It Is Not The Purpose Of This Review To Discuss The Development Of

It is not the purpose of this review to discuss the development of one-to-one midwifery
Literature in a foreign language will be excluded because of the cost and difficulties in obtaining translation.
Research reported prior to 1990 will not be included within this review.
3.5 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Any research involving NHS patients/service users, carers, NHS data, organs or tissues, NHS staff, or premises requires the approval of a NHS research ethics committee (Department of Health 2001) A literature review involves commenting on the work of others, work that is primarily published or in the public domain. This research methodology does not require access to confidential case records, staff, patients or clients so permission from an ethics committee is not required to carry out the review. However, it is essential to ensure that all direct quotes are correctly referenced. Permission must be sought from the correspondent before any personal communication may be used. All copyrights need to be acknowledged and referenced. The researcher will also act professionally when completing this report and ensure that research is identified, reviewed and reported accurately and on a scientific basis.
4.0 CRITICAL EVALUATION OF CHOSEN LITERATURE
A Theme Matrix was created to help summarise and identify the major themes within the literature (Appendix 1). The five most relevant articles were chosen for further analysis. Method matrices were completed for these studies (Appendix 2). These studies were selected because they used a range of methodologies and addressed different areas of the debate. They will be discussed in terms of the benefits of one-to-one midwifery as well as international studies and those which have evaluated a multi-faceted approach.
The first study to be outlined was conducted by Biro et al (2000). They randomly allocated 1000 women to either an experimental group, who received one-to-one continuous midwifery care, or the control group who received the standard care approach. The data collected revealed that those within the experimental group were subject to significantly fewer medical interventions during labour relative to those women in the control group. It was also reported that both the mothers and their babies within the experimental group spend a significantly shorter length of time IN HOSPITAL than those within the control group. This research therefore demonstrates that the use of one-to-one midwifery can reduce the need for medical interventions during labour whilst also having other significant benefits.
The second study chosen for critical evaluation was conducted by Beake et al (2001) in Hammer-Smith where one-to-one midwifery was monitored from 1993. Each midwife was given a case load of 40 mothers to manage each year. This ensured that 15% of mothers within Hammer-Smith received one-to-one midwifery care. The approach was evaluated on a variety of terms.