Better perineal outcomes in sitting birthing position cannot be explained by changing from upright to supine position for performing an episiotomy.

BACKGROUND: women who give birth in supine position are more likely to have an episiotomy than women who give birth in sitting position. A confounding effect may be that women in upright positions in second stage of labour are asked to lie down if a professional needs to perform an episiotomy. This prospective cohort study aimed to determine whether this factor can explain the lower rate of episiotomy in sitting compared to supine position. METHODS: data from 1196 women who had a spontaneous, vaginal birth were analysed. Positions during second stage and at birth were carefully recorded. Three groups of birthing positions were compared in multivariable analyses: 1) horizontal during second stage and supine at birth (horizontal/supine), 2) horizontal and upright during second stage and supine at birth (various/supine), 3) sitting at birth regardless of the position in second stage. Logistic regression analysis was used to adjust for known risk factors for perineal damage. FINDINGS: women in sitting position at birth compared to those in the horizontal/supine group had a lower episiotomy rate (adjusted OR 0.28;95%-CI 0.14-0.56) and a non-significant higher intact perineum rate (adjusted OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.96-2.04). Women in the various/supine group compared to the horizontal/supine group had a similar episiotomy rate (adjusted OR 1.12;95%-CI 0.69-1.83). CONCLUSIONS: we did not confirm our hypothesis that more women in supine compared to sitting position have an episiotomy because women in upright position are asked to lie down if an episiotomy is necessary.

Classification of substandard factors in perinatal care: development and multidisciplinary inter-rater agreement of the Groningen-system.

BACKGROUND: Perinatal audit is an established method for improving the quality of perinatal care. In audit meetings substandard factors (SSF) are identified in cases of perinatal mortality and morbidity. To our knowledge there is no classification system specifically designed for the classification of substandard factors. Such a classification may help to standardise allocation of substandard factors to categories. This will help to prioritise, guide and implement actions in quality improvement programs. METHODS: A classification system of 284 substandard factors (SSF) identified in perinatal audit meetings between 2007 and 2011 was drawn up using the WHO Conceptual Framework for the International Classification for Patient Safety as a starting point. Discussions were held on inter-rater disagreements, inclusion of items, format and organisation and definitions of the main- and subcategories. A guideline was developed. An independent multidisciplinary group tested the classification. Independent of inter-rater agreement the allocations to categories were counted. For the counts in the subcategories one and two, we used the allocations in the main category as reference. The chance corrected agreement between classifiers was tested with Cohen's kappa statistic. RESULTS: The classification consists of 9 main categories with one or two subcategories. The main categories are (1) Equipment and Materials, (2) Medication, (3) Additional tests/ investigations, (4) Transportation , (5) Documentation, (6) Communication, (7) Medical practice, (8) Other and (9) non classifiable. Of 3663 allocations by 13 classifiers 1452 SSF's were allocated (40%) to 'medical practice' and 1247 (34%) to 'documentation'. 118 (3%) times SSF's were not classifiable, mainly due to unclear phrasing of the SSF. The chance corrected agreement of 284 substandard factors in the main category was 0.68 (95% CI 0.66-0.70) and 0.57 (95% CI 0.54-0.59) for the CDG and the IGD respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Classifying substandard factors has given insight into problem area's in perinatal care and can give direction to medical, political and financial quality improvement measures. The Groningen-system has well defined categories and subcategories and the guidelines and examples are clear. The multidisciplinary inter-rater agreement is moderate to good. Improvement of the phrasing of the substandard factors is expected to improve inter-rater agreement.

The implementation of unit-based perinatal mortality audit in perinatal cooperation units in the northern region of the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Perinatal (mortality) audit can be considered to be a way to improve the careprocess for all pregnant women and their newborns by creating an opportunity to learn from unwanted events in the care process. In unit-based perinatal audit, the caregivers involved in cases that result in mortality are usually part of the audit group. This makes such an audit a delicate matter. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to implement unit-based perinatal mortality audit in all 15 perinatal cooperation units in the northern region of the Netherlands between September 2007 and March 2010. These units consist of hospital-based and independent community-based perinatal caregivers. The implementation strategy encompassed an information plan, an organization plan, and a training plan. The main outcomes are the number of participating perinatal cooperation units at the end of the project, the identified substandard factors (SSF), the actions to improve care, and the opinions of the participants. RESULTS: The perinatal mortality audit was implemented in all 15 perinatal cooperation units. 677 different caregivers analyzed 112 cases of perinatal mortality and identified 163 substandard factors. In 31% of cases the guidelines were not followed and in 23% care was not according to normal practice. In 28% of cases, the documentation was not in order, while in 13% of cases the communication between caregivers was insufficient. 442 actions to improve care were reported for 'external cooperation' (15%), 'internal cooperation' (17%), 'practice organization' (26%), 'training and education' (10%), and 'medical performance' (27%). Valued aspects of the audit meetings were: the multidisciplinary character (13%), the collective and non-judgmental search for substandard factors (21%), the perception of safety (13%), the motivation to reflect on one's own professional performance (5%), and the inherent postgraduate education (10%). CONCLUSION: Following our implementation strategy, the perinatal mortality audit has been successfully implemented in all 15 perinatal cooperation units. An important feature was our emphasis on the delicate character of the caregivers evaluating the care they provided. However, the actual implementation of the proposed actions for improving care is still a point of concern.

[Perinatal audit in the North of the Netherlands: the first 2 years]. / Perinatale audit Noord-Nederland: de eerste 2 jaar.

OBJECTIVE: Description of the implementation of local audit meetings and the identified substandard factors, points of special interest, actions for improvement and the opinion of the participating health care providers. DESIGN: Descriptive study. METHOD: A new organisation and methodology for perinatal mortality audit meetings was introduced in 15 collaborative structures in the northern part of the Netherlands in the period September 2007 to March 2010. During these multidisciplinary audit meetings, cases of perinatal mortality selected by the obstetric collaborative group were discussed in a structured way under the direction of an independent chairman. RESULTS: In total 64 audit meetings were held, in which 677 perinatal health care providers took part at least once, and 112 cases of perinatal death were evaluated. 163 substandard factors were identified. These included : not following the protocol, guideline, standard (31%) or usual care (23%) and insufficient documentation (28%) and communication between health care providers (13%). 442 actions to improve care were reported divided over: 'external collaboration' (15%), 'internal collaboration' (17%), 'practice management' (26%) and 'training and education' (10%). The most valued aspects of the audit meetings were: their multidisciplinary character, the collaborative search for substandard factors, their security, the learning effect and the positive effect on collaboration. CONCLUSION: Cases of perinatal mortality were discussed in all 15 perinatal collaborative structures in the northern part of the Netherlands. Substandard factors were identified, but further analysis of these factors merits attention. The participants concluded that the multidisciplinary approach and the collaboration during the audit meetings improved the cooperation between perinatal health care providers.

A multilayered approach for the analysis of perinatal mortality using different classification systems.

Many classification systems for perinatal mortality are available, all with their own strengths and weaknesses: none of them has been universally accepted. We present a systematic multilayered approach for the analysis of perinatal mortality based on information related to the moment of death, the conditions associated with death and the underlying cause of death, using a combination of representatives of existing classification systems. We compared the existing classification systems regarding their definition of the perinatal period, level of complexity, inclusion of maternal, foetal and/or placental factors and whether they focus at a clinical or pathological viewpoint. Furthermore, we allocated the classification systems to one of three categories: 'when', 'what' or 'why', dependent on whether the allocation of the individual cases of perinatal mortality is based on the moment of death ('when'), the clinical conditions associated with death ('what'), or the underlying cause of death ('why'). A multilayered approach for the analysis and classification of perinatal mortality is possible by using combinations of existing systems; for example the Wigglesworth or Nordic Baltic ('when'), ReCoDe ('what') and Tulip ('why') classification systems. This approach is useful not only for in depth analysis of perinatal mortality in the developed world but also for analysis of perinatal mortality in the developing countries, where resources to investigate death are often limited.

Are there inequalities in choice of birthing position? Sociodemographic and labour factors associated with the supine position during the second stage of labour.

OBJECTIVE: to establish which factors are associated with birthing positions throughout the second stage of labour and at the time of birth. DESIGN: retrospective cohort study. SETTING: primary care midwifery practices in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 665 low-risk women who received midwife-led care. MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: a postal questionnaire was sent to women 3-4 years after birth. The number of women who remained in the supine position throughout the second stage varied between midwifery practices, ranging from 31.3% to 95.9% (p<0.001). The majority of women pushed and gave birth in the supine position. For positions used throughout the second stage of labour, a stepwise forward logistic regression analysis was used to examine effects controlled for other factors. Women aged 36 years and highly educated women were less likely to use the supine pushing position alone [odds ratio (OR) 0.54, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.31-0.94; OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.21-0.73, respectively]. Women who pushed for longer than 60 minutes and who were referred during the second stage of labour were also less likely to use the supine position alone (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16-0.64; OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23-0.86, respectively). Bivariate analyses were conducted for effects on position at the time of birth. Age 36 years, higher education and homebirth were associated with giving birth in a non-supine position. KEY CONCLUSIONS: the finding that highly educated and older women were more likely to use non-supine birthing positions suggests inequalities in position choice. Although the Dutch maternity care system empowers women to choose their own place of birth, many may not be encouraged to make choices in birthing positions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: education of women, midwives, obstetricians and perhaps the public in general is necessary to make alternatives to the supine position a logical option for all women. Future studies need to establish midwife, clinical and other factors that have an effect on women's choice of birthing positions, and identify strategies that empower women to make their own choices.

Women's positions during the second stage of labour: views of primary care midwives.

AIM: This paper is a report of a study to explore the views of midwives on women's positions during the second stage of labour. BACKGROUND: Many authors recommend encouraging women to use positions that are most comfortable to them. Others advocate encouragement of non-supine positions, because offering 'choice' is not enough to reverse the strong cultural norm of giving birth in the supine position. Midwives' views on women's positions have rarely been explored. METHOD: Six focus groups were conducted in 2006-2007 with a purposive sample of 31 midwives. The data were interpreted using Thachuk's models of informed consent and informed choice. FINDINGS: The models were useful in distinguishing between two different approaches of midwives to women's positions during labour. When giving informed consent, midwives implicitly or explicitly ask a woman's consent for what they themselves prefer. When offering informed choice, a woman's preference is the starting point, but midwives will suggest other options if this is in the woman's interest. Obstetric factors and working conditions are reasons to deviate from women's preferences. CONCLUSIONS: To give women an informed choice about birthing positions, midwives need to give them information during pregnancy and discuss their position preferences. Women should be prepared for the unpredictability of their feelings in labour and for obstetric factors that may interfere with their choice of position. Equipment for non-supine births should be more midwife-friendly. In addition, midwives and students need to be able to gain experience in assisting births in non-supine positions.