184 Chapter 6 REFERENCES 1. Jervis B. Continuity within the NHS: it can and does happen, but why not for everyone? Part one -- a macro level analysis. MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 2016;26(3):297-303. 2. Jervis B. Continuity within the NHS: what could prevent it from happening? Part two — a midwifery practice analysis. MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 2016;26(4):448-51. 3. Munro S, Kornelsen J, Grzybowski S. Models of maternity care in rural environments: Barriers and attributes of interprofessional collaboration with midwives. Midwifery 2013;29(6):646-52. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2012.06.004 4. de Vries R. How (not) to create value based integrated maternity care: Lessons from the Netherlands. International Journal of Integrated Care 2018;2(18):1-8. 5. McKellar L, Newnham E, Fleet JA, Adelson P. Midwifery-led care in South Australia: Looking back to move forward. Women and Birth 2021;34(5):e537e45. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2020.10.011 6. Perdok H, Jans S, Verhoeven C, et al. Opinions of maternity care professionals and other stakeholders about integration of maternity care: A qualitative study in the Netherlands. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2016;16(1) doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-0975-z 7. Kuipers Y, Degraeve J, Bosmans V, et al. Midwifery-led care: A single mixed-methods synthesis. Int J Healthcare Man 2023;16(1):35-50. doi: 10.1080/20479700.2022.2070824 8. Clavel N, Paquet C, Blais R. Facilitating the Implementation of Midwifery Services: The Case of Montérégie, Quebec. Canadian Journal of Midwifery Research and Practice 2015;14(2):9-16. 9. Dawson K, McLachlan H, Newton M, Forster D. Implementing caseload midwifery: Exploring the views of maternity managers in Australia – A national cross sectional survey. Women and Birth 2016;29(3):214 22. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2015.10.010 10. Barker M, Fenwick J, Gamble J. Midwives’ Experiences of Transitioning Into Private Practice With Visiting Access in Australia: A Qualitative Descriptive Study. Int J Childbirth 2019;9(3):145-57. doi: 10.1891/Ijcbirth-D-19-00031 11. De Jonge A, Downe S, Page L, et al. Value based maternal and newborn care requires alignment of adequate resources with high value activities. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2019;19(1) doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2512-3 12. Harris JM, Watts K, Page L, Sandall J. Reflections on an educational intervention to encourage midwives to work in a continuity of care model – exploration and potential solutions. Midwifery 2020;88:102733. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2020.102733 13. Adcock JE, Sidebotham M, Gamble J. What do midwifery leaders need in order to be effective in contributing to the reform of maternity services? Women and Birth 2022;35(2):e142-e52. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2021.04.008 14. McCaffery S, Small K, Gamble J. Rural Australian Doctors’ Views About Midwifery and Midwifery Models of Care: A Qualitative Study. Int J Childbirth 2022;12(1):34-43. doi: 10.1891/Ijc-20210007 15. Wiseman O, Emmett L, Hickford G, et al. The challenges and opportunities for implementing group antenatal care (‘Pregnancy Circles’) as part of standard NHS maternity care: A co designed qualitative study. Midwifery 2022;109:103333. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2022.103333 16. Amsterdam UMC MS. Unpublished dataset of interviews with various maternity care stakeholders on the implementation of antenatal cardiotocography in primary care, 2021. 17. Brown M, Dietsch E. The feasibility of caseload midwifery in rural Australia: A literature review. Women and Birth 2013;26(1):e1-e4. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2012.08.003 18. Burau V, Overgaard C. Caseload midwifery as organisational change: The interplay between professional and organisational projects in Denmark. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2015;15(1) doi: 10.1186/s12884-015-0546-8
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw