Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T03:39:34.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Staff Competence and Program Compliance: Scotland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Marion H. Hall
Marion H. Hall
Affiliation:
University of Aberdeen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In Britain, antenatal care is performed by specialist obstetricians, general practitioners (GPs), and midwives, often in combination. Because most women are delivered in specialist hospitals, obstetricians are involved in booking for place of delivery, and usually in delivery of specialized investigations such as ultrasonic scanning. General practitioners may independently book women for confinement under their care in Cottage Hospitals or (rarely) at home, and may provide all the medical care for those women, in addition to sharing in the antenatal care of women to be delivered at specialist units, and in fact doing most of the care for these women, unless they are very high risk or complicated.

Type
The Setting of the Problem
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 8 , Supplement S1 , January 1992 , pp. 8 - 12
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.van Alten, D., Eskes, M., & Treffers, O.Midwifery in the Netherlands. The Wormeveer Study: Selection, mode of delivery, perinatal mortality and infant morbidity. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1989, 96, 656–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Bryce, F. D., Clayton, J. K., Rand, R. J., et al. General practitioner obstetrics in Bradford, 1990, 300, 725–27.Google ScholarPubMed
3.Campbell, R., & MacFarlane, A. Where to be born: The debate and the evidence. Oxford: National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Radcliffe Infirmary, 1987.Google Scholar
4.Chng, P.-K., Hall, M. H., & MacGillivray, I.An audit of antenatal care: The value of the first antenatal visit. British Medical Journal, 1980, 281, 1184–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Flint, C., & Poulengeris, P.The “Know your midwife” report. London: C. Flint, 49 Peckarman's Wood, Sydenham Hill, London SE26 6RZ, 1987.Google Scholar
6.Guthrie, K. A., Kelly, M., & Lilford, R. J. Information: systems in antenatal care. In Hall, M. (ed.), Antenatal care. Baillere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1990, 207–08.Google Scholar
7.Guthrie, K. A., Songane, F. F., Mackenzie, F., & Lilford, R. J.Audit of medical response to booking history. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1989, 96, 552.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Hall, M. H., Chng, P. K., & MacGillivray, I.Is routine antenatal care worthwhile? Lancet, 1980, ii, 78–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Hall, M. H., Macintyre, S., & Porter, M.Antenatal care assessed. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
10.Klein, M., Elbourne, D., & Lloyd, I.Booking for maternity care: A comparison of two systems. Occasional Paper 31, Royal College of General Practitioners, 1985.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Marsh, G. N.Obstetric audit in general practice. British Medical Journal, 1977, 2, 1004–06.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Marsh, G. N., & Channing, D. M.Audit of 26 years of obstetrics in general practice. British Medical Journal, 1989, 298, 1077–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Oakley, A. The origins & development of antenatal care. In Enkin, M. & Chalmers, I. (eds.), Effectiveness and satisfaction in antenatal care. London: Spastics International Medical Publications, 1982.Google Scholar
14.Porter, M., & Macintyre, S.What is, must be best: A research note on conservative or deferential response to antenatal care provision. Social Science and Medicine, 1984, 19, 1197–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Prentice, A., & Walton, S. M.Outcome of pregnancies referred to a general practitioner unit in a district hospital. British Medical Journal, 1989, 299, 1090–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Reynolds, J. L., Yudkin, P. L., & Bull, M. J. V.General practitioner obstetrics: Does risk prediction work? Journal of Royal College of General Practitioners, 1988, 38, 307–310.Google ScholarPubMed
17.Ris, M. Obstetrical care in the Netherlands. The place of midwives and specific aspects of their role. In Kaminski, M.Breart, G.Buekens, P. et al. (eds.), Perinatal care delivery systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
18.Robinson, S. The role of the midwife: Opportunities and constraints. In Chalmers, I.Enkin, M. & Keirse, M.j.n.c. (eds.), Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.Google Scholar
19.Robinson, S., Golden, J., & Bradley, S. The role of the midwife in the provision of antenatal care. In Enkin, M. & Chalmers, I. (eds.), Effectiveness and satisfaction in antenatal care. London: Spastics International Medical Publications, 1982.Google Scholar
20.Rosenberg, K., Grant, J. M., & Hepburn, M.Antenatal detection of growth retardation: Actual practice in a large maternity hospital. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1982, 89, 12–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Shared care in obstetrics. Report by the National Medical Consultative Committee Scottish Home and Health Department, Edinburgh, 1982.Google Scholar
22.Tew, M.Do obstetric intranatal interventions make birth safer? British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1986, 93, 659–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Working Party on Antenatal and Intrapartum Care. Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecologists, London, 1982.Google Scholar
24.Young, G.Are isolated maternity units run by general practitioners dangerous? British Medical Journal, 1987, 294, 744–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed