The impact of outpatient priming for induction of labour on midwives' work demand, work autonomy and satisfaction

Abstract

<h4>Background</h4>Induction of labour often begins with the application of a priming agent to soften the cervix, generally requiring women to stay in hospital overnight (inpatient priming). An alternative is outpatient priming by a midwife, where women are allowed to go home following priming. This approach has the potential to impact, either positively or negatively, on the midwives involved.<h4>Question</h4>To what extent did the introduction of outpatient priming influence midwives' work demands, work autonomy, stress and job satisfaction.<h4>Methods</h4>A before-after study (with two separate cross-sectional samples) was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial of outpatient versus inpatient priming, conducted at two metropolitan teaching hospitals in Australia. Midwives completed a questionnaire before the introduction of outpatient priming and again approximately two years later.<h4>Findings</h4>208 midwives participated (response rates-time 1:81% (87/108); time 2:78% (121/156)). A mixed model analysis test of pre-post intervention differences found no changes in work demand, work autonomy and satisfaction. At time 2, over 80% of midwives reported that the introduction of the practice had reduced or made no difference to their work stress and workload, and 93% reported that outpatient priming had increased or had no impact on their job satisfaction. Furthermore, 97% of respondents were of the opinion that the option of outpatient priming should continue to be offered.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Results suggest that outpatient priming for induction of labour is viable from a midwifery practice perspective, although more research is needed.