Literature DB >> 24820002

A national cross sectional survey of heads of midwifery services of uptake, benefits and barriers to use of obstetric early warning systems (EWS) by midwives.

Debra E Bick1, Jane Sandall2, Marie Furuta3, Michael Y K Wee4, Richard Isaacs5, Gary B Smith6, Sarah Beake7.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: to identify the extent to which Early Warning Systems (EWS) are used by midwives in the United Kingdom (UK), the maternity settings they are used in, physiological parameters used to 'trigger' referral, training provision, barriers to implementation and role in preventing maternal morbidity.
DESIGN: cross-sectional survey of heads of midwifery services. An email questionnaire was sent in September 2012.
SETTING: UK NHS secondary care organisations providing maternity care.
FINDINGS: heads of midwifery from 107 (68%) of 157 NHS organisations responded, with 108 questionnaires returned as two organisations had recently merged. All organisations, apart from one which only had a free-standing midwifery unit, had introduced EWS. Nearly all respondents (99%) reported EWS were used by midwives antenatally, 76% in labour and 100% on the postnatal ward. All EWS charts included body temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, systolic blood pressure and oxygen saturation although parameters for escalation varied widely. Barriers to use of EWS by midwives included overlap with the partogram in labour, and staff shortages and delays obtaining clinical review when referral was triggered. Two-thirds considered EWS prevented maternal morbidity although few could provide supporting evidence, for example, audit findings. Training for midwives in use of EWS was available in 83% of organisations.
CONCLUSION: most UK midwives are using EWS, with the highest use in obstetric units. The heterogeneity of EWS currently used potentially limits collation of evidence to inform appropriate system level responses. Research is needed to evaluate the role of EWS to prevent maternal morbidity during and after pregnancy in different maternity settings.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Adverse events; Maternal morbidity; Midwifery; Obstetric Early Warning Systems; Patient safety

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24820002     DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2014.03.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Midwifery        ISSN: 0266-6138            Impact factor:   2.372


  6 in total

Review 1.  Physiological track-and-trigger/early warning systems for use in maternity care.

Authors:  Valerie Smith; Louise C Kenny; Jane Sandall; Declan Devane; Maria Noonan
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-13

2.  Modified early obstetric warning scores: A promising tool but more evidence and standardization is required.

Authors:  Tanya Robbins; Andrew Shennan; Jane Sandall
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 3.636

Review 3.  Implementation science in maternity care: a scoping review.

Authors:  Ann Dadich; Annika Piper; Dominiek Coates
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 7.327

4.  Early warning systems in maternity care: protocol for a qualitative evidence synthesis of maternity care providers' views and experiences.

Authors:  Valerie Smith; Kumaresan Cithambaram; Deirdre O'Malley
Journal:  HRB Open Res       Date:  2021-05-27

5.  Screening for infectious maternal morbidity - knowledge, attitudes and perceptions among healthcare providers and managers in Malawi: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Emilia Slezak; Holger Unger; Luis Gadama; Mary McCauley
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 3.105

6.  Midwives' experiences of performing maternal observations and escalating concerns: a focus group study.

Authors:  Justine Jeffery; Alistair Hewison; Laura Goodwin; Sara Kenyon
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2017-09-02       Impact factor: 3.007

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.