SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Exploring clinicians' perspectives on the 'Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury Care Bundle' national quality improvement programme: a qualitative study.

Bidwell, P; Thakar, R; Gurol-Urganci, I; Harris, JM; Silverton, L; Hellyer, A; Freeman, R; Morris, E; Novis, V; Sevdalis, N (2020) Exploring clinicians' perspectives on the 'Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury Care Bundle' national quality improvement programme: a qualitative study. BMJ Open, 10 (9). e035674. ISSN 2044-6055 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035674
SGUL Authors: Thakar, Ranee

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASI) can have severe debilitating consequences to women and health systems. The OASI Care Bundle quality improvement programme was introduced in 16 maternity units across England, Scotland and Wales (January 2017 to March 2018) to address increasing OASI rates. OBJECTIVES: To explore clinicians' (midwives' and obstetricians') perspectives of the OASI Care Bundle with respect to (1) acceptability, (2) feasibility, and (3) sustainability. DESIGN: A qualitative exploratory study using focus groups methodology. SETTING: A total of 16 focus groups were conducted in 16 maternity units in England, Scotland and Wales where the OASI Care Bundle was implemented. Focus groups took place approximately 3 months following initial implementation of the care bundle in each unit. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 101 clinicians participated, with an average of six per focus group. Participants volunteered to take part and compromised of 37 obstetricians and 64 midwives (including eight students). The majority were female and the mean age was 36.5 years. RESULTS: Four main themes emerged: 'Implementation strategies', 'Opportunities to use the OASI Care Bundle', 'Does current practice need to change?' and 'Perceptions of what women want'. Midwives were more likely than obstetricians to report themes alluding to 'what women want' and variations in intrapartum perineal protection techniques. Both professional groups reported similar views of other themes, in particular regarding the supporting clinical evidence. Gaps were identified in clinicians' knowledge and experience of intrapartum perineal management. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of the OASI Care Bundle was associated with a number of cognitive and interpersonal factors, such as personal values, interprofessional working and how the intervention was launched; which both facilitated and impeded adoption. The 'what women want' theme has implications for maternal autonomy and needs further exploration. Our findings can be used by similar initiatives to reduce perineal trauma both nationally and internationally. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISCTRN 12143325; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12143325.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Keywords: maternal medicine, qualitative research, quality in health care, urogynaecology
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute (MCS)
Journal or Publication Title: BMJ Open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Language: eng
Dates:
DateEvent
9 September 2020Published
30 June 2020Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0
PubMed ID: 32907894
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/112453
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035674

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item