Ljósmæðrablaðið - 15.11.2005, Blaðsíða 11

were asked about their attitudes and
willingness to work within continuity of
carer and the results linked to back-
ground information such as age, marital
position, number and age of children,
education and experience (Ólafsdóttir,
1999).
The experience of the continuity of
care groups during the last ten years
has been positive and the midwives
have to deny many women access each
month because they are fully booked.
This satisfaction with care of models
offering continuity of care is in
accordance with other research (Biro et
al 2003; Brown & Lumley 1994;
IdcCourt & Page 1996; van Teijlingen
ct al 2003). Continuity schemes have
Positive ejfects on midwives' job
satisfaction, where the most influential
factors are the relationship between the
woman and her midwife, better use of
their skills and knowledge, control over
time and work. However some of the
midwives quit continuity of care
schemes because they find the on call
system too binding and stressful (Allen
et al 1997; Green et al 1998; Sandall
1997). Prospective parents are increas-
mgly ojfered continuous midwifery care
m Iceland, especially during pregnancy
nnd post partum. No one model is the
°nly right one, but it is important to
have a real choice and to ojfer dijferent
choises emphasising continuity during
the childbearing process, for both
women and midwives.
Heimildir
Allen, I., Bourke Dowling, S., Williams, S.
(1997). A Leading Role for Midwives?
Evaluation of Midwifery Group Practice
Development Projects. London: Policy
Studies Institute.
Arney, W.R. (1982). Powerand tlte Profession
of Obstetrics. Chicago: The university of
Chicago Press.
Atkins, J. (1997). Midwife-Led Care at the
Gilchrist Matemity Unit. Midwives, 110
(1313): 138-140.
Auður E. Jóhannsdóttir, Guðrún B. Þorsteins-
dóttir, Hulda Skúladóttir, Ingibjörg Hreiðars-
dóttir, (2000). Reynsla foreldra af samfelldri
þjónustu MFS-einingarinnar á Kvennadeild
Landspítalans. Lokaverkefni til BSc. gráðu í
hjúkrunarfræði við Háskóla íslands.
Árdís Ólafsdóttir, (1999). Continuity of Carer
~ Attitudes and Interest of Icelandic
Midwives. Óútgefin meistararitgerð. Thames
Valley University, London, England.
®erg, M., Hermannsson, E., Lundgren, I.,
Wahlberg, V. (1996). Women's experience
°f the encounter with the midwife during
childbirth. Midwifcry, 12: 11-15.
Biró, M.A.,Waldenström, U., Brown, S.,
Pannifex, J.H. (2003). Satisfaction with
Team Midwifery Care for Low- and High-
Risk Women: A Randomized Controlled
Trial. Birth, 30(1): 1-10.
Bissett, S. (1996). One-to-one midwifery:
Starting life as a one-to-one midwife.
Modern Midwife, January: 12-14.
Brown, S., Lumley, J. (1994). Satisfaction
with care in labor and birth: A survey of 790
Australian women, Birth, 21 (1): 4-13.
Campbell, M. (1995). One-to-one midwifery:
Planning & development. Modern Midwife,
December: 12-15.
Department of Health (1993). Changing
Childbirth Part 1: Report of the Expert
Maternity Group. London: HMSO.
Duff, E., Page, L. (1995). Is one-to-one a model
for all? (Interview) Midwives, October: 330-
331.
Farmer, E., Chipperfield, C. (1996). One-to-
one midwifery: Problems and solutions.
Modern Midwife, April: 19-21.
Fleissig, A„ Kroll, D„ McCarthy, M. (1996). Is
community-led matemity care a feasible
option for women assessed at low risk and
those with complicated pregnancies? Results
of a population based study in South
Camden, London. Midwifery, 12: 191-197.
Flint, C„ Grant, A„ Poulengeris, P„ (1989).
The „Know Your Midwife" scheme - a
randomised trial of continuity of care by a
team of midwives. Midwifery, 5: 11-16.
Flint, C. (1993). Midwifery Teams & Caseloads.
Oxford: Butterworth & Heinemann Ltd.
Fraser, D.M. (1999). Women's perceptions of
midwifery care: A longitudinal study to
shape curriculum development. Birth, 26
(2): 99-107.
Green, J.M., Curtis, P„ Price, H„ Renfrew,
M.J. (1998). Continuing to Care. Hale:
Books for Midwifery Press.
Hermína Stefánsdóttir (2005). Þróun sam-
felldrar Ijósmœðraþjónustu á Reykjavíkur-
svœðinu -áhersla til breytinga í fram-
tíðinni? Óbirt lokaverkefni í ljósmóður-
fræði við Háskóla Islands.
Hildingsson, I„ Waldenström, U„ Radestad, I.
(2003). Swedish women's interest in home
birth and in -hospital birth center care.
Birth, 30(1): 11-22.
Hundley, V„ Ryan, M„ Graham, W. (2001)
Assessing women's preferences for
intrapartum care. Birth, 28 (4): 254-263.
Leap, N. (1996). Caseload practice: Arecipe for
bumout? British Journal of Midwifery, 4
(6): 329-330.
Lee, G. (1997). The Concept of „Continuity" -
What Does it Mean. í Reflections on
Midwifery (útg. af M.J. Kirkham & E.R.
Perkins). London: Balliere Tindall.
Ljósmæðrafélag íslands (2000). Hugmynda-
frœði og stefna. Reykjavík,. Ljósmæðra-
félag íslands.
McCourt, C„ Page, L. (1996). Report of tlie
Evaluation of One-to-One Midwifeiy.
London: Thames Valley University.
Oakley, A„ Hickey, D„ Rajan, L„ Rigby, A.
(1996). Social support in pregnancy: Does it
have long term effects? Journal of
Reproductive Infant Psychology, 14:7-22.
Ólöf Á. Ólafsdóttir, (1992). Midwife's
Teaching-Coaching practice around the
time of birth. Óútgefin meistararitgerð.
School of Nursing Studies, University of
Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff.
Page, L.(1996). Reclaiming midwifery: 16th
Dame Rosalind Paget memorial lecture.
Midwives, 109 (1304): 248-253.
Reid, B. (2002). The albany midwifery
practice. MIDIRS Midwifery Digest, 14 (1):
118-121.
Robinson, S. (1993). Combining work with
caring for children, findings from a
longitudinal study of midwives' careers.
Midwifery, 9: 183-196.
Sandall, J. (1995). Choice, continuity and
control: Changing midwifery, towards a
sociological perspective. Midwiferv,
11:201-209.
Sandall, J. (1996). Moving towards caseload
practice: What evidence do we have?
British Journal of Midwifery, December, 4
(12): 620-621.
Sandall, J. (1997). Midwives' bumout and
continuity of care. British Journal of
Midwifery, 5 (2): 106-111.
Sigríður Halldórsdóttir, Sigfríður I. Karls-
dóttir, (1996). Joumeying through labour
and delivery: Perceptions of women who
have given birth. Midwifery, 12 (2): 48-61.
Teijlingen E.R. van, Hundley, V„ Rennie, A„
Graham, W„ Fitzmaurice, A. (2003).
Matemity satisfaction studies and their
limitations: „What is, must still be best“.
Birth, 30 (2): 75-82.
Wagner, M. (1994). Pursuing the Birth
Machine: The Searcli for appropriate Birth
Technology. Camperdown: ACE Graphics.
Waldenström, U„ Nilson, C.A. (1993).
Women's satisfaction with birth center care:
A randomized controlled study. Birth, 20
(1): 3-13.
Walker, J.M., Hall, S„ Thomas, M. (1995).
The experience of labour: A perspective
from those receiving care in a midwife-led
unit. Midwifery, 1: 120-129.
Walsh, D. (1998). An Etlmographic Study of
Women's Experience of Partnership
Caseload Midwifery Practice (The BUMPS
Scheme), The maternity Unit at Leicester
Royal Infirmary NHS Trast.
Watson, P. (1990). Report on the Kidlington
Team Midwifery Scheme. Oxford: National
Institute for Nursing: Centre for Practice,
Development and Research.
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (1973).
Springfield: G.&C. Merriam Company.
^spran
Ljósmæðrablaðið nóvember 2005 1 1