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.

The development and study of the effectiveness of a novel uterine contraction learning aid: A two-phase research study.

BACKGROUND: Nursing students lack clinical experience in assessing intrapartum uterine activity, rating their ability and level of understanding as low or fair despite receiving theoretical instruction prior to attending clinical placements. Teaching model/aids may facilitate learning, however, purchasing additional models could prove expensive within many organisations. Limited exposure to skills rehearsal in school may contribute to student anxiety, stress, and perceived low self-efficacy when in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: To develop and assess the effectiveness of a novel Uterine Contraction Learning Aid as a training tool to expand the knowledge, attitude, and practice of nursing students. METHODS: A two-phase study conducted at The Institute of Nursing in Thailand. Phase I was underpinned by research and development. After first being considered for its quality, by five experts comprising an obstetrician, two midwives and two nursing instructors, the novel Uterine Contraction Learning Aid was assessed by 30 fourth-year nursing students with experience in assessing uterine contractions for its educational suitability. Phase II - Sixty year-three nursing students were assigned via matched-pairs to either an experimental or control group to evaluate the effectiveness of the Uterine Contraction Learning Aid, completing three questionnaires underpinned by the knowledge, attitude, and practice concept. RESULTS: Phase I- Descriptive statistics applied to survey responses indicate participants rated the quality of the Uterine Contraction Learning Aid highly in every aspect of learning skills, and perceptions of confidence. The overall production was rated at a good level. Phase II - An independent sample t-test was used to compare knowledge, attitude, and practice values in assessing uterine contractions between control and experimental groups. Participants in the experiment group had significantly higher scores in knowledge and practice when assessing uterine contractions compared to the control group (t = 4.768, p < 0.000 vs. t = 3.630, p < 0.001, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in attitudes in relation to assessing uterine contractions between the two groups (t = 0.188, p = 0.852). CONCLUSIONS: The novel Uterine Contraction Learning Aid can be used effectively to prepare nursing students prior to practicing with women undergoing intrapartum care.

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.

Effective support following recurrent pregnancy loss: a randomized controlled feasibility and acceptability study.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is it feasible to perform a future definitive trial to determine the effectiveness of the positive reappraisal coping intervention (PRCI) in improving the psychological well-being of women with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) during the early stages of a new pregnancy? DESIGN: This mixed method study aimed to establish the feasibility of conducting a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) to definitively test the effects of the PRCI on the psychological well-being of women with RPL. Participants (n = 75) were recruited to the study and at the point of a positive pregnancy test, 47 were randomized into two study groups. The intervention group received the PRCI and weekly questionnaire assessment (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Weekly Record Keeping Form [WRK]) to monitor psychological well-being; the control group received the same questionnaires. Nested within the RCT was a qualitative process evaluation (QPE) exploring participants' subjective experience of study methods and the intervention. The study was conducted over a two-year period between 2014 and 2016. RESULTS: This study successfully gathered knowledge about the feasibility aspects of conducting a future multicentre definitive study to determine the effects of the PRCI on the psychological well-being of women with RPL. Participants were receptive to its use and the intervention appeared to convey benefits with no apparent downside. CONCLUSIONS: The study concluded that a definitive RCT of the PRCI is possible and that the model of care already has the potential to be made more widely available as a safe, low-cost, convenient and easily deliverable intervention to provide much-needed support to a vulnerable patient population.

Hope for the best but expect the worst: a qualitative study to explore how women with recurrent miscarriage experience the early waiting period of a new pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how women experience the initial period of a new pregnancy after suffering recurrent miscarriage (RM). DESIGN: A qualitative study, nested within a randomised controlled feasibility study of a coping intervention for RM, used semi-structured face-to-face interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic network approach. SETTING: Participants were recruited from the Recurrent Miscarriage Clinic and Early Pregnancy Unit in two tertiary referral hospitals in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 14 women with RMs and who had previously participated in the randomised controlled trial (RCT) feasibility component of the study were recruited. RESULTS: Seven organising themes emerged from the data: (1) turmoil of emotions, (2) preparing for the worst, (3) setting of personal milestones, (4) hypervigilance, (5) social isolation, (6) adoption of pragmatic approaches, (7) need for professional affirmation. CONCLUSIONS: The study established that for women with a history of RM, the waiting period of a new pregnancy is a traumatic time of great uncertainty and emotional turmoil and one in which they express a need for emotional support. Consideration should be given to the manner in which supportive care is best delivered within the constraints of current health service provision. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN43571276.