Exploring the implementation of an educational film within antenatal care to reduce the risk of cytomegalovirus infection in pregnancy: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a leading cause of sensorineural hearing loss and neuro-disability in childhood. In the absence of a licensed vaccine, adoption of hygiene-based measures may reduce the risk of CMV infection in pregnancy, however these measures are not routinely discussed with pregnant women as part of National Health Service (NHS) antenatal care in the United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: An exploratory qualitative study was conducted, underpinned by Normalization Process Theory (NPT), to investigate how an educational intervention comprising of a short film about CMV may best be implemented, sustained, and enhanced in real-world routine antenatal care settings. Video, semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants who were recruited using a purposive sample that comprised of midwives providing antenatal care from three NHS hospitals (n = 15) and participants from professional colleges and from organisations or charities providing, or with an interest in, antenatal education or health information in the UK (n = 15). FINDINGS: Midwives were reluctant to include CMV as part of early pregnancy discussions about reducing the risk of other infections due to lack of time, knowledge and absence of guidance or policies relating to CMV in antenatal education. However, the educational intervention was perceived to be a useful tool to encourage conversations and empower women to manage risk by all stakeholders, which would overcome some identified barriers. Macro-level challenges such as screening policies and lack of official guidelines to legitimise dissemination were identified. DISCUSSION: Successful implementation of education about CMV as part of routine NHS care in the UK will require an increase in awareness and knowledge about CMV amongst midwives. NPT revealed that 'coherence' and 'cognitive participation' between service members are vital to imbed CMV education in routine practice. 'Collective action' and 'reflexive monitoring' is required to sustain service changes.

Antenatal detection of large-for-gestational-age fetuses following implementation of the Growth Assessment Protocol: secondary analysis of a randomised control trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) affects the antenatal detection of large for gestational age (LGA) or maternal and perinatal outcomes amongst LGA babies. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a pragmatic open randomised cluster control trial comparing the GAP with standard care. SETTING: Eleven UK maternity units. POPULATION: Pregnant women and their LGA babies born at ≥36+0  weeks of gestation. METHODS: Clusters were randomly allocated to GAP implementation or standard care. Data were collected from electronic patient records. Trial arms were compared using summary statistics, with unadjusted and adjusted (two-stage cluster summary approach) differences. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of detection of LGA (estimated fetal weight on ultrasound scan above the 90th centile after 34+0  weeks of gestation, defined by either population or customised growth charts), maternal and perinatal outcomes (e.g. mode of birth, postpartum haemorrhage, severe perineal tears, birthweight and gestational age, neonatal unit admission, perinatal mortality, and neonatal morbidity and mortality). RESULTS: A total of 506 LGA babies were exposed to GAP and 618 babies received standard care. There were no significant differences in the rate of LGA detection (GAP 38.0% vs standard care 48.0%; adjusted effect size -4.9%; 95% CI -20.5, 10.7; p = 0.54), nor in any of the maternal or perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The use of GAP did not change the rate of antenatal ultrasound detection of LGA when compared with standard care.

Evaluation of the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) for antenatal detection of small for gestational age: The DESiGN cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal detection and management of small for gestational age (SGA) is a strategy to reduce stillbirth. Large observational studies provide conflicting results on the effect of the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) in relation to detection of SGA and reduction of stillbirth; to the best of our knowledge, there are no reported randomised control trials. Our aim was to determine if GAP improves antenatal detection of SGA compared to standard care. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This was a pragmatic, superiority, 2-arm, parallel group, open, cluster randomised control trial. Maternity units in England were eligible to participate in the study, except if they had already implemented GAP. All women who gave birth in participating clusters (maternity units) during the year prior to randomisation and during the trial (November 2016 to February 2019) were included. Multiple pregnancies, fetal abnormalities or births before 24+1 weeks were excluded. Clusters were randomised to immediate implementation of GAP, an antenatal care package aimed at improving detection of SGA as a means to reduce the rate of stillbirth, or to standard care. Randomisation by random permutation was stratified by time of study inclusion and cluster size. Data were obtained from hospital electronic records for 12 months prerandomisation, the washout period (interval between randomisation and data collection of outcomes), and the outcome period (last 6 months of the study). The primary outcome was ultrasound detection of SGA (estimated fetal weight <10th centile using customised centiles (intervention) or Hadlock centiles (standard care)) confirmed at birth (birthweight <10th centile by both customised and population centiles). Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal outcomes, including induction of labour, gestational age at delivery, mode of birth, neonatal morbidity, and stillbirth/perinatal mortality. A 2-stage cluster-summary statistical approach calculated the absolute difference (intervention minus standard care arm) adjusted using the prerandomisation estimate, maternal age, ethnicity, parity, and randomisation strata. Intervention arm clusters that made no attempt to implement GAP were excluded in modified intention to treat (mITT) analysis; full ITT was also reported. Process evaluation assessed implementation fidelity, reach, dose, acceptability, and feasibility. Seven clusters were randomised to GAP and 6 to standard care. Following exclusions, there were 11,096 births exposed to the intervention (5 clusters) and 13,810 exposed to standard care (6 clusters) during the outcome period (mITT analysis). Age, height, and weight were broadly similar between arms, but there were fewer women: of white ethnicity (56.2% versus 62.7%), and in the least deprived quintile of the Index of Multiple Deprivation (7.5% versus 16.5%) in the intervention arm during the outcome period. Antenatal detection of SGA was 25.9% in the intervention and 27.7% in the standard care arm (adjusted difference 2.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.4% to 10.7%; p = 0.62). Findings were consistent in full ITT analysis. Fidelity and dose of GAP implementation were variable, while a high proportion (88.7%) of women were reached. Use of routinely collected data is both a strength (cost-efficient) and a limitation (occurrence of missing data); the modest number of clusters limits our ability to study small effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed no effect of GAP on antenatal detection of SGA compared to standard care. Given variable implementation observed, future studies should incorporate standardised implementation outcomes such as those reported here to determine generalisability of our findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN67698474.

Family carers' experiences of dysphagia after a stroke: An exploratory study of spouses living in a large metropolitan city.

BACKGROUND: People with post-stroke dysphagia often require informal care from family to facilitate safe swallowing, modify food/drink or administer tube-feeds. Previous survey studies have found dysphagia may increase family caregiver burden. However, the experiences of family members in this population have not been fully explored. AIMS: To explore family members' experiences of living with a spouse with post-stroke dysphagia. METHODS & PROCEDURES: This exploratory qualitative study used one-to-one semi-structured interviews to explore family members' experiences. They were asked open questions about previous eating routines, dysphagia onset, their role and future hopes. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically with an inductive approach to determine key features of family members' experiences. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Five spouses aged 70-93 years participated. Their relatives' strokes happened 3 months to 3 years before the interview. Five themes were identified: 'I do all of it'; making sense of dysphagia; emotional responses; reflecting on relationships; and redefining lifestyle. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: It is important to consider family members' perspectives as they often provide vital care to loved-ones with dysphagia. In relation to eating and drinking, maintaining elements of previous routines seems important to families. Healthcare professionals should consider these when making recommendations for rehabilitation. Family members have differing perspectives of the comparative impact of dysphagia; patient and family priorities should be explored for healthcare professionals to provide better-targeted support. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Informal caregivers, often spouses, play a vital role in supporting the health and well-being of older people with health conditions. The presence of post-stroke dysphagia may present increased challenges for the informal caregiver. There are limited studies qualitatively exploring the experiences of informal caregivers in this population. What this paper adds to existing knowledge Current health and social care provision for this population leaves informal caregivers feeling they have been left to manage dysphagia alone. Informal caregivers demonstrate a breadth of knowledge about their spouse's dysphagia, problem-solving effective solutions. Informal caregivers have a range of interpretations of the nature and cause of dysphagia; leading to miscommunication with health professionals and complex emotional responses. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Healthcare professionals might consider ways in which to support dysphagic patients' families later in their care pathway, through scheduling reviews or running dysphagia patient and family groups. Health and social care professionals and policymakers should learn from informal caregivers' expertise to promote better health and quality-of-life outcomes for the patient and caregiver. Equal, open conversations between health and social care professionals and patients/families on their understanding of dysphagia may help informal caregivers to better voice their concerns and support mutual understanding. This has implications for adherence to recommendations, psychological well-being and patient safety.

A realist review to explore how midwifery continuity of care may influence preterm birth in pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: Midwifery continuity of care models are the only health system intervention associated with both a reduction in preterm birth (PTB) and an improvement in perinatal survival; however, questions remain about the mechanisms by which such positive outcomes are achieved. We aimed to uncover theories of change by which we can postulate how and why continuity of midwifery care models might affect PTB. METHODS: We followed Pawson's guidance for conducting a realist review and performed a comprehensive search to identify existing literature exploring the impact of continuity models on PTB in all pregnant women. A realist methodology was used to uncover the context (C), mechanisms (M), and outcomes (O) and to develop a group of CMO configurations to illuminate middle-range theories. RESULTS: Eleven papers were included from a wide variety of settings in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States. The majority of study participants had low socioeconomic status or social risk factors and received diverse models of midwifery continuity of care. Three themes-woman-midwife partnership, maternity pathways and processes, and system resources-encompassed ten CMO configurations. Building relationships, trust, confidence, and advocacy resulted in women feeling safer, less stressed, and more secure and respected, and encouraged them to access and engage in antenatal care with more opportunities for early prevention and diagnosis of complications, which facilitated effective management when compliance to guidelines was ensured. Organizational infrastructure, innovative partnerships, and robust community systems are crucial to overcome barriers, address women's complex needs, ensure quality of care, and reduce PTB risk. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women living in different contexts in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States at low and mixed risk of complications and with low socioeconomic status or social risk factors experienced continuity models in similar ways, and similar underlying mechanisms may have influenced PTB outcomes. Further research is required to understand how continuity models may influence behavioral change, physiological stress levels, ethnic disparities in PTB and care coordination, and navigation of health services.

Midwifery continuity of care versus standard maternity care for women at increased risk of preterm birth: A hybrid implementation-effectiveness, randomised controlled pilot trial in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Midwifery continuity of care is the only health system intervention shown to reduce preterm birth (PTB) and improve perinatal survival, but no trial evidence exists for women with identified risk factors for PTB. We aimed to assess feasibility, fidelity, and clinical outcomes of a model of midwifery continuity of care linked with a specialist obstetric clinic for women considered at increased risk for PTB. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a hybrid implementation-effectiveness, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group pilot trial at an inner-city maternity service in London (UK), in which pregnant women identified at increased risk of PTB were randomly assigned (1:1) to either midwifery continuity of antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal care (Pilot study Of midwifery Practice in Preterm birth Including women's Experiences [POPPIE] group) or standard care group (maternity care by different midwives working in designated clinical areas). Pregnant women attending for antenatal care at less than 24 weeks' gestation were eligible if they fulfilled one or more of the following criteria: previous cervical surgery, cerclage, premature rupture of membranes, PTB, or late miscarriage; previous short cervix or short cervix this pregnancy; or uterine abnormality and/or current smoker of tobacco. Feasibility outcomes included eligibility, recruitment and attrition rates, and fidelity of the model. The primary outcome was a composite of appropriate and timely interventions for the prevention and/or management of preterm labour and birth. We analysed by intention to treat. Between 9 May 2017 and 30 September 2018, 334 women were recruited; 169 women were allocated to the POPPIE group and 165 to the standard group. Mean maternal age was 31 years; 32% of the women were from Black, Asian, and ethnic minority groups; 70% were in employment; and 46% had a university degree. Nearly 70% of women lived in areas of social deprivation. More than a quarter of women had at least one pre-existing medical condition and multiple risk factors for PTB. More than 75% of antenatal and postnatal visits were provided by a named/partner midwife, and a midwife from the POPPIE team was present at 80% of births. The incidence of the primary composite outcome showed no statistically significant difference between groups (POPPIE group 83.3% versus standard group 84.7%; risk ratio 0.98 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.08]; p = 0.742). Infants in the POPPIE group were significantly more likely to have skin-to-skin contact after birth, to have it for a longer time, and to breastfeed immediately after birth and at hospital discharge. There were no differences in other secondary outcomes. The number of serious adverse events was similar in both groups and unrelated to the intervention (POPPIE group 6 versus standard group 5). Limitations of this study included the limited power and the nonmasking of group allocation; however, study assignment was masked to the statistician and researchers who analysed the data. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that it is feasible to set up and achieve fidelity of a model of midwifery continuity of care linked with specialist obstetric care for women at increased risk of PTB in an inner-city maternity service in London (UK), but there is no impact on most outcomes for this population group. Larger appropriately powered trials are needed, including in other settings, to evaluate the impact of relational continuity and hypothesised mechanisms of effect based on increased trust and engagement, improved care coordination, and earlier referral on disadvantaged communities, including women with complex social factors and social vulnerability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We prospectively registered the pilot trial on the UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database (ID number: 31951, 24 April 2017). We registered the trial on the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) (Number: 37733900, 21 August 2017) and before trial recruitment was completed (30 September 2018) when informed that prospective registration for a pilot trial was also required in a primary clinical trial registry recognised by WHO and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The protocol as registered and published has remained unchanged, and the analysis conforms to the original plan.

What influences birth place preferences, choices and decision-making amongst healthy women with straightforward pregnancies in the UK? A qualitative evidence synthesis using a 'best fit' framework approach.

BACKGROUND: English maternity care policy has supported offering women choice of birth setting for over twenty years, but only 13% of women in England currently give birth in settings other than obstetric units (OUs). It is unclear why uptake of non-OU settings for birth remains relatively low. This paper presents a synthesis of qualitative evidence which explores influences on women's experiences of birth place choice, preference and decision-making from the perspectives of women using maternity services. METHODS: Qualitative evidence synthesis of UK research published January 1992-March 2015, using a 'best-fit' framework approach. Searches were run in seven electronic data bases applying a comprehensive search strategy. Thematic framework analysis was used to synthesise extracted data from included studies. RESULTS: Twenty-four papers drawing on twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. The synthesis identified support for the key framework themes. Women's experiences of choosing or deciding where to give birth were influenced by whether they received information about available options and about the right to choose, women's preferences for different services and their attributes, previous birth experiences, views of family, friends and health care professionals and women's beliefs about risk and safety. The synthesis additionally identified that women's access to choice of place of birth during the antenatal period varied. Planning to give birth in OU was straightforward, but although women considering birth in a setting other than hospital OU were sometimes well-supported, they also encountered obstacles and described needing to 'counter the negativity' surrounding home birth or birth in midwife-led settings. CONCLUSIONS: Over the period covered by the review, it was straightforward for low risk women to opt for hospital birth in the UK. Accessing home birth was more complex and contested. The evidence on freestanding midwifery units (FMUs) is more limited, but suggests that women wanting to opt for an FMU birth experienced similar barriers. The extent to which women experienced similar problems accessing alongside midwifery units (AMUs) is unclear. Women's preferences for different birth options, particularly for 'hospital' vs non-hospital settings, are shaped by their pre-existing values, beliefs and experience, and not all women are open to all birth settings.

How do pregnancy and birth experiences influence planned place of birth in future pregnancies? Findings from a longitudinal, narrative study.

BACKGROUND: A perception that first birth is more risky than subsequent births has led to women planning births in obstetric units (OU) and to care providers supporting these choices. This study explored the influence of pregnancy and birth experiences on women's intended place of birth in current and future pregnancies. METHODS: Prospective, longitudinal narrative interviews (n = 122) were conducted with 41 women in three English National Health Service sites. During postnatal interviews, women reflected on their recent births and discussed where they might plan to give birth in a future pregnancy. Longitudinal narrative analysis methods were used to explore these data. RESULTS: Women's experience of care in their eventual place of birth had more influence on decisions about the (hypothetical) next pregnancy than planned place of birth during pregnancy did. Women with complex pregnancies usually planned hospital (OU) births, but healthy women with straightforward pregnancies also chose an OU and would often plan the same for the future, particularly if they experienced giving birth in an OU setting during recent births. DISCUSSION: The experience of giving birth in a hospital OU reinforced women's perceptions that birth is risky and uncertain, and that hospital OUs are best equipped to keep women and babies safe. The assumption that women will opt for lower acuity settings for second or subsequent births was not supported by these data, which may mean that multiparous women who best fit criteria for non-OU births are reluctant to plan births in these settings. This highlights the importance of providing balanced information about risks and benefits of different birth settings to all women during pregnancy.

Developing a complex intervention for diet and activity behaviour change in obese pregnant women (the UPBEAT trial); assessment of behavioural change and process evaluation in a pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Complex interventions in obese pregnant women should be theoretically based, feasible and shown to demonstrate anticipated behavioural change prior to inception of large randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The aim was to determine if a) a complex intervention in obese pregnant women leads to anticipated changes in diet and physical activity behaviours, and b) to refine the intervention protocol through process evaluation of intervention fidelity. METHODS: We undertook a pilot RCT of a complex intervention in obese pregnant women, comparing routine antenatal care with an intervention to reduce dietary glycaemic load and saturated fat intake, and increase physical activity. Subjects included 183 obese pregnant women (mean BMI 36.3 kg/m2). RESULTS: Compared to women in the control arm, women in the intervention arm had a significant reduction in dietary glycaemic load (33 points, 95% CI -47 to -20), (p < 0.001) and saturated fat intake (-1.6% energy, 95% CI -2.8 to -0. 3) at 28 weeks' gestation. Objectively measured physical activity did not change. Physical discomfort and sustained barriers to physical activity were common at 28 weeks' gestation. Process evaluation identified barriers to recruitment, group attendance and compliance, leading to modification of intervention delivery. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial of a complex intervention in obese pregnant women suggests greater potential for change in dietary intake than for change in physical activity, and through process evaluation illustrates the considerable advantage of performing an exploratory trial of a complex intervention in obese pregnant women before undertaking a large RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN89971375.

A continuity of care programme for women at risk of preterm birth in the UK: Process evaluation of a hybrid randomised controlled pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: The development and evaluation of specific maternity care packages designed to address preterm birth remains a public health priority. We aim to evaluate the implementation, context, and potential mechanisms of action, of a new care pathway that combined midwifery continuity of care with a specialist obstetric clinic for women at risk of preterm birth (POPPIE) in London (UK). METHODS: We did a multiphase mixed method triangulation evaluation nested within a hybrid type 2, randomised controlled trial in London (United Kingdom). Pregnant women with identified risk factors for preterm birth were eligible for trial participation and randomly assigned (1:1) to either midwifery continuity of care linked to a specialist obstetric clinic (POPPIE group) or standard maternity care. The primary outcome was a composite of appropriate and timely interventions for the prevention and/or management of preterm labour and birth, analysed according to intention to treat. Clinical and process outcome data were abstracted from medical records and electronic data systems, and coded by study team members, who were masked to study group allocation. Implementation data were collected from meeting records and key documents, postnatal surveys (n = 164), semi-structured interviews with women (n = 30), healthcare providers and stakeholders (n = 24) pre-, mid and post implementation. Qualitative and quantitative data from meeting records and key documents were examined narratively. Qualitative data from interviews were analysed using three thematic frameworks: Proctor's (for implementation outcomes: appropriateness, adoption, feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, penetration, sustainability), the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (for determinants of implementation), and published program theories of continuity models (for potential mechanisms). Data triangulation followed a convergent parallel and pragmatic approach which brought quantitative and qualitative data together at the interpretation stage. We averaged individual implementation measures across all domains to give a single composite implementation strength score which was compared to the primary outcome. RESULTS: Between May 9, 2017, and Sep 30, 2018, 553 women were assessed for eligibility and 334 were enrolled with less than 6% of loss to follow up (169 were assigned to the POPPIE group; 165 were to the standard group). There was no difference in the primary outcome (POPPIE group 83·3% versus standard group 84·7%; risk ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·90 to 1·08]). Appropriateness and adoption: The introduction of the POPPIE model was perceived as a positive fundamental change for local maternity services. Partnership working and additional funding were crucial for adoption. Fidelity: More than 75% of antenatal and postnatal visits were provided by a named or partner midwife, and a POPPIE midwife was present in more than 80% of births. Acceptability: Nearly 98% of women who responded to the postnatal survey were very satisfied with POPPIE model. Quantitative fidelity and acceptability results were supported by the qualitative findings. Penetration and sustainability: Despite delays (likely associated with lack of existing continuity models at the hospital), the model was embedded within established services and a joint decision was made to sustain and adapt the model after the trial (strongly facilitated by national maternal policy on continuity pathways). Potential mechanisms of impact identified included e.g. access to care, advocacy and perceptions of safety and trust. There was no association between implementation measures and the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The POPPIE model of care was a feasible and acceptable model of care that was implemented with high fidelity and sustained in maternity services. Larger powered trials are feasible and needed in other settings, to evaluate the impact and implementation of continuity programmes in other communities affected by preterm birth and women who experience social disadvantage and vulnerability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UKCRN Portfolio Database (prospectively registered, 24 April 2017): 31951. ISRCTN registry (retrospectively registered, 21 August 2017): ISRCTN37733900.

Effect of the Growth Assessment Protocol on the DEtection of Small for GestatioNal age fetus: process evaluation from the DESiGN cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Reducing the rate of stillbirth is an international priority. At least half of babies stillborn in high-income countries are small for gestational-age (SGA). The Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP), a complex antenatal intervention that aims to increase the rate of antenatal detection of SGA, was evaluated in the DESiGN type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation cluster randomised trial (n = 13 clusters). In this paper, we present the trial process evaluation. METHODS: A mixed-methods process evaluation was conducted. Clinical leads and frontline healthcare professionals were interviewed to inform understanding of context (implementing and standard care sites) and GAP implementation (implementing sites). Thematic analysis of interview text used the context and implementation of complex interventions framework to understand acceptability, feasibility, and the impact of context. A review of implementing cluster clinical guidelines, training and maternity records was conducted to assess fidelity, dose and reach. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 28 clinical leads and 27 frontline healthcare professionals across 11 sites. Staff at implementing sites generally found GAP to be acceptable but raised issues of feasibility, caused by conflicting demands on resource, and variable beliefs among clinical leaders regarding the intervention value. GAP was implemented with variable fidelity (concordance of local guidelines to GAP was high at two sites, moderate at two and low at one site), all sites achieved the target to train > 75% staff using face-to-face methods, but only one site trained > 75% staff using e-learning methods; a median of 84% (range 78-87%) of women were correctly risk stratified at the five implementing sites. Most sites achieved high scores for reach (median 94%, range 62-98% of women had a customised growth chart), but generally, low scores for dose (median 31%, range 8-53% of low-risk women and median 5%, range 0-17% of high-risk women) were monitored for SGA as recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of GAP was generally acceptable to staff but with issues of feasibility that are likely to have contributed to variation in implementation strength. Leadership and resourcing are fundamental to effective implementation of clinical service changes, even when such changes are well aligned to policy mandated service-change priorities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Primary registry and trial identifying number: ISRCTN 67698474. Registered 02/11/16. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN67698474 .

Experiences of maternity care among women at increased risk of preterm birth receiving midwifery continuity of care compared to women receiving standard care: Results from the POPPIE pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Midwifery continuity of care models for women at low and mixed risk of complications have been shown to improve women's experiences of care. However, there is limited research on care experiences among women at increased risk of preterm birth. We aimed to explore the experiences of care among women with risk factors for preterm birth participating in a pilot trial (POPPIE) of a midwifery continuity of care model which included a specialist obstetric clinic. METHODS: A total of 334 pregnant women identified at increased risk of preterm birth were randomly allocated to either midwifery continuity of care (POPPIE group) or standard maternity care. Women in both groups were followed up at six-to-eight weeks postpartum and were invited to complete a postnatal survey either online or by post. An equal status exploratory sequential mixed method design was chosen to collect and analyse the quantitative postnatal survey data and qualitative interviews data. The postnatal survey included measures of social support, trust, perceptions of safety, quality of care, control during childbirth, bonding and quality of life. Categorical data were analysed with chi-squared tests and continuous data were analysed with t-tests and/or Mann-Whitney U test to measure differences in measures scores among groups. The qualitative interview data were subjected to a thematic framework analysis. Data triangulation brought quantitative and qualitative data together at the interpretation stage. FINDINGS: A total of 166 women completed the survey and 30 women were interviewed (90 and 16 in POPPIE group; 76 and 14 in standard group). We found survey respondents in the POPPIE group, compared to respondents in the standard group, were significantly more likely to report greater trust in midwives (Mann-Whitney U, p<0.0001), greater perceptions of safety during the antenatal care (t-test, p = 0.0138), have a particular midwife to contact when they needed during their pregnancy (t-test, p<0.0001) and the postnatal period (chi-squared, p<0.0001). They reported increased involvement in decisions regarding antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal care (t-test, p = 0.002; p = 0.008; p = 0.006 respectively); and greater postnatal support and advice about: feeding the baby (chi-squared, p<0.0001), handling, settling and looking after the baby (chi-squared, p<0.0001), baby's health and progress (chi-squared, p = 0.039), their own health and recovery (chi-squared, p = 0.006) and who to contact about any emotional changes (chi-squared, p = 0.005). There were no significant differences between groups in the reporting of perceptions of safety during birth and the postnatal period, concerns raised during labour and birth taken seriously, being left alone during childbirth at a time of worries, control during labour, bonding, social support, and physical and mental health related quality of life after birth. Results from qualitative interviews provided insight and depth into many of these findings, with women in the POPPIE group reporting more positive experiences of bonding towards their babies and more positive physical health postnatally. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with standard maternity care, women at increased risk of PTB who received midwifery continuity of care were more likely to report increased perceptions of trust, safety and quality of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN (Number: 37733900); UK CRN (ID: 31951).

Assessing mental health during pregnancy: An exploratory qualitative study of midwives' perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Mental health disorders are estimated to affect between 10% and 20% of women who access maternity services and can be defined as a public health issue due to the potential consequences for women, children and families. Detecting problems early in pregnancy can significantly improve outcomes for women and their families. However, mental health problems are not being consistently identified in routine midwifery practice and little is known from current literature about midwives' practice in relation to current national guidelines or the impact models of care have on assessing maternal mental health. OBJECTIVE: To identify midwives' views about barriers and facilitators to screening for mental health in pregnancy using current UK guidelines. DESIGN: Nine community midwives from a single district general hospital in the south of England were recruited to take part in focus groups. Thematic analysis was used to extract key themes from the data. FINDINGS: Three key themes were identified from the focus groups and included system factors, social factors and trust. Barriers and facilitators to screening maternal mental health were associated with the initial 'booking' appointment' and differences in models of care. Barriers to screening were defined as high workload, poor continuity, and a lack of trust between women and midwives. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights key barriers and facilitators associated with mental health screening during pregnancy, including issues of trust and uncertainty about women's willingness to disclose mental health conditions. Further research is required to evaluate the relationship between women and midwives in contemporary practice and the influence this may have on maternal mental health.

The DESiGN trial (DEtection of Small for Gestational age Neonate), evaluating the effect of the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Stillbirth rates in the United Kingdom (UK) are amongst the highest of all developed nations. The association between small-for-gestational-age (SGA) foetuses and stillbirth is well established, and observational studies suggest that improved antenatal detection of SGA babies may halve the stillbirth rate. The Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) describes a complex intervention that includes risk assessment for SGA and screening using customised fundal-height growth charts. Increased detection of SGA from the use of GAP has been implicated in the reduction of stillbirth rates by 22%, in observational studies of UK regions where GAP uptake was high. This study will be the first randomised controlled trial examining the clinical efficacy, health economics and implementation of the GAP programme in the antenatal detection of SGA. METHODS/DESIGN: In this randomised controlled trial, clusters comprising a maternity unit (or National Health Service Trust) were randomised to either implementation of the GAP programme, or standard care. The primary outcome is the rate of antenatal ultrasound detection of SGA in infants found to be SGA at birth by both population and customised standards, as this is recognised as being the group with highest risk for perinatal morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes include antenatal detection of SGA by population centiles, antenatal detection of SGA by customised centiles, short-term maternal and neonatal outcomes, resource use and economic consequences, and a process evaluation of GAP implementation. Qualitative interviews will be performed to assess facilitators and barriers to implementation of GAP. DISCUSSION: This study will be the first to provide data and outcomes from a randomised controlled trial investigating the potential difference between the GAP programme compared to standard care for antenatal ultrasound detection of SGA infants. Accurate information on the performance and service provision requirements of the GAP protocol has the potential to inform national policy decisions on methods to reduce the rate of stillbirth. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Primary registry and trial identifying number: ISRCTN 67698474 . Registered on 2 November 2016.

An experiential model of education introduced to improve the confidence of student midwives in undertaking second stage management of the perineum (SSMP).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: the limited availability of high quality evidence related to second stage management of the perineum (SSMP) combined with a perceived shift in UK practice towards a 'hands off' the perineum/fetal head approach are likely to have impacted significantly on student midwives' understanding of SSMP. This paper presents a classroom based educational session using low fidelity simulation, which was designed in response to student feedback and aimed to improve confidence in this skill. DESIGN: reflective teaching practice, based on evaluation of SSMP teaching. SETTING: an undergraduate midwifery programme based at an inner city university in London UK. PARTICIPANTS: student midwives. FINDINGS: the education session based on Kolb's experiential approach to learning appeared to address gaps in the previous teaching which was identified by students. The Classroom setting offered students a supportive setting in which to experiment with different SSMP approaches with a view to personalising care and without compromising safety. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: although further longitudnal research is needed, the experiential model appears to offer a low resource approach to teaching SSMP and has potential application in other countries.

Interventions to support effective communication between maternity care staff and women in labour: A mixed-methods systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: the objectives of this review were (1) to assess whether interventions to support effective communication between maternity care staff and healthy women in labour with a term pregnancy could improve birth outcomes and experiences of care; and (2) to synthesize information related to the feasibility of implementation and resources required. DESIGN: a mixed-methods systematic review. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: studies which reported on interventions aimed at improving communication between maternity care staff and healthy women during normal labour and birth, with no apparent medical or obstetric complications, and their family members were included. 'Maternity care staff' included medical doctors (e.g. obstetricians, anaesthetists, physicians, family doctors, paediatricians), midwives, nurses and other skilled birth attendants providing labour, birth and immediate postnatal care. Studies from all birth settings (any country, any facility including home birth, any resource level) were included. FINDINGS: two papers met the inclusion criteria. One was a step wedge randomised controlled trial conducted in Syria, and the other a sub-analysis of a randomised controlled trial from the United Kingdom. Both studies aimed to assess effects of communication training for maternity care staff on women's experiences of labour care. The study from Syria reported that a communication skills training intervention for resident doctors was not associated with higher satisfaction reported by women. In the UK study, patient-actors' (experienced midwives) perceptions of safety and communication significantly improved for postpartum haemorrhage scenarios after training with patient-actors in local hospitals, compared with training using manikins in simulation centres, but no differences were identified for other scenarios. Both studies had methodological limitations. KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: the review identified a lack of evidence on impact of interventions to support effective communication between maternity care staff and healthy women during labour and birth. Very low quality evidence was found on effectiveness of communication training of maternity care staff. Robust studies which are able to identify characteristics of interventions to support effective communication in maternity care are urgently needed. Consideration also needs to be given to how organisations prepare, monitor and sustain interventions to support effective communication, which reflect outcomes of priority for women, local culture and context of labour and birth care.

Healthcare professionals' attitudes, knowledge and self-efficacy levels regarding the use of self-hypnosis in childbirth: A prospective questionnaire survey.

OBJECTIVE: to examine healthcare professionals' attitudes, knowledge and levels of self-efficacy regarding the use of self-hypnosis in childbirth. DESIGN: a prospective survey. SETTING: two large maternity units in London, England. PARTICIPANTS: healthcare professionals (n=129) involved in the care of childbearing women (anaesthetists, midwives and obstetricians). METHODS: online questionnaire assessing healthcare professionals' experience, knowledge, attitudes and self-efficacy relating to self-hypnosis in childbirth. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: attitude, self-efficacy and knowledge. FINDINGS: over half of the participants surveyed (56%) reported they had minimal or no knowledge of hypnosis. Higher levels of knowledge were associated with higher levels of self-efficacy (p<0.001) and also with more positive attitudes (p<.001). Midwives reported significantly higher levels of knowledge, more positive attitudes (7.25, 95% CI: 4.60-9.89) and higher levels of self-efficacy (3.48, 95% CI: 1.46-5.51) than doctors. Midwives also reported more exposure to/experience of hypnosis than doctors, and more exposure was significantly associated with higher levels of self-efficacy (midwives p<.001; doctors p=.001). Professionals who would plan to use self-hypnosis in their own or partners' births had significantly higher self-efficacy scores (p<.001). KEY CONCLUSIONS: if healthcare professionals are to effectively support women using self-hypnosis in childbirth, they need to be confident in their ability to facilitate this method. Previous research has established that self-efficacy is a strong indicator of performance. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Professionals with more knowledge of self-hypnosis are also more confident in supporting women using this technique in childbirth. Multi-disciplinary staff training which aims to increase knowledge, and which includes exposure to hypnosis in labour, may be beneficial in assisting staff to support women choosing to use self-hypnosis in labour.