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 (270kB)


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: 28 Aug 2021 23:37


Downloads per month over past year

Repository Staff Only: item control page

View Item View Item

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