Essential content for teaching implementation practice in healthcare: a mixed-methods study of teams offering capacity-building initiatives.

BACKGROUND: Applying the knowledge gained through implementation science can support the uptake of research evidence into practice; however, those doing and supporting implementation (implementation practitioners) may face barriers to applying implementation science in their work. One strategy to enhance individuals' and teams' ability to apply implementation science in practice is through training and professional development opportunities (capacity-building initiatives). Although there is an increasing demand for and offerings of implementation practice capacity-building initiatives, there is no universal agreement on what content should be included. In this study we aimed to explore what capacity-building developers and deliverers identify as essential training content for teaching implementation practice. METHODS: We conducted a convergent mixed-methods study with participants who had developed and/or delivered a capacity-building initiative focused on teaching implementation practice. Participants completed an online questionnaire to provide details on their capacity-building initiatives; took part in an interview or focus group to explore their questionnaire responses in depth; and offered course materials for review. We analyzed a subset of data that focused on the capacity-building initiatives' content and curriculum. We used descriptive statistics for quantitative data and conventional content analysis for qualitative data, with the data sets merged during the analytic phase. We presented frequency counts for each category to highlight commonalities and differences across capacity-building initiatives. RESULTS: Thirty-three individuals representing 20 capacity-building initiatives participated. Study participants identified several core content areas included in their capacity-building initiatives: (1) taking a process approach to implementation; (2) identifying and applying implementation theories, models, frameworks, and approaches; (3) learning implementation steps and skills; (4) developing relational skills. In addition, study participants described offering applied and pragmatic content (e.g., tools and resources), and tailoring and evolving the capacity-building initiative content to address emerging trends in implementation science. Study participants highlighted some challenges learners face when acquiring and applying implementation practice knowledge and skills. CONCLUSIONS: This study synthesized what experienced capacity-building initiative developers and deliverers identify as essential content for teaching implementation practice. These findings can inform the development, refinement, and delivery of capacity-building initiatives, as well as future research directions, to enhance the translation of implementation science into practice.

Planning and implementing practice changes in Ontario maternal-newborn hospital units: a secondary qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Moving evidence into practice is complex, and pregnant and birthing people and their infants do not always receive care that aligns with the best available evidence. Implementation science can inform how to effectively move evidence into practice. While there are a growing number of examples of implementation science being studied in maternal-newborn care settings, it remains unknown how real-world teams of healthcare providers and leaders approach the overall implementation process when making practice changes. The purpose of this study was to describe maternal-newborn hospital teams' approaches to implementing practice changes. We aimed to identify what implementation steps teams take (or not) and identify strengths and potential areas for improvement based on best practices in implementation science. METHODS: We conducted a supplementary qualitative secondary analysis of 22 interviews completed in 2014-2015 with maternal-newborn nursing leaders in Ontario, Canada. We used directed content analysis to code the data to seven steps in an implementation framework (Implementation Roadmap): identify the problem and potential best practice; assemble local evidence; select and customize best practice; discover barriers and drivers; tailor implementation strategies; field-test, plan evaluation, prepare to launch; launch, evaluate, and sustain. Frequency counts are presented for each step. RESULTS: Participants reported completing a median of 4.5 of 7 Implementation Roadmap steps (range = 3-7), with the most common being identifying a practice problem. Other steps were described less frequently (e.g., selecting and adapting evidence, field-testing, outcome evaluation) or discussed frequently but not optimally (e.g., barriers assessment). Participants provided examples of how they engaged point-of-care staff throughout the implementation process, but provided fewer examples of engaging pregnant and birthing people and their families. Some participants stated they used a formal framework or process to guide their implementation process, with the most common being quality improvement approaches and tools. CONCLUSIONS: We identified variability across the 22 hospitals in the implementation steps taken. While we observed many strengths, we also identified areas where further support may be needed. Future work is needed to create opportunities and resources to support maternal-newborn healthcare providers and leaders to apply principles and tools from implementation science to their practice change initiatives.

Gestational weight loss and fetal growth in uncomplicated pregnancies among women with obesity: a population-based retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of gestational weight loss (GWL) on fetal growth among women with obesity remains unclear. This study aimed to examine the association between weight loss during pregnancy among women with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2 and the risk of small-for-gestational-age (SGA) and large-for-gestational-age (LGA) neonates. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study of women with pre-pregnancy obesity that resulted in a singleton live birth in 2012-2017, using birth registry data in Ontario, Canada. Women with pregnancy complications or health conditions which could cause weight loss were excluded. GWL is defined as negative gestational weight change (≤0 kg). The association between GWL and fetal growth was estimated using generalized estimating equation models and restricted cubic spline regression analysis. Stratified analysis was conducted by obesity class (I:30-34.9 kg/m2, II:35-39.9 kg/m2, and III + : ≥40 kg/m2). RESULTS: Of the 52,153 eligible women who entered pregnancy with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, 5.3% had GWL. Compared to adequate gestational weight gain, GWL was associated with an increased risk of SGA neonates (aRR:1.45, 95% CI: 1.30-1.60) and a decreased risk of LGA neonates (aRR: 0.81, 95% CI:0.73-0.93). Non-linear L-shaped associations were observed between gestational weight change and SGA neonates, with an increased risk of SGA observed with increased GWL. On the contrary, non-linear S-shaped associations were observed between gestational weight change and LGA neonates, with a decreased risk of LGA observed with increased GWL. Similar findings were observed from the stratified analysis by obesity class. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight that GWL in women with obesity may increase the risk of SGA neonates but reduce the risk of LGA neonates. Recommendations of GWL for women with obesity should be interpreted with caution.

Pregnancy, fetal, and neonatal outcomes after a first booster dose of covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy in Ontario, Canada: population based, retrospective cohort study.

Objective: To assess risk of adverse pregnancy, fetal, and neonatal outcomes after a third dose (first booster dose) of covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy among individuals who had completed both doses of primary covid-19 vaccine series before pregnancy. Design: Population based, retrospective cohort study. Setting: Ontario, Canada, from 20 December 2021 to 31 August 2022. Participants: Individuals were included if they were pregnant with an expected date of delivery from 20 December 2021 (start date of third dose eligibility for everyone ≥18 years) to 31 August 2022, who had completed the two doses of primary covid-19 messenger RNA vaccine series before pregnancy, and became eligible for a third dose (≥six months since dose two) before the end of pregnancy. Main outcome measures: Pregnancy outcomes included hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, placental abruption, caesarean delivery, chorioamnionitis, and postpartum hemorrhage. Fetal and neonatal outcomes included stillbirth, preterm birth, admission to neonatal intensive care unit for >24 h, newborn 5 min Apgar score <7, and small-for-gestational age infant (<10th percentile). We estimated hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for study outcomes, treating dose three as a time varying exposure and adjusting for confounding using inverse probability weighting. Results: Among 32 689 births, 18 491 (56.6%) were born to individuals who received a third covid-19 dose during pregnancy. Compared with eligible individuals who did not receive a third dose during pregnancy, no increased risks were associated with receiving a third covid-19 vaccine dose during pregnancy for placental abruption (adjusted hazard ratio 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.70 to 1.02)), chorioamnionitis (0.67 (0.49 to 0.90)), postpartum haemorrhage (1.01 (0.89 to 1.16)), caesarean delivery (0.90 (0.87 to 0.94)), stillbirth (0.56 (0.39 to 0.81)), preterm birth (0.91 (0.84 to 0.99)), neonatal intensive care unit admission (0.96 (0.90 to 1.03)), 5 min Apgar score<7 (0.96 (0.82 to 1.14)), or small-for-gestational age infant (0.86 (0.79 to 0.93)). Conclusion: Receipt of a third covid-19 vaccine dose during pregnancy was not associated with an increased risk of adverse pregnancy, fetal, or neonatal outcomes. These findings can help to inform evidence based decision making about the risks and benefits of covid-19 booster doses during pregnancy.

Temporal trends and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine series initiation after recent pregnancy.

During the rapid deployment of COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, safety concerns may have led some pregnant individuals to postpone vaccination until after giving birth. This study aimed to describe temporal patterns and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine series initiation after recent pregnancy in Ontario, Canada. Using the provincial birth registry linked with the COVID-19 vaccine database, we identified all individuals who gave birth between January 1 and December 31, 2021, and had not yet been vaccinated by the end of pregnancy, and followed them to June 30, 2022 (follow-up ranged from 6 to 18 months). We used cumulative incidence curves to describe COVID-19 vaccine initiation after pregnancy and assessed associations with sociodemographic, pregnancy-related, and health behavioral factors using Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Among 137,198 individuals who gave birth in 2021, 87,376 (63.7%) remained unvaccinated at the end of pregnancy; of these, 65.0% initiated COVID-19 vaccination by June 30, 2022. Lower maternal age (<25 vs. 30-34 y aHR: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.70-0.77), smoking during pregnancy (vs. nonsmoking aHR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.65-0.72), lower neighborhood income (lowest quintile vs. highest aHR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.76-0.83), higher material deprivation (highest quintile vs. lowest aHR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.70-0.79), and exclusive breastfeeding (vs. other feeding aHR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.79-0.84) were associated with lower likelihood of vaccine initiation. Among unvaccinated individuals who gave birth in 2021, COVID-19 vaccine initiation after pregnancy reached 65% by June 30, 2022, suggesting persistent issues with vaccine hesitancy and/or access to vaccination in this population.

Understanding how and under what circumstances integrated knowledge translation works for people engaged in collaborative research: metasynthesis of IKTRN casebooks.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Interaction and collaboration between researchers, patients/public, clinicians, managers and policy-makers are necessary to enhance the relevance and use of research, improve planning, and optimize healthcare delivery and outcomes. The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network (IKTRN) published four casebooks from 2019 to 2021, describing varied approaches to research co-production. Our aim was to examine the case studies to extend existing theoretical and empirical perspectives about how co-production works. METHODS: We used metasynthesis, a qualitative research design that includes seven iterative steps (clarify the purpose, delineate the case studies included, extract and code the data, derive themes from the coded data, determine the relationships of the themes to research co-production, synthesize the concepts, and build theory). RESULTS: A total of 35 cases was reviewed. The aggregate findings of this metasynthesis identified multiple contextual and process factors, barriers, and facilitators that influence integrated knowledge translation (IKT), and a range of IKT activities that increased the likelihood of success of co-production during research. In comparing the findings from the metasynthesis with existing literature, we found a number of consistencies, but also new information about barriers, facilitators, IKT activities and outcomes, thereby adding to our understanding about factors that influence co-production. CONCLUSIONS: This metasynthesis provided concrete examples to optimize co-produced clinical and health system research. More research is needed to fully understand how to overcome some challenging modifiable barriers, establish relationships, facilitate communication, overcome power differentials and create processes for knowledge-users working across boundaries (clinical practice and research) to stay engaged and participate fully in research endeavours.

Temporal trends and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine coverage and series initiation during pregnancy in Ontario, Canada, December 2020 to December 2021: A population-based retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Population-based COVID-19 vaccine coverage estimates among pregnant individuals are limited. We assessed temporal patterns in vaccine coverage (≥1 dose before or during pregnancy) and evaluated factors associated with vaccine series initiation (receiving dose 1 during pregnancy) in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We linked the provincial birth registry with COVID-19 vaccination records from December 14, 2020 to December 31, 2021 and assessed coverage rates among all pregnant individuals by month, age, and neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics. Among individuals who gave birth since April 2021-when pregnant people were prioritized for vaccination-we assessed associations between sociodemographic, behavioral, and pregnancy-related factors with vaccine series initiation using multivariable regression to estimate adjusted risk ratios (aRR) and risk differences (aRD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Among 221,190 pregnant individuals, vaccine coverage increased to 71.2% by December 2021. Gaps in coverage across categories of age and sociodemographic characteristics decreased over time, but did not disappear. Lower vaccine series initiation was associated with lower age (<25 vs. 30-34 years: aRR 0.53, 95%CI 0.51-0.56), smoking (vs. non-smoking: 0.64, 0.61-0.67), no first trimester prenatal care visit (vs. visit: 0.80, 0.77-0.84), and residing in neighborhoods with the lowest income (vs. highest: 0.69, 0.67-0.71). Vaccine series initiation was marginally higher among individuals with pre-existing medical conditions (vs. no conditions: 1.07, 1.04-1.10). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine coverage among pregnant individuals remained lower than in the general population, and there was lower vaccine initiation by multiple characteristics.

Worries, beliefs and factors influencing perinatal COVID-19 vaccination: a cross-sectional survey of preconception, pregnant and lactating individuals.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines are recommended for pregnant and lactating individuals, and there is substantial evidence for their safety and effectiveness. As the pandemic continues, information on worries and beliefs surrounding perinatal COVID-19 vaccination remains important to inform efforts aimed at improving vaccine uptake. Our objectives were to assess factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination among perinatal individuals; and to explore motivational factors associated with willingness to be vaccinated among unvaccinated perinatal individuals. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional web-based survey of preconception, pregnant, and lactating individuals in Canada. The outcomes of interest were vaccination with at least one dose of any COVID-19 vaccine and willingness to be vaccinated among unvaccinated individuals. Sample characteristics were summarized using frequencies and percentages. The association between eight prespecified risk factors and two outcomes (vaccination status and willingness to be vaccinated) was assessed by logistic regression. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the total sample, and across perinatal sub-groups. RESULTS: Among 3446 survey respondents, there were 447 (13.0%) preconception, 1832 (53.2%) pregnant, and 1167 (42.4%) lactating. There were 1460 (42.4%) and 1982 (57.5%) who were vaccinated and unvaccinated, respectively. Factors positively associated with COVID-19 vaccine status were speaking to a healthcare provider about vaccination during the perinatal period (aOR:2.35, 95% CI:1.97-2.80) and believing that the COVID-19 vaccine is effective (aOR:1.91, 95% CI:1.46-2.48). Factors negatively associated with vaccine status included worries about fetal growth and development (aOR:0.55, 95% CI:0.43-0.70) and future child behavioral/neurodevelopmental problems (aOR:0.59, 95% CI:0.46-0.75). Among unvaccinated individuals specifically, characteristics positively associated with willingness to vaccinate were speaking to a healthcare provider (aOR:1.67, 95% CI:1.32-2.12) and believing the COVID-19 vaccine is effective (aOR:3.56, 95% CI:2.70-4.69). Factors negatively associated with willingness were concerns over infertility (aOR:0.66, 95% CI:0.49-0.88), fetal growth and development (aOR:0.33, 95% CI:0.24-0.46), and future child behavioral/neurodevelopmental problems (aOR:0.64, 95% CI:0.48-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: In this Canadian perinatal population, approximately 42% reported COVID-19 vaccination. Among unvaccinated individuals, willingness to receive vaccination was high (73%). Factors enhancing vaccine willingness included discussions with healthcare providers and believing the vaccine was effective. Concerns regarding vaccine safety, particularly with respect to fetal/child development, were the greatest barriers to vaccine uptake.

Risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, and stillbirth after covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy: population based retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, and stillbirth after covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy. DESIGN: Population based retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Ontario, Canada, 1 May to 31 December 2021. PARTICIPANTS: All liveborn and stillborn infants from pregnancies conceived at least 42 weeks before the end of the study period and with gestational age ≥20 weeks or birth weight ≥500 g. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Using Cox regression, hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for preterm birth before 37 weeks (overall and spontaneous preterm birth), very preterm birth (<32 weeks), small for gestational age at birth (<10th centile), and stillbirth. Vaccination against covid-19 was treated as a time varying exposure in the outcome specific risk window, and propensity score weighting was used to adjust hazard ratios for potential confounding. RESULTS: Among 85 162 births, 43 099 (50.6%) occurred in individuals who received one dose or more of a covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy-42 979 (99.7%) received an mRNA vaccine. Vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with any increased risk of overall preterm birth (6.5% among vaccinated v 6.9% among unvaccinated; adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.08), spontaneous preterm birth (3.7% v 4.4%; 0.96, 0.90 to 1.03), or very preterm birth (0.59% v 0.89%; 0.80, 0.67 to 0.95). No increase was found in risk of small for gestational age at birth (9.1% v 9.2%; 0.98, 0.93 to 1.03) or stillbirth (0.25% v 0.44%; 0.65, 0.51 to 0.84). Findings were similar by trimester of vaccination, mRNA vaccine product, and number of doses received during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that vaccination against covid-19 during pregnancy is not associated with a higher risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, or stillbirth.

Obstetrical safety indicators for preventing hospital harms in low risk births: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Optimising the safety of obstetric patient care is a primary concern for many hospitals. Performance indicators measuring aspects of patient care processes can lead to improvements in health systems and the prevention of harm to the patient. We present our protocol for a scoping review to identify indicators for obstetric safety in low risk births. We aim to identify indicators addressing preventable hospital harms, to summarise the data and synthesise results. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use methods described by Arksey and O'Malley and further expanded by Levac et al. We will search electronic databases such as Medline, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library, and websites from professional bodies and other organisations, using an iterative search strategy.Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts of search results to determine eligibility for inclusion. If eligibility is not clear, the reviewers will screen the full text version. If reviewers' decisions regarding eligibility differ, a third reviewer will review the record. Two reviewers will independently extract data from records that meet our inclusion criteria using a standardised data collection form. We will narratively describe quantitative data, such as the frequency with which indicators are identified, and conduct a thematic analysis of the qualitative data. We will compile a comprehensive list of patient safety indicators and organise them according to concepts that best suit the data such as the Donabedian model or the Hospital Harm Framework. We will discuss the implications for future research, clinical practice and policy-making. We will report the conduct of the review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews checklist. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The sources of information included in this scoping review will be available to the public. Therefore, ethics approval is not warranted. We will disseminate results in a peer-reviewed publication, conference/event presentation(s) and stakeholder communications.

Use of a maternal newborn audit and feedback system in Ontario: a collective case study.

BACKGROUND: As part of a larger study examining the effectiveness of the Maternal Newborn Dashboard, an electronic audit and feedback system to improve maternal-newborn care practices and outcomes, the purpose of this study was to increase our understanding of factors explaining variability in performance after implementation of the Dashboard in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: A collective case study. A maximum variation sampling approach was used to invite hospitals reflecting different criteria to participate in a 1-day to 2-day site visit by the research team. The visits included: (1) semistructured interviews and focus groups with healthcare providers, leaders and personnel involved in clinical change processes; (2) observations and document review. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative content analysis was used to code and categorise the data. RESULTS: Between June and November 2016, we visited 14 maternal-newborn hospitals. Hospitals were grouped into four quadrants based on their key indicator performance and level of engagement with the Dashboard. Findings revealed four overarching themes that contribute to the varying success of sites in achieving practice change on the Dashboard key performance indicators, namely, interdisciplinary collaboration and accountability, application of formal change strategies, team trust and use of evidence and data, as well as alignment with organisational priorities and support. CONCLUSION: The diversity of facilitators and barriers across the 14 hospitals highlights the need to go beyond a 'one size fits all' approach when implementing audit and feedback systems. Future work to identify tools to assess barriers to practice change and to evaluate the effects of cointerventions to optimise audit and feedback systems for clinical practice change is needed.

Roles, processes, and outcomes of interprofessional shared decision-making in a neonatal intensive care unit: A qualitative study.

Shared decision-making provides an opportunity for the knowledge and skills of care providers to synergistically influence patient care. Little is known about interprofessional shared decision-making processes in critical care settings. The aim of this study was to explore interprofessional team members' perspectives about the nature of interprofessional shared decision-making in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and to determine if there are any differences in perspectives across professional groups. An exploratory qualitative approach was used consisting of semi-structured interviews with 22 members of an interprofessional team working in a tertiary care NICU in Canada. Participants identified four key roles involved in interprofessional shared decision-making: leader, clinical experts, parents, and synthesizer. Participants perceived that interprofessional shared decision-making happens through collaboration, sharing, and weighing the options, the evidence and the credibility of opinions put forward. The process of interprofessional shared decision-making leads to a well-informed decision and participants feeling valued. Findings from this study identified key concepts of interprofessional shared decision-making, increased awareness of differing professional perspectives about this process of shared decision-making, and clarified understanding of the different roles involved in the decision-making process in an NICU.

Effect of a population-level performance dashboard intervention on maternal-newborn outcomes: an interrupted time series study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of the Maternal Newborn Dashboard on six key clinical performance indicators in the province of Ontario, Canada. DESIGN: Interrupted time series using population-based data from the provincial birth registry covering a 3-year period before implementation of the Dashboard and 2.5 years after implementation (November 2009 through March 2015). SETTING: All hospitals in the province of Ontario providing maternal-newborn care (n=94). INTERVENTION: A hospital-based online audit and feedback programme. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of the six performance indicators included in the Dashboard. RESULTS: 2.5 years after implementation, the audit and feedback programme was associated with statistically significant absolute decreases in the rates of episiotomy (decrease of 1.5 per 100 women, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.39), induction for postdates in women who were less than 41 weeks at delivery (decrease of 11.7 per 100 women, 95% CI 7.4 to 16.0), repeat caesarean delivery in low-risk women performed before 39 weeks (decrease of 10.4 per 100 women, 95% CI 9.3 to 11.5) and an absolute increase in the rate of appropriately timed group B streptococcus screening (increase of 2.8 per 100, 95% CI 2.2 to 3.5). The audit and feedback programme did not significantly affect the rates of unsatisfactory newborn screening blood samples or formula supplementation at discharge. No statistically significant effects were observed for the two internal control outcomes or the four external control indicators-in fact, two external control indicators (episiotomy and postdates induction) worsened relative to before implementation. CONCLUSION: An electronic audit and feedback programme implemented in maternal-newborn hospitals was associated with clinically relevant practice improvements at the provincial level in the majority of targeted indicators.

Women's perspectives of the fetal fibronectin testing process: a qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: In 2009 the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care funded the implementation of province-wide fetal fibronectin testing in Ontario hospitals. This paper reports results from the provincial evaluation that sought to describe the experience of fetal fibronectin testing from the perspective of women with symptoms of preterm labour. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative design was used, employing semi-structured telephone and face-to-face interviews with women who had fetal fibronectin testing. RESULTS: Five hospitals participated in recruiting women for the study and 17 women were interviewed. Women described their experiences of fetal fibronectin testing as an emotional process that moves from expecting, to feeling, to hoping for reassurance; and then to re-defining what is required to feel reassured. Women described feeling anxious while waiting for fetal fibronectin results. When test results were negative, women described feeling a sense of relief that their symptoms would not likely lead to an imminent preterm birth. Women with positive results expressed feeling reassured by the care decisions and quick action taken by the health care team. CONCLUSION: Fetal fibronectin testing was acceptable and beneficial to these women with symptoms of preterm labour. Implications for practice and future research are suggested.

Measuring quality in maternal-newborn care: developing a clinical dashboard.

Pregnancy, birth, and the early newborn period are times of high use of health care services. As well as opportunities for providing quality care, there are potential missed opportunities for health promotion, safety issues, and increased costs for the individual and the system when quality is not well defined or measured. There has been a need to identify key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure quality care within the provincial maternal-newborn system. We also wanted to provide automated audit and feedback about these KPIs to support quality improvement initiatives in a large Canadian province with approximately 140 000 births per year. We therefore worked to develop a maternal-newborn dashboard to increase awareness about selected KPIs and to inform and support hospitals and care providers about areas for quality improvement. We mapped maternal-newborn data elements to a quality domain framework, sought feedback via survey for the relevance and feasibility of change, and examined current data and the literature to assist in setting provincial benchmarks. Six clinical performance indicators of maternal-newborn quality care were identified and evidence-informed benchmarks were set. A maternal-newborn dashboard with "drill down" capacity for detailed analysis to enhance audit and feedback is now available for implementation. While audit and feedback does not guarantee individuals or institutions will make practice changes and move towards quality improvement, it is an important first step. Practice change and quality improvement will not occur without an awareness of the issues.