26 research outputs found

    ‘Midwives Overboard!’ Inside their hearts are breaking, their makeup may be flaking but their smile still stays on

    Get PDF
    PROBLEM: Midwifery practice is emotional and, at times, traumatic work. Cumulative exposure to this, in an unsupportive environment can result in the development of psychological and behavioural symptoms of distress. BACKGROUND: As there is a clear link between the wellbeing of staff and the quality of patient care, the issue of midwife wellbeing is gathering significant attention. Despite this, it can be rare to find a midwife who will publically admit to how much they are struggling. They soldier on, often in silence. AIM: This paper aims to present a narrative review of the literature in relation to work-related psychological distress in midwifery populations. Opportunities for change are presented with the intention of generating further conversations within the academic and healthcare communities. METHODS: A narrative literature review was conducted. FINDINGS: Internationally, midwives experience various types of work-related psychological distress. These include both organisational and occupational sources of stress. DISCUSSION: Dysfunctional working cultures and inadequate support are not conducive to safe patient care or the sustained progressive development of the midwifery profession. New research, revised international strategies and new evidence based interventions of support are required to support midwives in psychological distress. This will in turn maximise patient, public and staff safety. CONCLUSIONS: Ethically, midwives are entitled to a psychologically safe professional journey. This paper offers the principal conclusion that when maternity services invest in the mental health and wellbeing of midwives, they may reap the rewards of improved patient care, improved staff experience and safer maternity services

    Assessing Site Vulnerability to Phosphorus Loss in an Agricultural Watershed

    Get PDF
    A P index was developed as a tool to rank agricultural fields on the basis of P loss vulnerability, helping to target remedial P management options within watersheds. We evaluated two approaches, a soil P threshold and components of a P index, by comparing site vulnerability estimates derived from these two approaches with measured runoff P losses in an agricultural watershed in Pennsylvania. Rainfall–surface runoff simulations (70 mm h-1 for 30 min) were conducted on 57 sites representing the full range of soil P concentrations and management conditions found in the watershed. Each site was comprised of two, abutting 2-m2 runoff plots, serving as duplicate observations. For sites that had not received P additions for at least six months prior to the study, Mehlich-3 P concentration was strongly associated with dissolved P concentrations (r 2= 0.86) and losses (r 2=0.83) in surface runoff, as well as with total P concentration (r 2= 0.80) and loss (r 2 = 0.74). However, Mehlich-3 P alone was poorly correlated with runoff P from sites receiving manure within three weeks prior to rainfall. The P index effectively described 88 and 83% of the variability in dissolved P concentrations and losses from all sites in the watershed, and P index ratings exhibited strong associations with total P concentrations (r 2 = 0.81) and losses (r 2 = 0.79). When site-specific observations were extrapolated to all fields in the watershed, management recommendations derived from a P index approach were less restrictive than those derived from the soil P threshold approach, better reflecting the low P loads exported from the watershed
    corecore