Adapting obstetric and neonatal services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The provision of care to pregnant persons and neonates must continue through pandemics. To maintain quality of care, while minimizing physical contact during the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-related Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV2) pandemic, hospitals and international organizations issued recommendations on maternity and neonatal care delivery and restructuring of clinical and academic services. Early in the pandemic, recommendations relied on expert opinion, and offered a one-size-fits-all set of guidelines. Our aim was to examine these recommendations and provide the rationale and context to guide clinicians, administrators, educators, and researchers, on how to adapt maternity and neonatal services during the pandemic, regardless of jurisdiction. METHOD: Our initial database search used Medical subject headings and free-text search terms related to coronavirus infections, pregnancy and neonatology, and summarized relevant recommendations from international society guidelines. Subsequent targeted searches to December 30, 2020, included relevant publications in general medical and obstetric journals, and updated society recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 846 titles and abstracts, of which 105 English-language publications fulfilled eligibility criteria and were included in our study. A multidisciplinary team representing clinicians from various disciplines, academics, administrators and training program directors critically appraised the literature to collate recommendations by multiple jurisdictions, including a quaternary care Canadian hospital, to provide context and rationale for viable options. INTERPRETATION: There are different schools of thought regarding effective practices in obstetric and neonatal services. Our critical review presents the rationale to effectively modify services, based on the phase of the pandemic, the prevalence of infection in the population, and resource availability.

Quality of labor epidural analgesia at a high-volume tertiary care obstetric unit: a before-and-after study.

INTRODUCTION: We wanted to better understand the quality of our labor epidural practice at a large urban academic medical center. Several practice changes were implemented between 2011 and 2017, namely a more uniform epidural loading dose of local anesthetic that includes fentanyl, an increase in both the hourly baseline offer and maximum allowed hourly amount of bupivacaine, and the change from a continuous epidural infusion to a programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) regimen. We aimed to assess the impact of those changes on the quality of labor analgesia. METHODS: We performed two separate audits representing before-and-after groups. The audits were performed in November 2011 (before group) and November-December 2017 (after group). The data for 2011 were extracted from a previously published study. Hence, we conducted a similar audit in 2017, including only outcomes that were included in the previous audit. The primary outcome was the presence of pain >3 (Numerical Rating Scale 0-10) at any time during first or second stage of labor. Secondary outcomes included top-up requirements, and women's pain perception during the first and second stage of labor according to a postpartum questionnaire. RESULTS: We studied 294 and 247 women in the before-and-after groups, respectively. The proportion of women reporting pain >3/10 at any time during labor and delivery significantly decreased in the after group (30% vs 41%; p<0.01). In an adjusted analysis, there was a 35% reduction in the likelihood of pain scores>3 for the after group (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46, 0.94). Women in the after group received fewer top-ups by nurses (3% vs 24%, p<0.001). Most women in both cohorts (85% before and 87% after) were satisfied with the overall quality of analgesia. DISCUSSION: A bundle of practice changes implemented in our clinical practice, including the PIEB regimen, has resulted in a significant improvement in the quality of labor analgesia. However, despite all the implemented changes, 30% of women still experience pain during labor and further optimization of our practice is warranted.

Barriers to collaborative anesthetic care between anesthesiologists and nurses on the labour and delivery unit: a study using a modified Delphi technique.

INTRODUCTION: The practice of obstetrical anesthesia relies on collaborative effort between anesthesiologists and nurses, but teamwork remains a challenge. We sought to identify a consensus on the perceived barriers to collaborative care between anesthesiologists and perinatal nurses in a Canadian tertiary labour and delivery (L&D) unit. METHODS: A cross-sectional consensus-building study was conducted using a modified Delphi technique. We aimed to reach consensus on the barriers to collaborative care as well as to identify the reasons behind the issues and possible interventions. This technique involved conducting four parallel sequential rounds of questionnaires: Round 1 - posing open-ended questions to nurses and anesthesiologists; Round 2 - establishing an initial within-group consensus; Round 3 - conducting a cross-over round to determine the interprofessional consensus and the remaining anesthesia and nursing consensuses; Round 4 - ranking to identify the top three barriers identified by the three consensuses. RESULTS: Twenty-one anesthesiologists and 15 nurses were recruited. Themes of barriers to collaboration included issues on professionalism, availability, dissonance, team coordination, communication, organizational structure, educational gaps, and role clarity. The top two barriers from the interprofessional consensus were communication issues. DISCUSSION: Anesthesiologists and nurses at our tertiary L&D unit identified communication as a major barrier to collaborative care. This study also shows the feasibly of using the modified Delphi technique in L&D units seeking to improve collaborative care.

The Impact of Standardized Acuity Assessment and a Fast-Track on Length of Stay in Obstetric Triage: A Quality Improvement Study.

To prospectively assess the impact of a standardized 5-category Obstetrical Triage Acuity Scale (OTAS) and a fast-track for lower-acuity patients on patient flow. Length of stay (LOS) data of women presenting to obstetric triage were abstracted from the electronic medical record prior to (July 1, 2011, to March 30, 2012) and following OTAS implementation (April 1 to December 31, 2012). Following computerized simulation modeling, a fast-track for lower acuity women was implemented (January 1, 2013, to February 28, 2014). Prior to OTAS implementation (8085 visits), the median LOS was 105 (interquartile range [IQR] = 52-178) minutes. Following OTAS implementation (8131 visits), the median LOS decreased to 101 (IQR = 49-175) minutes (P = .04). The LOS did not correlate well with acuity. Simulation modeling predicted that a fast-track for OTAS 4 and 5 patients would reduce the LOS. The LOS for lower-acuity patients in the fast-track decreased to 73 (IQR = 40-140) minutes (P = .005). In addition, the overall LOS (12 576 visits) decreased to 98 (IQR = 47-172) minutes (6.9% reduction; P < .001). Standardized assessment of acuity and a fast-track for lower acuity pregnant women decreased the overall LOS and the LOS of lower-acuity patients.

Acuity Assessment in Obstetrical Triage.

OBJECTIVE: A five-category Obstetrical Triage Acuity Scale (OTAS) was developed with a comprehensive set of obstetrical determinants. The purposes of this study were: (1) to compare the inter-rater reliability (IRR) in tertiary and community hospital settings and measure the intra-rater reliability (ITR) of OTAS; (2) to establish the validity of OTAS; and (3) to present the first revision of OTAS from the National Obstetrical Triage Working Group. METHODS: To assess IRR, obstetrical triage nurses were randomly selected from London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC) (n = 8), Stratford General Hospital (n = 11), and Chatham General Hospital (n= 7) to assign acuity levels to clinical scenarios based on actual patient visits. At LHSC, a group of nurses were retested at nine months to measure ITR. To assess validity, OTAS acuity level was correlated with measures of resource utilization. RESULTS: OTAS has significant and comparable IRR in a tertiary care hospital and in two community hospitals. Repeat assessment in a cohort of nurses demonstrated significant ITR. Acuity level correlated significantly with performance of routine and second order laboratory investigations, point of care ultrasound, nursing work load, and health care provider attendance. A National Obstetrical Triage Working Group was formed and guided the first revision. Four acuity modifiers were added based on hemodynamics, respiratory distress, cervical dilatation, and fetal well-being. CONCLUSION: OTAS is the first obstetrical triage scale with established reliability and validity. OTAS enables standardized assessments of acuity within and across institutions. Further, it facilitates assessment of patient care and flow based on acuity.

Women's Satisfaction With Obstetric Triage Services.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the satisfaction of pregnant women who presented at a triage unit in an obstetric birthing care unit with obstetric triage services. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive with conventional content analysis. SETTING: Individual audio recorded telephone interviews with women after discharge from a tertiary care hospital's obstetric triage unit. PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sample of 19 pregnant women who had received obstetric triage services. METHODS: A semi-structured interview guide was used for data collection. All interviews were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis was consistent with qualitative content analysis with open coding to categorize and develop themes to describe women's satisfaction with triage services and care. RESULTS: Five themes, Triage Unit Environment, Triage Staff Attitude and Behavior, Triage Team Function, Nursing Care Received in Triage and Time Spent in Triage, illustrated the women's recent triage experiences. Overall the women were very satisfied with the triage services. Women appreciated a caring approach from triage nurses, being informed about the well-being of themselves and their fetuses, being closely monitored, and effective teamwork among the members of the health care team. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that a humanizing, caring approach by the inter-professional team offering obstetric triage services contributed to women's satisfaction and woman-centered care.

Implementing an obstetric triage acuity scale: interrater reliability and patient flow analysis.

A 5-category Obstetric Triage Acuity Scale (OTAS) was developed with a comprehensive set of obstetrical determinants. The objectives of this study were as follows: (1) to test the interrater reliability of OTAS and (2) to determine the distribution of patient acuity and flow by OTAS level. To test the interrater reliability, 110 triage charts were used to generate vignettes and the consistency of the OTAS level assigned by 8 triage nurses was measured. OTAS performed with substantial (Kappa, 0.61 - 0.77, OTAS 1-4) and near perfect correlation (0.87, OTAS 5). To assess patient flow, the times to primary and secondary health care provider assessments and lengths of stay stratified by acuity were abstracted from the patient management system. Two-thirds of triage visits were low acuity (OTAS 4, 5). There was a decrease in length of stay (median [interquartile range], minutes) as acuity decreased from OTAS 1 (120.0 [156.0] minutes) to OTAS 3 (75.0 [120.8]). The major contributor to length of stay was time to secondary health care provider assessment and this did not change with acuity. The percentage of patients admitted to the antenatal or birthing unit decreased from 80% (OTAS 1) to 12% (OTAS 5). OTAS provides a reliable assessment of acuity and its implementation has allowed for triaging of obstetric patients based on acuity, and a more in-depth assessment of the patient flow. By standardizing assessment, OTAS allows for opportunities to improve performance and make comparisons of patient care and flow across organizations.