Labouring Together: Women's experiences of "Getting the care that I want and need" in maternity care.

OBJECTIVE: Poor interprofessional collaboration and lack of decision-making with women have been identified as being detrimental to the quality, safety, and experience of maternity care. The aim of the Labouring Together study was to explore childbearing women's preferences for and experiences of collaboration and control over decision-making in maternity care. DESIGN: A sequential, mixed-method, multi-site case study approach was used to explore the perceptions and experiences of childbearing women regarding collaboration and decision-making. Women's preferred role for decision-making compared to the actual experiences, and the influences upon their preferences and experiences of collaboration were explored using semi-structured interviews. An inductive approach was used for qualitative analysis of interviews, and cross-case analyses were conducted using replication logic. SETTING: Postnatal wards of 1 private and 3 public maternity services in both metropolitan and regional Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Postnatal women, over the age of 18 years (n=182). FINDINGS: Half (48.3%) of the participants indicated a preference for a shared decision-making role and 35% preferred an active role. Only 16.7% participants indicated a preference for a passive role, however 24.4% of women reported experiencing a passive decision-making role during their maternity care. Statistically significant differences were also identified between preferences for and experiences of decision-making among women who chose the private obstetrician model of maternity care compared to the public maternity care system. Negative impacts upon women's autonomy over decision-making included: poor access to midwifery models of care; poor access to relational continuity of care; poor understanding of the rights of the woman; inadequate information for women about the risks and benefits of all proposed interventions; and a bureaucratic style of decision-making based upon a dominant discourse of risk avoidance that could ultimately veto the woman's choice. KEY CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence of the benefits for women of having autonomy over decision-making in their own care, fundamental barriers were identified that hindered women's participation in collaboration in maternity care. Shared decision-making with childbearing women is not routine practice in maternity care in Victoria, Australia. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Relational continuity of care is imperative to promote the autonomy of childbearing women and an environment conducive to women's active engagement in maternity care and participation in shared decision-making.

The impact of COVID-19 on the wellbeing of the UK nursing and midwifery workforce during the first pandemic wave: A longitudinal survey study.

BACKGROUND: The specific challenges experienced by the nursing and midwifery workforce in previous pandemics have exacerbated pre-existing professional and personal challenges, and triggered new issues. We aimed to determine the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the UK nursing and midwifery workforce and identify potential factors associated with signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. METHODS: A United Kingdom national online survey was conducted at three time-points during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between April and August 2020 (T1 and T2 during initial wave; T3 at three-months following the first wave). All members of the UK registered and unregistered nursing and midwifery workforce were eligible to participate. The survey was promoted via social media and through organisational email and newsletters. The primary outcome was an Impact of Events Scale-Revised score indicative of a post-traumatic stress disorder diagnosis (defined using the cut-off score ≥33). Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to assess the association between explanatory variables and post-traumatic stress disorder. RESULTS: We received 7840 eligible responses (T1- 2040; T2- 3638; T3- 2162). Overall, 91.6% participants were female, 77.2% were adult registered nurses, and 28.7% were redeployed during the pandemic. An Impact of Events Scale-Revised score ≥33 (probable post-traumatic stress disorder) was observed in 44.6%, 37.1%, and 29.3% participants at T1, T2, and T3 respectively. At all three time-points, both personal and workplace factors were associated with probable post-traumatic stress disorder, although some specific associations changed over the course of the pandemic. Increased age was associated with reduced probable post-traumatic stress disorder at T1 and T2 (e.g. 41-50 years at T1 odds ratio (OR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.86), but not at T3. Similarly, redeployment with inadequate/ no training was associated with increased probable post-traumatic stress disorder at T1 and T2, but not at T3 (T1 OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06-1.77; T3 OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.89-1.55). A lack of confidence in infection prevention and control training was associated with increased probable post-traumatic stress disorder at all three time-points (e.g. T1 OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.97). CONCLUSION: A negative psychological impact was evident 3-months following the first wave of the pandemic. Both personal and workplace are associated with adverse psychological effects linked to the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings will inform how healthcare organisations should respond to staff wellbeing needs both during the current pandemic, and in planning for future pandemics.

Effectiveness of nurse-coordinated, person-centered comprehensive assessment on improving quality of life of community-dwelling, frail older people: a systematic review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review is to determine the effectiveness of nurse-coordinated, person-centered comprehensive assessment on improving quality of life of community-dwelling, frail older people. INTRODUCTION: There is a growing need to meet the challenges of the increasingly frail and older population, and to provide proactive, holistic care close to home. A standardized assessment and care planning intervention could be implemented in primary care, which could be delivered by a primary or community healthcare nurse to address these challenges. However, it is not yet clear if an assessment and care planning intervention will improve outcomes for patients, such as quality of life. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider studies that evaluate nurse-coordinated, person-centered, comprehensive assessment delivered in partnership with community-dwelling, frail older people, and will compare the intervention to usual care. Studies that include people aged 60 years and older living at home or in supported living accommodation with a recognized level of frailty as assessed by use of frailty screening or assessment tools, will be considered. Studies that include outcomes of health-related quality of life, social functioning, and well-being will also be considered. METHODS: An initial limited search of PubMed and CINAHL has been undertaken to identify articles on the topic. The following sources will be searched for eligible papers: PubMED, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, BNI, AMED, and OpenGrey. Retrieval of full-text studies, assessment of methodological quality, and data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis will be performed, if possible, and a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Summary of Findings presented. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42019137886.

Maternity service organisational interventions that aim to reduce caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Caesarean sections (CSs) are associated with increased maternal and perinatal morbidity, yet rates continue to increase within most countries. Effective interventions are required to reduce the number of non-medically indicated CSs and improve outcomes for women and infants. This paper reports findings of a systematic review of literature related to maternity service organisational interventions that have a primary intention of improving CS rates. METHOD: A three-phase search strategy was implemented to identify studies utilising organisational interventions to improve CS rates in maternity services. The database search (including Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Maternity and Infant Care, EMBASE and SCOPUS) was restricted to peer-reviewed journal articles published from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2017. Reference lists of relevant reviews and included studies were also searched. Primary outcomes were overall, planned, and unplanned CS rates. Secondary outcomes included a suite of birth outcomes. A series of meta-analyses were performed in RevMan, separated by type of organisational intervention and outcome of interest. Summary risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals were presented as the effect measure. Effect sizes were pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Fifteen articles were included in the systematic review, nine of which were included in at least one meta-analysis. Results indicated that, compared with women allocated to usual care, women allocated to midwife-led models of care implemented across pregnancy, labour and birth, and the postnatal period were, on average, less likely to experience CS (overall) (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.96), planned CS (average RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93), and episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.95). Narratively, audit and feedback, and a hospital policy of mandatory second opinion for CS, were identified as interventions that have potential to reduce CS rates. CONCLUSION: Maternity service leaders should consider the adoption of midwife-led models of care across the maternity episode within their organisations, particularly for women classified as low-risk. Additional studies are required that utilise either audit and feedback, or a hospital policy of mandatory second opinion for CS, to facilitate the quantification of intervention effects within future reviews. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42016039458 ; prospectively registered.

The holistic assessment and care planning in partnership intervention study (HAPPI): A protocol for a feasibility, cluster randomized controlled trial.

AIM: During an initial phase of this research, an e-Delphi survey was conducted to gain consensus among stakeholders on the components of a nurse-led assessment and care planning intervention for older people who live with frailty in primary care. This feasibility randomized controlled trial (fRCT) will test the proposed intervention and its implementation and determine methods for the design of a conclusive randomized controlled trial. METHODS: The fRCT, with embedded qualitative study, aims to recruit 60 participants. Moderately and severely frail older people will be identified using the electronic frailty index (eFI) and the intervention will be delivered by senior community nurses. The control participants will receive usual primary care for frailty. The study is funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR; funding granted in May 2016, ref: ICA-CDRF-2016-02-018) and received NHS and University Research Ethics Committee approval in 2018. DISCUSSION: There is evidence that the delivery of complex interventions for community-dwelling older people can reduce care home and hospital admissions and falls, there is less evidence for the benefit of any specific type or intensity of intervention or the additional benefits of targeting the frail population. This trial will determine feasibility of the intervention, define recruitment and retention parameters and trial logistics, and decide outcome measures. IMPACT: This study aims to address the limitations of current research by using a systematic method of frailty diagnosis and participant identification, trialling implementation of a person-centred intervention, and testing of feasibility parameters. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN: 74345449.