the midwives by their managers were found to be detrimental to the process of clinical supervision and working relationships with their peers and clients. These pressures also inhibited the process of change. The midwives' behaviour and coping strategies revealed an apparent lack of understanding on their part, and that of their midwifery managers, of the regulation of emotion and the amount of energy this generated. Pseudo-cohesion and resistance to change were key defence mechanisms used by the participating midwives. Key conclusions: a large amount of published literature supported the existence of stress and burnout in midwifery, but no research addressed ways of alleviating this situation. Effective facilitation of midwifery support is needed, which can be met through support mechanisms such as clinical supervision. During the process of clinical supervision, strong messages emerged about the necessity to ensure that midwives are prepared educationally for the difficult situations that are brought about through collaborative working. There are also messages about the cultural legacy of NHS midwifery and how this can inhibit autonomous behaviour by midwives. Implications for practice: developing and increasing self-awareness is still not viewed as being intrinsic to the work of the midwife, and midwives are being asked to undertake a level of work for which they have not been adequately prepared. The bureaucratic pressures of working in a large maternity unit exaggerate this further. In this situation, the system is seen as more important than the midwives.

    Item Type: Article
    Additional Information: Copyright © 2005 Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved
    Uncontrolled Keywords: Action research clinical supervision organisational change participation support
    Subjects: R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
    R Medicine > RG Gynecology and obstetrics
    Schools: School of Human and Health Sciences
    School of Human and Health Sciences > Centre for Applied Childhood Studies
    References:

    Agar, M., MacDonald, J., 1995. Focus goups and ethnography.
    Human Organization 54, 78–86.
    Arksey, H., Knight, P., 1999. Interviewing for social scientists.
    Sage Publications Ltd., London.
    Association of Radical Midwives (ARM), 1995. Super-vision:
    consensus conference proceedings. Books for Midwives Press,
    Cheshire.
    Ball, L., Curtis, P., Kirkham, M., 2002. Why do midwives leave?
    The Royal College of Midwives, London.
    Baker, R., Hinton, R., 1999. Do focus groups facilitate meaningful
    participation in social research? In: Barbour, R.S.,
    Kitzinger, J. (Eds.), Developing focus group research, politics,
    theory and practice. Sage publications, London.
    Bentz, V.M., Shapiro, J.J., 1998. Mindful inquiry in social
    research. Sage Publications, London.
    Bishop, V., 1998. Clinical supervision in practice. Some questions,
    answers and guidelines. Macmillan Press Ltd, London.
    Bond, M., Holland, S., 1998. Skills of clinical supervision for
    nurses: A practical guide for supervisees, clinical supervisors
    and managers. Open University Press, Buckingham.
    Brooks, I., Brown, R.B., 2002. The role of ritualistic ceremonial
    in removing barriers between subcultures in the
    National Health Service. Journal of Advanced Nursing 38,
    341–352.
    Butterworth, T., Carson, J., White, E., Jeacock, J., Clements,
    A., Bishop, V., 1997. It is good to talk: an evaluation study in
    England and Scotland. The University of Manchester, Manchester.
    Butterworth, T., 1998. Clinical supervision as an emerging idea in
    nursing. In: Butterworth, T., Faugier, J., Burnard, P. (Eds.),
    Clinical supervision and mentorship in nursing, 2nd edn.
    Nelson Thornes Ltd., Cheltenham.
    Cotterill, P., 1992. Interviewing women: issues of friendship,
    vulnerability, and power. Women’s Studies International
    Forum 15, 593–606.
    Cutcliffe, J.R., Epling, M., 1997. An exploration of John Heron’s
    confronting interventions within supervision: case studies
    from practice. Psychiatric Care 4, 174–180.
    Davies, C., 1995. Gender and the professional predicament in
    nursing. Open University Press, Buckingham. Davis-Floyd, R., 2001. The technocratic, humanistic and holistic
    paradigms of childbirth. International Journal of Gynecology
    and Obstetrics 75 (supp 1), 5–23.
    Deery, R., Corby, D., 1996. A case for clinical supervision in
    midwifery. In: Kirkham, M. (Ed.), Supervision of midwives.
    Books for Midwives Press, Hale.
    Deery, R., Kirkham, M., 2000. Moving from hierarchy to
    collaboration: The birth of an action research project. The
    Practising Midwife 3, 25–28.
    Department of Health, 1993a. Changing childbirth, Part 1
    (Report of the Expert Maternity Group). HMSO, London.
    Department of Health, 1993b. A vision for the future: the
    nursing, midwifery and health visiting contribution to health
    and health care. HMSO, London.
    Department of Health, 1998. A first class service: quality in the
    new NHS. HMSO, London.
    Department of Health, 1999. Making a difference: strengthening
    the nursing, midwifery and health visiting contribution to
    health and healthcare. HMSO, London.
    Department of Health, 2000. The NHS plan: a plan for
    investment, a plan for reform. HMSO, London.
    Dudley, M., Butterworth, T., 1994. The costs and some benefits
    of clinical supervision: an initial exploration. International
    Journal Psychiatric Research 1, 34–40.
    Farrington, A., 1995. ‘‘Models of clinical supervision’’. British
    Journal of Nursing 1, 876–878.
    Faugier, J., 1998. The supervisory relationship. In: Faugier, J.,
    Burnard, P. (Eds.), Clinical supervision and mentorship
    in nursing, 2nd edn. Butterworth, Nelson Thornes Ltd.,
    Cheltenham.
    Fineman, S., 2003. Understanding emotion at work. Sage
    Publications, London.
    Fleming, V., 2000. The midwifery partnership in New Zealand:
    past history or a new way forward? In: Kirkham, M. (Ed.), The
    midwife–mother relationship. Macmillan Press Ltd., London.
    Flint, C., 1986. Sensitive midwifery. Heinemann, London.
    Goffman, E., 1990 (first published in 1959). The presentation of
    self in everyday life, Penguin, Harmondsworth.
    Hallberg, I.R., Norberg, A., 1993. Strain among nurses and their
    emotional reactions during 1 year of systematic clinical
    supervision combined with the implementation of individualised
    care in dementia nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing
    18, 1860–1875.
    Hawkins, P., Shohet, R., 1989. Supervision in the helping
    professions. Open University Press, Buckingham.
    Heron, J., 1991. Helping the client: a creative practical guide.
    Sage Publications, London.
    Holloway, W., Jefferson, T., 2002. Doing qualitative research
    differently. Free association narrative and the interview
    method. Sage Publications, London.
    Hughes, D., Deery, R., Lovatt, A., 2002. A critical ethnographic
    approach to facilitating cultural shift in midwifery. Midwifery
    18, 43–52.
    Hunter, B., 2002. Emotion work in midwifery: an ethnographic
    study of the emotional work undertaken by a sample of
    student and qualified midwives in Wales [unpublished PhD
    thesis]. University of Wales Swansea, Swansea.
    Kirkham, M., 1999. The culture of midwifery in the National
    Health Service in England. Journal of Advanced Nursing 30,
    732–739.
    Kirkham, M., 2000. How can we relate? In: Kirkham, M. (Ed.),
    The midwife–mother relationship. Macmillan Press Ltd.,
    London.
    Kirkham, M., 2003. Birth centres. A social model for maternity
    care, In: Book for Midwives. Elsevier Science Limited,
    London.
    Kirkham, M., Stapleton, H., 2000. Midwives’ support needs as
    childbirth changes. Journal of Advanced Nursing 32, 465–472.
    Kitzinger, J., 1994. The methodology of focus groups: The
    importance of interaction between research participants.
    Sociology of Health and Illness 16, 103–121.
    Leap, N., 2000. The less we do, the more we give. In: Kirkham,
    M. (Ed.), The midwife–mother relationship. Macmillan Press
    Ltd., London.
    Levy, V., 1999. Protective steering: a grounded theory study of
    the processes involved when midwives facilitate informed
    choice in pregnancy. Journal of Advanced Nursing 29,
    104–112.
    Lindahl, B., Norberg, A., 2002. Clinical group supervision in an
    intensive care unit: a space for relief, and for sharing
    emotions and experiences of care. Journal of Clinical Nursing
    11, 809–818.
    Lipsky, M., 1980. Street 1 level bureaucracy: dilemmas of the
    individual in public services. Russell Sage Foundation, New
    York.
    Mackin, P., Sinclair, M., 1998. Labour ward midwives’
    perceptions of stress. Journal of Advanced Nursing 27,
    986–991.
    Maguire, P., 2001. Uneven ground: Feminisms and action
    research. In: Reason, P., Bradbury, H. (Eds.), Handbook of
    action research, participative inquiry and practice. Sage
    Publications Ltd., London.
    Mauthner, N., Doucet, A., 1998. Reflections on a voice-centred
    relational method. Analysing maternal and domestic voices.
    In: Ribbens, J., Edwards, R. (Eds.), Feminist dilemmas in
    qualitative research, public knowledge and private lives.
    Sage Publications, London.
    Meyer, J., Batehup, L., 1997. Action research in health-care
    practice: nature, present concerns and future possibilities.
    NT Research 2, 175–184.
    Morris, M., 1995. The role of clinical supervision in mental health
    practice. British Journal of Nursing 4, 886–888.
    Morrison, B., Lilford, R., 2001. How can action research apply to
    health services? Qualitative Health Research 11, 436–449.
    Oakley, A., 1981. Interviewing women: a contradiction in terms.
    In: Roberts, H. (Ed.), Doing feminist research. Routledge and
    Kegan Paul, London.
    Pairman, S., 2000. Woman-centred midwifery: partnerships or
    professional friendships? In: Kirkham, M. (Ed.), The midwife–
    mother relationship. Macmillan Press Ltd., London.
    Raphael-Leff, J., 2000. Psychological understanding: its use and
    abuse in midwifery. British Journal of Midwifery 8 (11),
    680–686.
    Riessman, C.K., 1987. When gender is not enough: women
    interviewing women. Gender and Society 1, 172–207.
    Riessman, C.K., 1993. Narrative analysis. qualitative research
    methods series 30. Sage Publications, London.
    Ribbens, J., 1989. Interviewing: an ‘‘unnatural situation’’?
    Women’s Studies International Forum 12, 579–592.
    Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D., Jasper, M., 2001. Critical reflection for
    nursing and the helping professions: a user’s guide. Palgrave,
    Basingstoke.
    Royal College of Midwives (RCM), 1997. Evidence to the review
    body for nursing staff, midwives, health visitors and professionals
    allied to medicine for 1997. Royal College of
    Midwives, London.
    Sandall, J., 1995. Burnout and midwifery: an occupational
    hazard? British Journal of Midwifery 3, 246–248.
    Sandall, J., 1997. Midwives’ burnout and continuity of care.
    British Journal of Midwifery 5, 106–111.
    Sandall, J., 1998. Occupational burnout in midwives: new ways
    of working and the relationship between organisational
    ARTICLE IN PRESS
    Support needs and the affect of group clinical supervision 175
    factors and psychological health and well being. Risk Decision
    and Policy 3, 213–232.
    Sandall, J., 1999. Team midwifery and burnout in midwives in
    the UK: practical lessons from a national study. MIDIRS
    Midwifery Digest 9, 147–152.
    Stapleton, H., Duerden, J., Kirkham, M., 1998. Evaluation of
    the impact of the supervision of midwives on professional
    practice and the quality of midwifery care. ENB and
    UKCC commissioned project. University of Sheffield,
    Sheffield.
    Stapleton, H., Kirkham, M., Curtis, P., Thomas, G., 2002. Silence
    and time in antenatal care. British Journal of Midwifery 10,
    393–396.
    Starhawk, M.S., 1987. Truth or dare, encounters with power,
    authority, and mystery. Harper and Row, New York.
    Waterman, H., Tillen, D., Dickson, R., et al., 2001. Action
    research: a systematic review and guidance for assessment,
    Health Technology Assessment, 5 (23) NHS R & D HTA
    Programme.
    Webb, C., Kevern, J., 2001. Focus groups as a research method:
    a critique of some aspects of their use in nursing. Journal of
    Advanced Nursing 33, 798–805.
    Williamson, G.R., Prosser, S., 2002. Action research: politics,
    ethics and participation. Journal of Advanced Nursing 40,
    587–593.
    Wilkins, P., 1998. Clinical supervision and community psychiatric
    nursing. In: Faugier, T.J., Burnard, P. (Eds.), Clinical supervision
    and mentorship in nursing, 2nd edn. Butterworth
    Nelson Thornes Ltd., Cheltenham.
    Winship, J., 1996. The UKCC perspective: The statutory basis for
    the supervision of midwives today. In: Kirkham, M. (Ed.),
    Supervision of midwives. Books for Midwives Press, Cheshire.
    Winter, R., Munn-Giddings, C., 2001. A handbook for action
    research in health and social care. Routledge in association
    with Taylor & Francis Group, London and New York.
    Yegdich, T., Cushing, A., 1998. An historical perspective on
    clinical supervision in nursing. Australian and New Zealand
    Journal of Mental Health Nursing 7, 3–24.

    Depositing User: Sara Taylor
    Date Deposited: 22 Feb 2007
    Last Modified: 05 Jan 2011 15:19
    URI: http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/133

    Document Downloads

    Downloader Countries

    More statistics for this item...

    Item control for Repository Staff only:

    View Item

    University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH Copyright and Disclaimer All rights reserved ©