Inpatient midwifery staffing levels and postpartum readmissions: a retrospective multicentre longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Preventing readmission to hospital after giving birth is a key priority, as rates have been rising along with associated costs. There are many contributing factors to readmission, and some are thought to be preventable. Nurse and midwife understaffing has been linked to deficits in care quality. This study explores the relationship between staffing levels and readmission rates in maternity settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective longitudinal study using routinely collected individual patient data in three maternity services in England from 2015 to 2020. Data on admissions, discharges and case-mix were extracted from hospital administration systems. Staffing and workload were calculated in Hours Per Patient day per shift in the first two 12-hour shifts of the index (birth) admission. Postpartum readmissions and staffing exposures for all birthing admissions were entered into a hierarchical multivariable logistic regression model to estimate the odds of readmission when staffing was below the mean level for the maternity service. RESULTS: 64 250 maternal admissions resulted in birth and 2903 mothers were readmitted within 30 days of discharge (4.5%). Absolute levels of staffing ranged between 2.3 and 4.1 individuals per midwife in the three services. Below average midwifery staffing was associated with higher rates of postpartum readmissions within 7 days of discharge (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.108, 95% CI 1.003 to 1.223). The effect was smaller and not statistically significant for readmissions within 30 days of discharge (aOR 1.080, 95% CI 0.994 to 1.174). Below average maternity assistant staffing was associated with lower rates of postpartum readmissions (7 days, aOR 0.957, 95% CI 0.867 to 1.057; 30 days aOR 0.965, 95% CI 0.887 to 1.049, both not statistically significant). CONCLUSION: We found evidence that lower than expected midwifery staffing levels is associated with more postpartum readmissions. The nature of the relationship requires further investigation including examining potential mediating factors and reasons for readmission in maternity populations.

The association between midwifery staffing and reported harmful incidents: a cross-sectional analysis of routinely collected data.

BACKGROUND: Independent inquiries have identified that appropriate staffing in maternity units is key to enabling quality care and minimising harm, but optimal staffing levels can be difficult to achieve when there is a shortage of midwives. The services provided and how they are staffed (total staffing, skill-mix and deployment) have been changing, and the effects of workforce changes on care quality and outcomes have not been assessed. This study aims to explore the association between daily midwifery staffing levels and the rate of reported harmful incidents affecting mothers and babies. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of daily reports of clinical incidents in maternity inpatient areas matched with inpatient staffing levels for three maternity services in England, using data from April 2015 to February 2020. Incidents resulting in harm to mothers or babies was the primary outcome measure. Staffing levels were calculated from daily staffing rosters, quantified in Hours Per Patient Day (HPPD) for midwives and maternity assistants. Understaffing was defined as staffing below the mean for the service. A negative binomial hierarchical model was used to assess the relationship between exposure to low staffing and reported incidents involving harm. RESULTS: The sample covered 106,904 maternal admissions over 46 months. The rate of harmful incidents in each of the three services ranged from 2.1 to 3.0 per 100 admissions across the study period. Understaffing by registered midwives was associated with an 11% increase in harmful incidents (adjusted IRR 1.110, 95% CI 1.002,1.229). Understaffing by maternity assistants was not associated with an increase in harmful incidents (adjusted IRR 0.919, 95% 0.813,1.039). Analysis of specific types of incidents showed no statistically significant associations, but most of the point estimates were in the direction of increased incidents when services were understaffed. CONCLUSION: When there is understaffing by registered midwives, more harmful incidents are reported but understaffing by maternity assistants is not associated with higher risk of harms. Adequate registered midwife staffing levels are crucial for maintaining safety. Changes in the profile of maternity service workforces need to be carefully scrutinised to prevent mothers and babies being put at risk of avoidable harm.

Evidence on the use of Birthrate Plus® to guide safe staffing in maternity services - A systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Birthrate Plus® is a widely used tool that informs decisions about the number of midwifery staff needed to provide safe and high quality care in maternity services. Evidence about the effectiveness, validity, reliability, and feasibility of tools such as this is needed. OBJECTIVE: To identify, describe and analyse the available evidence supporting the use of Birthrate Plus. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Google Scholar, Scopus, Academic Search, British Library Ethos, Directory of Open Access Journals and Science Direct. Studies were eligible if they reported empirical data relevant to the validity, reliability, or useability of Birthrate Plus or if they measured the impact on staffing levels, outcomes, costs or provided a comparison with other methods. RESULTS: 23 sources of evidence were identified and reviewed. We found no prospective intervention studies on the use of Birthrate Plus to demonstrate outcomes for mothers, babies or staff wellbeing. Nor did we find studies comparing the tool to other methods or addressing resource use. Most of the evidence was descriptive, focussing on the use of the tool or the results of Birthrate Plus assessments. There is some evidence of the reliability of application of categories within the tool, the ability of the tool to detect variation in demand and to highlight staff shortages. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of traditional hierarchies of evidence, the evidence for Birthrate Plus is weak. There is a need for more independent research or simulation using real world data to understand how the tool performs in the current context of midwifery practice.

'A good decision is the one that feels right for me': Codesign with patients to inform theoretical underpinning of a decision aid website.

INTRODUCTION: Patient decision aids (PtDA) complement shared decision-making with healthcare professionals and improve decision quality. However, PtDA often lack theoretical underpinning. We are codesigning a PtDA to help people with increased genetic cancer risks manage choices. The aim of an innovative workshop described here was to engage with the people who will use the PtDA regarding the theoretical underpinning and logic model outlining our hypothesis of how the PtDA would lead to more informed decision-making. METHODS: Short presentations about psychological and behavioural theories by an expert were interspersed with facilitated, small-group discussions led by patients. Patients were asked what is important to them when they make health decisions, what theoretical constructs are most meaningful and how this should be applied to codesign of a PtDA. An artist created a visual summary. Notes from patient discussions and the artwork were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The overarching theme was: It's personal. Contextual factors important for decision-making were varied and changed over time. There was no one 'best fit' theory to target support needs in a PtDA, suggesting an inductive, flexible framework approach to programme theory would be most effective. The PtDA logic model was revised based on patient feedback. CONCLUSION: Meaningful codesign of PtDA including discussions about the theoretical mechanisms through which they support decision-making has the potential to lead to improved patient care through understanding the intricately personal nature of health decisions, and tailoring content and format for holistic care. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION: Patients with lived experience were involved in codesign and coproduction of this workshop and analysis as partners and coauthors. Patient discussions were the primary data source. Facilitators provided a semi-structured guide, but they did not influence the patient discussions or provide clinical advice. The premise of this workshop was to prioritise the importance of patient lived experience: to listen, learn, then reflect together to understand and propose ideas to improve patient care through codesign of a PtDA.

Exploring the relationship between women's experience of postnatal care and reported staffing measures: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Women have reported dissatisfaction with care received on postnatal wards and this area has been highlighted for improvement. Studies have shown an association between midwifery staffing levels and postnatal care experiences, but so far, the influence of registered and support staff deployed in postnatal wards has not been studied. This work is timely as the number of support workers has increased in the workforce and there has been little research on skill mix to date. METHODS: Cross sectional secondary analysis including 13,264 women from 123 postnatal wards within 93 hospital Trusts. Staffing was measured in each organisation as Full Time Equivalent staff employed per 100 births, and on postnatal wards, using Hours Per Patient Day. Women's experiences were assessed using four items from the 2019 national maternity survey. Multilevel logistic regression models were used to examine relationships and adjust for maternal age, parity, ethnicity, type of birth, and medical staff. RESULTS: Trusts with higher levels of midwifery staffing had higher rates of women reporting positive experiences of postnatal care. However, looking at staffing on postnatal wards, there was no evidence of an association between registered nurses and midwives hours per patient day and patient experience. Wards with higher levels of support worker staffing were associated with higher rates of women reporting they had help when they needed it and were treated with kindness and understanding. CONCLUSION: The relationship between reported registered staffing levels on postnatal wards and women's experience is uncertain. Further work should be carried out to examine why relationships observed using whole Trust staffing were not replicated closer to the patient, with reported postnatal ward staffing. It is possible that recorded staffing levels on postnatal wards do not actually reflect staff deployment if midwives are floated to cover delivery units. This study highlights the potential contribution of support workers in providing quality care on postnatal wards.

Midwifery and nurse staffing of inpatient maternity services - A systematic scoping review of associations with outcomes and quality of care.

OBJECTIVE: To undertake a scoping literature review of studies examining the quantitative association between staffing levels and outcomes for mothers, neonates, and staff. The purpose was to understand the strength of the available evidence, the direction of effects, and to highlight gaps for future research. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches were conducted in Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBCSCO), Cochrane Library, TRIP, Web of Science and Scopus. STUDY SELECTION AND REVIEW METHODS: To be eligible, staffing levels had to be quantified for in-patient settings, such as ante-natal, labour/delivery or post-natal care. Staff groups included midwives, nurse midwives or equivalent, and assistant staff working under the supervision of professionals. Studies of the quality of care, patient outcomes and staff outcomes were included from all countries. All quantitative designs were included, including controlled trials, time series, cross-sectional, cohort studies and case controlled studies. Data were extracted and sources of bias identified by considering the study design, measurement of exposure and outcomes, and risk adjustment. Studies were grouped by outcome noting the direction and significance of effects. RESULTS: The search yielded a total of 3280 records and 21 studies were included in this review originating from ten countries. There were three randomised controlled trials, eleven cohort studies, one case control study and six cross sectional studies. Seventeen were multicentre studies and nine of them had over 30,000 participants. Reduced incidence of epidural use, augmentation, perineal damage at birth, postpartum haemorrhage, maternal readmission, and neonatal resuscitation were associated with increased midwifery staff. Few studies have suggested a negative impact of increasing staffing rates, although a number of studies have found no significant differences in outcomes. Impact on the mode of birth was unclear. Increasing midwifery assistants was not associated with improved patient outcomes. No studies were found on the impact of low staffing levels for the midwifery workforce. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Although there is some evidence that higher midwifery staffing is associated with improved outcomes, current research is insufficient to inform service planning. Studies mainly reported outcomes relating to labour, highlighting a gap in research evidence for the antenatal and postnatal periods. Further studies are needed to assess the costs and consequences of variations in maternity staffing, including the deployment of maternity assistants and other staff groups.