Induction of labour care in the UK: A cross-sectional survey of maternity units.

OBJECTIVES: To explore local induction of labour pathways in the UK National Health Service to provide insight into current practice. DESIGN: National survey. SETTING: Hospital maternity services in all four nations of the UK. SAMPLE: Convenience sample of 71 UK maternity units. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was disseminated and completed via a national network of obstetrics and gynaecology specialist trainees (October 2021-March 2022). Results were analysed descriptively, with associations explored using Fisher's Exact and ANOVA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Induction rates, criteria, processes, delays, incidents, safety concerns. RESULTS: 54/71 units responded (76%, 35% of UK units). Induction rate range 19.2%-53.4%, median 36.3%. 72% (39/54) had agreed induction criteria: these varied widely and were not all in national guidance. Multidisciplinary booking decision-making was not reported by 38/54 (70%). Delays reported 'often/always' in hospital admission for induction (19%, 10/54) and Delivery Suite transfer once induction in progress (63%, 34/54). Staffing was frequently reported cause of delay (76%, 41/54 'often/always'). Delays triggered incident reports in 36/54 (67%) and resulted in harm in 3/54 (6%). Induction was an area of concern (44%, 24/54); 61% (33/54) reported induction-focused quality improvement work. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation in induction rates, processes and policies across UK maternity services. Delays appear to be common and are a cause of safety concerns. With induction rates likely to increase, improved guidance and pathways are critically needed to improve safety and experience of care.

Community postnatal care delivery in England since Covid-19: A qualitative study of midwifery leaders' perspectives and strategies.

PROBLEM: COVID-19 impacted negatively on maternity care experiences of women and staff. Understanding the emergency response is key to inform future plans. BACKGROUND: Before the COVID-19 pandemic, experts highlighted concerns about UK community postnatal care, and its impact on long-term health, wellbeing, and inequalities. These appear to have been exacerbated by the pandemic. AIM: To explore community postnatal care provision during and since the pandemic across a large diverse UK region. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative approach. Virtual semi-structured interviews conducted November 2022-February 2023. All regional midwifery community postnatal care leaders were invited to participate. FINDINGS: 11/13 midwifery leaders participated. Three main themes were identified: Changes to postnatal care (strategic response, care on the ground); Impact of postnatal care changes (staff and women's experiences); and Drivers of postnatal care changes (COVID-19, workforce issues). DISCUSSION: Changes to postnatal care during the pandemic included introduction of virtual care, increased role of Maternity Support Workers, and moving away from home visits to clinic appointments. This has largely continued without evaluation. The number of care episodes provided for low and high-risk families appears to have changed little. Those requiring additional support but not deemed highest risk appear to have been most impacted. Staffing levels influenced amount and type of care provided. There was little inter-organisation collaboration in the postnatal pandemic response. CONCLUSION: Changes to postnatal care provision introduced more efficient working practices. However, evaluation is needed to ensure ongoing safe, equitable and individualised care provision post pandemic within limited resources.

Views of female genital mutilation survivors, men and health-care professionals on timing of deinfibulation surgery and NHS service provision: qualitative FGM Sister Study.

Background: Female genital mutilation is an important UK health-care challenge. There are no health benefits of female genital mutilation, and it is associated with lifelong physical, psychological and sexual impacts. The annual cost to the NHS to care for survivors is £100M. Deinfibulation may improve the health and well-being of some women, but there is no consensus on the optimal timing of surgery for type 3 survivors. UK care provision is reportedly suboptimal. Objectives: We aimed to explore the views of survivors, men and health-care professionals on the timing of deinfibulation surgery and NHS service provision. Methods: This was a qualitative study informed by the Sound of Silence framework. This framework is useful for researching sensitive issues and the health-care needs of marginalised populations. A total of 101 interviews with 44 survivors, 13 men and 44 health-care professionals were conducted, supplemented by two workshops with affected communities (participants, n = 10) and one workshop with stakeholders (participants, n = 30). Data were analysed using a hybrid framework method. Results: There was no clear consensus between groups on the optimal timing of deinfibulation. However, within groups, survivors expressed a preference for deinfibulation pre pregnancy; health-care professionals preferred antenatal deinfibulation, with the caveat that it should be the survivor's choice. There was no consensus among men. There was agreement that deinfibulation should take place in a hospital setting and be undertaken by a suitable health-care professional. Decision-making around deinfibulation was complex. Deficiencies in professionals' awareness, knowledge and understanding resulted in impacts on the provision of appropriate care. Although there were examples of good practice and positive care interactions, in general, service provision was opaque and remains suboptimal, with deficiencies most notable in mental health. Deinfibulation reportedly helps to mitigate some of the impacts of female genital mutilation. Interactions between survivors and health-care professionals were disproportionately framed around the law. The way in which services are planned and provided often silences the perspectives and preferences of survivors and their families. Limitations: Only a minority of the interviews were conducted in a language other than English, and the recruitment of survivors was predominantly through maternity settings, which meant that some voices may not have been heard. The sample of men was relatively small, limiting interpretation. Conclusions: In general, service provision remains suboptimal and can silence the perspectives and preferences of survivors. Deinfibulation services need to be widely advertised and information should highlight that the procedure will be carried out in hospital by suitable health-care professionals and that a range of time points will be offered to facilitate choice. Future services should be developed with survivors to ensure that they are clinically and culturally appropriate. Guidelines should be updated to better reflect the needs of survivors and to ensure consistency in service provision. Future work: Research is needed to (1) map female genital mutilation service provision; (2) develop and test effective education to address deficits in awareness and knowledge for affected communities and health-care professionals; and (3) develop, monitor and evaluate clinically and culturally competent female genital mutilation services. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14710507. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Female genital mutilation (or cutting) involves changing or removing parts of a girl's or woman's genitalia when there is no medical reason to do so. Many women and girls who have been cut live in the UK, where female genital mutilation is illegal. Some girls and women who have been cut experience problems in getting pregnant and having their baby. There are four types of cutting. Type 3 involves cutting and sewing together the genitalia, leaving only a small hole. Women and girls with type 3 mutilation can have a small operation to open their vagina. We do not know when the best time is to have this operation. We would also like to know more about how NHS female genital mutilation services can best help women. To answer these questions, we talked to 141 people, who were women who have been cut, men and health-care professionals. They told us that there is no ideal time to have the operation. Women who have been cut would like the operation before they get pregnant, but health-care professionals would like women to have it during their pregnancy. Men were not sure when it should happen. They all agreed that the operation should take place in a hospital and be carried out by a skilled professional. The way that we support women and men could be better and we need to improve the help that is offered. Sometimes women and men did not know where to go for help or how to ask for help. Women, men and health-care professionals sometimes found it hard to talk about cutting. Some health professionals did not have the right skills to undertake the operation. They told us that they need more training and clearer guidance to ensure that women feel cared for and safe.

Preferences for deinfibulation (opening) surgery and female genital mutilation service provision: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the views of female genital mutilation (FGM) survivors, men and healthcare professionals (HCPs) on the timing of deinfibulation surgery and NHS service provision. DESIGN: Qualitative study informed by the sound of silence framework. SETTING: Survivors and men were recruited from three FGM prevalent areas of England. HCPs and stakeholders were from across the UK. SAMPLE: Forty-four survivors, 13 men and 44 HCPs. Ten participants at two community workshops and 30 stakeholders at a national workshop. METHODS: Hybrid framework analysis of 101 interviews and three workshops. RESULTS: There was no consensus across groups on the optimal timing of deinfibulation for survivors who wished to be deinfibulated. Within group, survivors expressed a preference for deinfibulation pre-pregnancy and HCPs antenatal deinfibulation. There was no consensus for men. Participants reported that deinfibulation should take place in a hospital setting and be undertaken by a suitable HCP. Decision making around deinfibulation was complex but for those who underwent surgery it helped to mitigate FGM impacts. Although there were examples of good practice, in general, FGM service provision was suboptimal. CONCLUSION: Deinfibulation services need to be widely advertised. Information should highlight that the procedure can be carried out at different time points, according to preference, and in a hospital by suitable HCPs. Future services should ideally be developed with survivors, to ensure that they are clinically and culturally appropriate. Guidelines would benefit from being updated to reflect the needs of survivors and to ensure consistency in provision.

The role of social risk factors and engagement with maternity services in ethnic disparities in maternal mortality: A retrospective case note review.

Background: Reasons for ethnic disparities in maternal death in the UK are unclear and may be explained by differences in social risk factors and engagement with maternity services. Methods: In this retrospective systematic case note review, we used anonymised medical records from MBRRACE-UK for all Other than White, and White European/Other women plus a random sample of White British/Irish women who died in pregnancy or up to 1 year afterwards from 01/01/2015 to 12/31/2017. We used a standardised data extraction tool developed from a scoping review to explore social risk factors and engagement with maternity services. Findings: Of 489 women identified, 219 were eligible for the study and 196 case notes were reviewed, including 103/119 from Other than White groups, 33/37 White European/Other and a random sample of 60/333 White British/Irish. The presence of three or more social risk factors was 11⋅7% (12/103) in Other than White women, 18⋅2% (6/33) for White European/Other women and 36⋅7% (22/60) in White British/Irish women. Across all groups engagement with maternity services was good with 85⋅5% (148/196) receiving the recommended number of antenatal appointments as was completion of antenatal mental health assessment (123/173, 71⋅1%). 15⋅5% (16/103) of Other than White groups had pre-existing co-morbidities and 51⋅1% (47/92) had previous pregnancy problems while women across White ethnic groups had 3⋅2% (3/93) and 33⋅3% (27/81) respectively. Three or more unscheduled healthcare attendances occurred in 60⋅0% (36/60) of White British/Irish, 39⋅4% (13/33) in White European/Other and 35⋅9% (37/103) of Other than White women. Evidence of barriers to following healthcare advice was identified for a fifth of all women. None of the 17 women who required an interpreter received appropriate provision at all key points throughout their maternity care. Interpretation: Neither increased social risk factors or barriers to engagement with maternity services appear to underlie disparities in maternal mortality. Management of complex social factors and interpreter services need improvement. Funding: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration West Midlands.

A national cohort study and confidential enquiry to investigate ethnic disparities in maternal mortality.

BACKGROUND: Ethnic disparities in maternal mortality were first documented in the UK in the early 2000s but are known to be widening. This project aimed to describe the women who died in the UK during or up to a year after the end of pregnancy, to compare the quality of care received by women from different aggregated ethnic groups, and to identify any structural or cultural biases or discrimination affecting their care. METHODS: National surveillance data was used to identify all 1894 women who died during or up to a year after the end of pregnancy between 2009 and 18 in the UK. Their characteristics and causes of death were described. A Confidential Enquiry was undertaken to describe the quality of care women received. The care of a stratified random sample of 54 women who died during or up to a year after the end of pregnancy between 2009 and 18, (18 from the aggregated group of Black women, 19 from the Asian aggregated group and 17 from the White aggregated group) was re-examined specifically to describe any structural or cultural biases or discrimination identified. FINDINGS: There were no major differences causes of death between women from different aggregated ethnic groups, with cardiovascular disease the leading cause of death in all groups. Multiple areas of bias were identified in the care women received, including lack of nuanced care (notable amongst women from Black aggregated ethnic groups who died), microaggressions (most prominent in the care of women from Asian aggregated ethnic groups who died) and clinical, social and cultural complexity (evident across all ethnic groups). INTERPRETATION: This confidential enquiry suggests that multiple structural and other biases exist in UK maternity care. Further research on the role of microaggressions is warranted. FUNDING: This research is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Policy Research Programme, conducted through the Policy Research Unit in Maternal and Neonatal Health and Care, PR-PRU-1217-21,202. MK is an NIHR Senior Investigator. SK is part funded and FCS fully funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Centre (ARC) West Midlands. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Transformational Change in maternity services in England: a longitudinal qualitative study of a national transformation programme 'Early Adopter'.

BACKGROUND: Large system transformation in health systems is designed to improve quality, outcomes and efficiency. Using empirical data from a longitudinal study of national policy-driven transformation of maternity services in England, we explore the utility of theory-based rules regarding 'what works' in large system transformation. METHODS: A longitudinal, qualitative case study was undertaken in a large diverse urban setting involving multiple hospital trusts, local authorities and other key stakeholders. Data was gathered using interviews, focus groups, non-participant observation, and a review of key documents in three phases between 2017 and 2019. The transcripts of the individual and focus group interviews were analysed thematically, using a combined inductive and deductive approach drawing on simple rules for large system transformation derived from evidence synthesis and the findings are reported in this paper. RESULTS: Alignment of transformation work with Best et al's rules for 'what works' in large system transformation varied. Interactions between the rules were identified, indicating that the drivers of large system transformation are interdependent. Key challenges included the pace and scale of change that national policy required, complexity of the existing context, a lack of statutory status for the new 'system' limiting system leaders' power and authority, and concurrent implementation of a new overarching system alongside multifaceted service change. CONCLUSIONS: Objectives and timescales of transformation policy and plans should be realistic, flexible, responsive to feedback, and account for context. Drivers of large system transformation appear to be interdependent and synergistic. Transformation is likely to be more challenging in recently established systems where the basis of authority is not yet clearly established.

Systematic exploration of local reviews of the care of maternal deaths in the UK and Ireland between 2012 and 2014: a case note review study.

OBJECTIVES: Local reviews of the care of women who die in pregnancy and post-birth should be undertaken. We investigated the quantity and quality of hospital reviews. DESIGN: Anonymised case notes review. PARTICIPANTS: All 233 women in the UK and Ireland who died during or up to 6 weeks after pregnancy from any cause related to or aggravated by pregnancy or its management in 2012-2014. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The number of local reviews undertaken. Quality was assessed by the composition of the review panel, whether root causes were systematically assessed and actions detailed. RESULTS: The care of 177/233 (76%) women who died was reviewed locally. The care of women who died in early pregnancy and after 28 days post-birth was less likely to be reviewed as was the care of women who died outside maternity services and who died from mental health-related causes. 140 local reviews were available for assessment. Multidisciplinary review was undertaken for 65% (91/140). External involvement in review occurred in 12% (17/140) and of the family in 14% (19/140). The root causes of deaths were systematically assessed according to national guidance in 13% (18/140). In 88% (123/140) actions were recommended to improve future care, with a timeline and person responsible identified in 55% (77/140). Audit to monitor implementation of changes was recommended in 14% (19/140). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic assessment of local reviews of care demonstrated that not all hospitals undertake a review of care of women who die during or after pregnancy and in the majority quality is lacking. The care of these women should be reviewed using a standardised robust process including root cause analysis to maximise learning and undertaken by an appropriate multidisciplinary team who are given training, support and adequate time.

Midwives' perspectives of continuity based working in the UK: A cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: UK policy is advocating continuity of midwife throughout the antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal period in order to improve outcomes. We explored the working patterns that midwives are willing and able to adopt, barriers to change, and what would help midwives to work in continuity models of care. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey. SETTING: 27 English maternity providers in the seven geographically-based 'Early Adopter' sites, which have been chosen to fast-track national policy implementation. PARTICIPANTS: All midwives working in the 'Early Adopter' sites were eligible to take part. METHOD: Anonymous online survey disseminated by local and national leaders, and social media, in October 2017. Descriptive statistics were calculated for quantitative survey responses. Qualitative free text responses were analysed thematically. FINDINGS: 798 midwives participated (estimated response rate 20% calculated using local and national NHS workforce headcount data for participating sites). Being willing or able to work in a continuity model (caseloading and/or team) was lowest where this included intrapartum care in both hospital and home settings (35%, n = 279). Willingness to work in a continuity model of care increased as the range of intrapartum care settings covered decreased (home births only 45%, n = 359; no intrapartum care at all 54%, n = 426). A need to work on the same day each week was reported by 24% (n = 188). 31% (n = 246) were currently working 12 h shifts only, while 37% (n = 295) reported being unable to work any on-calls and/or nights. Qualitative analysis revealed multiple barriers to working in continuity models: the most prominent was caring responsibilities for children and others. Midwives suggested a range of approaches to facilitate working differently including concessions in the way midwife roles are organised, such as greater autonomy and choice in working patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that many midwives are not currently able or willing to work in continuity models, which includes care across antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal periods as recommended by UK policy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A range of approaches to providing continuity models should be explored as the implementation of 'Better Births' takes place across England. This should include studies of the impact of the different models on women, babies and midwives, along with their practical scalability and cost.

Implementation of an Interprofessional Team Review of Adverse Events in Obstetrics Using a Standardized Computer Tool: A Mixed Methods Study.

OBJECTIVE: As part of a larger study, an interprofessional team piloted a computer tool called Standardized Clinical Outcome Review (SCOR) to review adverse obstetric events that occurred at a tertiary care hospital over a 12-month period. We sought to understand whether the SCOR tool offered a feasible, acceptable, and appropriate strategy for improving patient safety through improved review of incidents. METHODS: We designed a mixed methods implementation study. Following completion of the 12-month pilot period, team members completed a questionnaire and participated in a focus group. Quantitative data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative data were analyzed using grounded theory to generate themes. RESULTS: The SCOR tool was easy to implement with an interprofessional team. Despite technical challenges with the software, the tool was quicker and more efficient than traditional case review methods. The content was appropriate for an obstetric unit and provided objective identification of factors contributing to adverse events. Team members were positive about the use of the tool in their institution and in wider contexts and believed that it was a valuable tool for raising awareness and addressing patient safety at their unit. CONCLUSIONS: SCOR was an acceptable and appropriate tool for the interprofessional team review of adverse outcomes, and its use represents a significant advance in the quality assurance process for formal peer review of incidents.

Learning from Adverse Events in Obstetrics: Is a Standardized Computer Tool an Effective Strategy for Root Cause Analysis?

OBJECTIVE: Adverse events occur in up to 10% of obstetric cases, and up to one half of these could be prevented. Case reviews and root cause analysis using a structured tool may help health care providers to learn from adverse events and to identify trends and recurring systems issues. We sought to establish the reliability of a root cause analysis computer application called Standardized Clinical Outcome Review (SCOR). METHODS: We designed a mixed methods study to evaluate the effectiveness of the tool. We conducted qualitative content analysis of five charts reviewed by both the traditional obstetric quality assurance methods and the SCOR tool. We also determined inter-rater reliability by having four health care providers review the same five cases using the SCOR tool. RESULTS: The comparative qualitative review revealed that the traditional quality assurance case review process used inconsistent language and made serious, personalized recommendations for those involved in the case. In contrast, the SCOR review provided a consistent format for recommendations, a list of action points, and highlighted systems issues. The mean percentage agreement between the four reviewers for the five cases was 75%. The different health care providers completed data entry and assessment of the case in a similar way. Missing data from the chart and poor wording of questions were identified as issues affecting percentage agreement. CONCLUSION: The SCOR tool provides a standardized, objective, obstetric-specific tool for root cause analysis that may improve identification of risk factors and dissemination of action plans to prevent future events.

Objectif : Des événements indésirables se manifestent dans jusqu'à 10 % des cas obstétricaux et jusqu'à la moitié de ces événements sont évitables. Les analyses de cas et l'analyse des causes fondamentales au moyen d'un outil structuré pourraient aider les fournisseurs de soins à tirer des leçons des événements indésirables et à identifier les tendances et les problèmes systémiques récurrents. Nous avons cherché à établir la fiabilité d'un logiciel d'analyse des causes fondamentales connu sous le nom de Standardized Clinical Outcome Review (SCOR). Méthodes : Nous avons conçu une étude faisant appel à des méthodes mixtes pour évaluer l'efficacité de l'outil. Nous avons mené une analyse qualitative du contenu de cinq dossiers ayant été analysés tant au moyen des méthodes traditionnelles d'assurance de la qualité en obstétrique qu'au moyen de l'outil SCOR. Nous avons également déterminé la fidélité interévaluateurs en demandant à quatre fournisseurs de soins d'analyser les cinq mêmes dossiers au moyen de l'outil SCOR. Résultats : L'analyse qualitative comparative a révélé que le processus traditionnel d'assurance de la qualité dans le cadre de l'analyse des cas utilisait un langage hétérogène et formulait de sérieuses recommandations personnalisées à l'endroit des intervenants du dossier. En revanche, l'analyse au moyen de l'outil SCOR fournissait un format uniforme pour les recommandations et une liste de points de décision, en plus de faire ressortir les problèmes systémiques. Le taux moyen d'entente (en pourcentage) entre les quatre évaluateurs pour les cinq dossiers en question était de 75 %. Les autres fournisseurs de soins ont procédé à la saisie des données et à l'évaluation des dossiers de façon semblable. L'absence de certaines données dans les dossiers et la mauvaise formulation des questions ont été identifiées comme étant des problèmes affectant le taux d'entente. Conclusion : L'outil SCOR permet la tenue d'une analyse des causes fondamentales de façon standardisée, objective et centrée sur l'obstétrique, ce qui pourrait améliorer l'identification des facteurs de risque et la dissémination des plans d'action pour la prévention de futurs événements.

Maternity services in multi-cultural Britain: using Q methodology to explore the views of first- and second-generation women of Pakistani origin.

OBJECTIVE: to explore first- and second-generation Pakistani women's experiences of maternity services and the inter generational differences/comparisons. DESIGN: a retrospective Q methodology study of Pakistani women following childbirth. SETTING: two Children's Centres in an inner city in the West Midlands. PARTICIPANTS: women self-identified following distribution of information leaflets at Children's Centres. Fifteen women took part in interviews (Stage one) using a semi-structured design and 16 women participated in the completion of the Q grid sorting (Stage four). METHODS: a standard five-stage Q methodology process took place: (1) initial data were gathered using a combination of individual face-to-face and focus group semi-structured community-based interviews (developing the concourse); (2) transcribed interviews were analysed for 'themes'; (3) the themes were reduced to 'statements' that reflected the overall content of the concourse using an unstructured evolving approach (giving the Q set); (4) participants were asked to sort the statements (Q sorting) according to a pre-designed distribution grid providing individual participant response grids; and (5) the response grids were factor analysed using PQ Method (V2.11), which generates clusters of participants rather than clusters of variables. Factor loadings were calculated using factor analysis by principal components with varimax rotation. This produced a list of factors, each of which represents a 'story' of women's experiences of maternity services. Throughout the process, an Urdu interpreter was involved. FINDINGS: six factors were identified: (1) confidence and empowerment of women who had attended higher education and had family support; (2) isolation of some women from both family and maternity services; (3) women who had poor experiences of maternity services but good family support, and wanted opportunities to be involved in service development; (4) women with positive experiences of maternity care and influenced by traditional cultural practices; (5) importance of information and support from health-care professionals; and (6) importance of midwifery care to women. CONCLUSION: there were no clear inter generational differences identified, but a breadth of opinion and experience that seemed to be influenced by level of both education and social support was found. Whereas some women had few demands of maternity services, those who had less support and those with language barriers had additional needs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: care given should be based on individual need but given within a wider collaborative context in order to support women effectively. Increased maternity service user involvement would also be welcomed for future planning of maternity services.