A Comparison of Midwives’ Perceptions of the Labour Care Guide and the Traditional Partograph: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

Background/Objectives: While the traditional partograph remains widely used in labor monitoring, concerns about its clinical effectiveness have led to the introduction of the World Health Organization’s Labour Care Guide (LCG) in 2020, raising questions about its acceptance in practice. This study aimed to determine midwives’ perceptions of these two tools, their usage preferences, and the influencing factors. Methods: This multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted with 153 midwives working in public and university hospitals in Mardin, Batman, and Hakkari between 7 April and 30 June 2025. Data were collected using a socio-demographic form and analyzed with descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, and logistic regression. Results: Findings showed that 89.5% of midwives considered the partograph more appropriate, and 85.6% found it more practical. In contrast, 62.1% rated the LCG as poor, and 77.8% reported that not all its parameters were necessary. Midwives with high job satisfaction used the partograph significantly more actively. Those working in public hospitals were 2.83 times more likely to find the LCG useful than those in university hospitals, while midwives with higher perceived professional competence were 2.29 times more likely to favor the LCG. Conclusions: Midwives perceive the traditional partograph as more efficient, whereas the LCG is viewed as overly detailed and increasing workload. The findings suggest that beyond theoretical training, successful LCG implementation requires workload regulation, adequate staffing, and practice-oriented in-service training.