The concept of maternal care quality for women with low-risk pregnancy in the maternity ward: An integrative review


1 Department of Reproductive Health, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 2 Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Department of Public Health Nursing, Nursing Faculty, Aja University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


Background: Improving the quality of maternal care is considered a key strategy for improving maternal and neonatal outcomes. However, available definitions do not clearly define this concept. Objective: The aim of this study was to clarify the concept of maternal care quality (MCQ) for women with low-risk pregnancy in the maternity ward and to determine its attributes. Methods: This integrative review was conducted using Whitmore and Knafl's method. An online literature search was done in Medline, Embase, Web of Sciences, Scopus, SID, Magiran, and IranMedex databases as well as the websites of health-care and midwifery organizations and associations. Data were analyzed in the four steps of data reduction, data display, data comparison, and conclusion drawing and verification. Results: The two main attributes of MCQ are effective communication and interaction and professional care. Effective communication and interaction between the care provider and pregnant women in the maternity ward is the most important attribute of MCQ. The first category included three subcategories, namely informational interaction, human interaction, and participatory interaction. The two subcategories of the second category were adherence to standards during care delivery and delivering accessible care. Conclusion: MCQ in maternity ward is defined as “the process of delivering safe, fair, accessible, and standard professional care to women during childbirth through human, informational, and participatory interactions.”


1.     The State of the World’s Midwifery 2011: Delivering Health,
Saving Lives. USA: United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA);
2.     Lankarani NB, Azin A, Sadighi J, Jahangiri K, Aeenparast A,
Omidvari S, et al. Chronic diseases in a population-based study:
Iranian health perception survey (IHPS). Payesh 2011;10:391-5.
3.     World Health Organization. Quality, Equity, Dignity: The
Network to Improve Quality of Care for Maternal, Newborn
and Child Health––Strategic Objectives. Geneva: World Health
Organization; 2018
4.     Renfrew MJ, McFadden A, Bastos MH, Campbell J,
Channon AA, Cheung NF, et al. Midwifery and quality care:
Findings from a new evidence-informed framework for maternal
and newborn care. Lancet 2014;384:1129-45.
5.     Oladapo OT, Iyaniwura CA, Sule-Odu AO. Quality of antenatal
services at the primary care level in southwest Nigeria. Afr J
Reprod Health 2008;12:71-92.
6.     Bohren MA, Titiloye MA, Kyaddondo D, Hunter EC,
Oladapo OT, Tunçalp Ö, et al. Defining quality of care during
childbirth from the perspectives of Nigerian and Ugandan
women: A qualitative study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2017;139:4-16.
7.     Shakibazadeh E, Namadian M, Bohren MA, Vogel JP,
Rashidian A, Nogueira Pileggi V, et al. Respectful care during
childbirth in health facilities globally: A qualitative evidence
synthesis. Bjog 2018;125:932-42.
8.     Whittemore R, Knafl K. The integrative review: Updated
methodology. J Adv Nurs 2005;52:546-53.
9.     Broome ME, Lillis PP, Smith MC. Pain interventions with
children: A meta-analysis of research. Nurs Res 1989;38:154-8.
10.     Ganong LH. Integrative reviews of nursing research. Res Nurs
Health 1987;10:1-11.
11.     Hong QN, Pluye P, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F,
Cargo M, et al. The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT)
version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Educ
Inform 2018;34:285-91.
12.     Oates J, Topping A, Arias T, Charles P, Hunter C, Watts K.
The mental health and wellbeing of midwifery students: An
integrative review. Midwifery 2019;72:80-9.
13.     Pezaro S, Clyne W, Fulton EA. A systematic mixed-methods
review of interventions, outcomes and experiences for midwives
and student midwives in work-related psychological distress.
Midwifery 2017;50:163-73.
14.     Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F,
Feder G, et al.; AGREE Next Steps Consortium. AGREE II:
Advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in
health care. CMAJ 2010;182:E839-42.
15.     Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC,
Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting
systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate
health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. Plos Med
16.     Mgawadere F, Smith H, Asfaw A, Lambert J, Broek NVD.
“There is no time for knowing each other”: Quality of care during
childbirth in a low resource setting. Midwifery 2019;75:33-40.
17.     Munabi-Babigumira S, Glenton C, Willcox M, Nabudere H.
Ugandan health workers’ and mothers’ views and experiences of
the quality of maternity care and the use of informal solutions:
A qualitative study. PLoS One 2019;14:e0213511.
18.     Mohale H, Sweet L, Graham K. Maternity health care: The
experiences of sub-Saharan African women in sub-Saharan
Africa and Australia. Women Birth 2017;30:298-307.
19.     Ndirima Z, Neuhann F, Beiersmann C. Listening to their voices:
Understanding rural women’s perceptions of good delivery care
at the Mibilizi district hospital in Rwanda. BMC Women Health
20.     Deliktas Demirci A, Kabukcuglu K, Haugan G, Aune I. “I want
a birth without interventions”: Women’s childbirth experiences
from turkey. Women Birth 2019;32:e515-22.
21.     Jolly Y, Aminu M, Mgawadere F, van den Broek N. “We are
the ones who should make the decision”: Knowledge and
understanding of the rights-based approach to maternity care
among women and healthcare providers. BMC Preg Childbirth
2019;19:42.22.     Shimoda K, Horiuchi S, Leshabari S, Shimpuku Y. Midwives’
respect and disrespect of women during facility-based childbirth in
urban Tanzania: A qualitative study. Reprod Health 2018;15:8.
23.     Raven J, van den Broek N, Tao F, Kun H, Tolhurst R. The quality
of childbirth care in China: Women’s voices: A qualitative study.
BMC Preg Childbirth 2015;15:113.
24.     Afulani PA, Kirumbi L, Lyndon A. What makes or mars the
facility-based childbirth experience: Thematic analysis of
women’s childbirth experiences in western Kenya. Reprod
Health 2017;14:180.
25.     Berg M, Asta Ólafsdóttir O, Lundgren I. A midwifery model
of woman-centred childbirth care–in Swedish and Icelandic
settings. Sex Reprod Healthc 2012;3:79-87.
26.     Paula C, Butler M, Martina M, Ann R. Exploring women’s
experiences of care in labour. Evid Based Midwifery 2014;12:89-
27.     Jenkins MG, Ford JB, Morris JM, Roberts CL. Women’s
expectations and experiences of maternity care in NSW: What
women highlight as most important. Women Birth 2014;27:214-
28.     Afaya A, Yakong VN, Afaya RA, Salia SM, Adatara P, Kuug AK,
et al. A qualitative study on women’s experiences of intrapartum
nursing care at tamale teaching hospital (TTH), Ghana. J Caring
Sci 2017;6:303-14.
29.     Dahlberg U, Persen J, Skogås AK, Selboe ST, Torvik HM,
Aune I. How can midwives promote a normal birth and a
positive birth experience? The experience of first-time Norwegian
mothers. Sex Reprod Healthc 2016;7:2-7.
30.     World Health Organization. Recommendations on Intrapartum
Care for a Positive Childbirth Experience. Geneva: World
Health Organization; 2018. Available from: http://apps.who.
sequence=1. [Last accessed on 2021 Aug 10].
31.     ACOG. Committee Opinion No. 766: Approaches to
limit intervention during labor and birth. Obstet Gynecol
32.     Baldisserotto ML, Theme Filha MM, da Gama SG. Good
practices according to WHO’S recommendation for normal
labor and birth and women’s assessment of the care received:
The “birth in brazil” national research study, 2011/2012. Reprod
Health 2016;13:124.
33.     Homer CS, Passant L, Brodie PM, Kildea S, Leap N,
Pincombe J, et al. The role of the midwife in Australia: Views of
women and midwives. Midwifery 2009;25:673-81.
34.     Cipolletta S, Balasso S. When everything seems right: The first
birth experience of women in an Italian hospital. J Reprod Infant
Psychol 2011;29:374-81.
35.     Goberna-Tricas J, Banús-Giménez MR, Palacio-Tauste A,
Linares-Sancho S. Satisfaction with pregnancy and birth services:
The quality of maternity care services as experienced by women.
Midwifery 2011;27:e231-7.
36.     Kyaddondo D, Mugerwa K, Byamugisha J, Oladapo OT,
Bohren MA. Expectations and needs of Ugandan women
for improved quality of childbirth care in health facilities:
A qualitative study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2017;139:38-46.
37.     Attarha M, Keshavarz Z, Bakhtiari M, Jamilian M. The outcome
of midwife-mother relationship in delivery room: A qualitative
content analysis. Health 2016;8:336.
38.     Mohseni M, Bahadoran P, Abedi H. The quality of postpartum
care from mothers’ viewpoint. Hakim Res J 2009;12:27-34.
39.     Askari F, Atarodi A, Torabi S, Delshad Noghabi A,
Sadegh Moghadam L, Rahmani R. Women’s labor experience:
A phenomenological study. Horizon Med Sci 2010;15:39-46.
40.     Moridi M, Pazandeh F, Hajian S, Potrata B. Midwives’
perspectives of respectful maternity care during childbirth:
A qualitative study. PLoS One 2020;15:e0229941.
41.     Iravani M, Janghorbani M, Zarean E, Bahrami M. An overview
of systematic reviews of normal labor and delivery management.
Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res 2015;20:293-303.
42.     Nove A, Hoope-Bender PT, Moyo NT, Bokosi M. The midwifery
services framework: What is it, and why is it needed? Midwifery
43.     Srivastava A, Avan BI, Rajbangshi P, Bhattacharyya S.
Determinants of women’s satisfaction with maternal health care:
A review of literature from developing countries. BMC Preg
Childbirth 2015;15:97.
44.     Kennedy HP, Rousseau AL, Low LK. An exploratory
metasynthesis of midwifery practice in the United States.
Midwifery 2003;19:203-14.
45.     World Health Organization. Standards for Improving Quality
of Maternal and Newborn Care in Health Facilities. Geneva;
2016 [internet]. Available from:
bitstream/10665/249155/1/9789241511216eng.pdf. [Last
accessed on 2017 Aug 10].
46.     ICM. Core Document; Philosophy and Model of Midwifery
Care; 2014. Available from: http://www.internationalmidwives.
org/assets/uploads/documents/CoreDocuments/CD2005. [Last
accessed on 2016 Jul 10].
47.     Corcoran PM, Catling C, Homer CS. Models of midwifery care
for indigenous women and babies: A meta-synthesis. Women
Birth 2017;30:77-86.
48.     Moghasemi S, Vedadhir A, Simbar M. Models for providing
midwifery care and its challenges in the context of Iran. J Holist
Nurs Midwifery 2018;28:64-74.
49.     Jamas MT, Hoga LA, Tanaka AC. Mothers’ birth care
experiences in a Brazilian birth centre. Midwifery 2011;27:693-
50.     Behruzi R, Hatem M, Goulet L, Fraser WD. Perception of
humanization of birth in a highly specialized hospital: Let’s think
differently. Health Care Women Int 2014;35:127-48.
51.     Cooper H. Synthesizing Research: A Guide for Literature
Reviews. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 1998.
52.     Bolderston A, Lewis D, Chai MJ. The concept of caring:
Perceptions of radiation therapists. Radiography 2010;16:198-
53.     Guittier MJ, Cedraschi C, Jamei N, Boulvain M, Guillemin F.
Impact of mode of delivery on the birth experience in firsttime mothers: A qualitative study. BMC Preg Childbirth
54.     Sorkin DH, Ngo-Metzger Q, De Alba I. Racial/ethnic
discrimination in health care: Impact on perceived quality of
care. J Gen Intern Med 2010;25:390-6.
55.     Page LA, McCandlish R. The New Midwifery E-book: Science
and Sensitivity in Practice. 2nd ed. Elsevier Health Sciences:
Netherlands; 2006.
56.     Solnes Miltenburg A, Lambermon F, Hamelink C, Meguid T.
Maternity care and human rights: What do women think? BMC
Int Health Hum Rights 2016;16:17.
57.     Contreras JAH, Hernández MDE, Ponce AMG. Quality
assessment in the service area of expertise in an institution of
public health sector. Open J Soc Sci 2015;3:50-3.