Abstract
Introduction An appropriately staffed midwifery workforce is essential for the provision of safe and high-quality maternity care. However, there is a global and national shortage of midwives. Understaffed maternity services are frequently identified as contributing to unsafe care provision and adverse outcomes for mothers and babies. While there is a need to recruit midwives through pre-registration midwifery programmes, this is associated with cost and resource implications, and is counteracted to a large extent by the high number of midwives leaving the workforce. It is increasingly recognised that there is a critical need to attend to retention in midwifery in order to develop and maintain safe staffing levels. The objective of this review is to collate and map factors that have been found to influence attrition and retention in midwifery.
Methods and analysis Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews will be used to guide the review process and reporting of the review. CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases will be used to carry out the search for relevant literature. Results will be screened against inclusion criteria. Data will be extracted using a pre-formed data extraction tool and findings will be presented in narrative, tabular, and graphical formats.
Ethics and dissemination The review will collate data from existing research, therefore ethics approval is not required. Findings will be published in journals, presented at conferences, and will be translated into infographics and other formats for online dissemination.
Strengths and limitations of this study
This will be the first review to systematically map the factors found to influence midwives’ decision to stay in or leave their role as a midwife
Scoping reviews provide a rigorous and structured method through which to collate and map evidence on a given topic
This protocol and the full review will follow Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for scoping reviews and will be reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews
The review will be of relevance to other high income countries but is unlikely be relevant for low and middle income countries
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the Chief Scientist Office grant number: CAF/23/06
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
N/A
