The division of caseload between levels may need some adjustment in particular countries.
This study aimed to explore midwifery students׳ views and experiences of caseload midwifery and their work intentions in relation to the caseload model following graduation.
Twenty caseload midwives commented on aspects of caseload midwifery that they found to be negative for them personally (Table 8).
Twenty caseload and 117 standard care midwives made one or more comments on the positive aspects of caseload midwifery for midwives at baseline, and 22 caseload and 120 standard care midwives made comments after two years.
It is also possible that responders (both caseload and standard care midwives) differ from non-responders in terms of their views and experiences of caseload midwifery.
Further exploration of the processes related to therapists' caseload management behaviours is required in order to develop a theoretically coherent understanding of caseload management.
For example, after a meeting organised by the caseload midwives at the mid-level hospital, the chief midwife agreed to a slight reduction of caseload sizes.
Nearly every caseload midwife listed this as a negative feature of caseload midwifery, with comments reflecting that on-call was unpredictable and uncertain.
There have been no RCTs of caseload midwifery care in Australia.
Processes concern the negotiations on the introduction of caseload midwifery and its development through practice.
