A Care Bundle Aiming to Reduce the Risk of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury: A Survey of Women's Experiences

IF 4.7 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Magdalena Jurczuk, Lizzie Phillips, Posy Bidwell, Dorian Martinez, Louise Silverton, Nick Sevdalis, Jan van der Meulen, Ipek Gurol-Urganci, Ranee Thakar
{"title":"A Care Bundle Aiming to Reduce the Risk of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury: A Survey of Women's Experiences","authors":"Magdalena Jurczuk,&nbsp;Lizzie Phillips,&nbsp;Posy Bidwell,&nbsp;Dorian Martinez,&nbsp;Louise Silverton,&nbsp;Nick Sevdalis,&nbsp;Jan van der Meulen,&nbsp;Ipek Gurol-Urganci,&nbsp;Ranee Thakar","doi":"10.1111/1471-0528.18029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To study experiences of women who gave birth in maternity units that have implemented a ‘care bundle’ quality improvement initiative to reduce obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) and associated morbidity.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Postnatal electronic questionnaire.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Setting</h3>\n \n <p>Twenty-nine maternity units across England, Scotland and Wales.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Population</h3>\n \n <p>Women with live vaginal births.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Descriptive statistics for quantitative results. Analysis of free-text responses informed by framework method.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Outcome Measures</h3>\n \n <p>Experience with components of the care bundle: information provision, manual perineal protection (MPP) and post-birth rectal examination.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In this study, 1208 women completed the survey: 684 (56.6%) said they received antenatal information about perineal health, 377 (31.2%) recalled MPP, and 664 (55.0%) recalled rectal examination. Of the 684 women who said they received antenatal information, 595 (87.0%) agreed that the information was easy to understand, and 423 (61.8%) agreed that it helped them to make their own choices to reduce their OASI risk. One hundred and fifty-four (22.5%) agreed that the information made them fearful about giving birth vaginally. Of the 377 women who recalled MPP, 203 (53.9%) felt it provided them with support, and another 97 (25.7%) did not mind the sensation. Of the 664 women who recalled rectal examination, 281 (42.3%) did not mind the exam, and another 335 (50.5%) felt it was uncomfortable but understood its importance. Free-text responses aligned with quantitative results.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Many women did not recall MPP or rectal examination. The reported experiences for those who recalled these components do not support concerns that the OASI care bundle has negative effects on women's experiences.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50729,"journal":{"name":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","volume":"132 5","pages":"588-595"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1471-0528.18029","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-0528.18029","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To study experiences of women who gave birth in maternity units that have implemented a ‘care bundle’ quality improvement initiative to reduce obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) and associated morbidity.

Design

Postnatal electronic questionnaire.

Setting

Twenty-nine maternity units across England, Scotland and Wales.

Population

Women with live vaginal births.

Methods

Descriptive statistics for quantitative results. Analysis of free-text responses informed by framework method.

Main Outcome Measures

Experience with components of the care bundle: information provision, manual perineal protection (MPP) and post-birth rectal examination.

Results

In this study, 1208 women completed the survey: 684 (56.6%) said they received antenatal information about perineal health, 377 (31.2%) recalled MPP, and 664 (55.0%) recalled rectal examination. Of the 684 women who said they received antenatal information, 595 (87.0%) agreed that the information was easy to understand, and 423 (61.8%) agreed that it helped them to make their own choices to reduce their OASI risk. One hundred and fifty-four (22.5%) agreed that the information made them fearful about giving birth vaginally. Of the 377 women who recalled MPP, 203 (53.9%) felt it provided them with support, and another 97 (25.7%) did not mind the sensation. Of the 664 women who recalled rectal examination, 281 (42.3%) did not mind the exam, and another 335 (50.5%) felt it was uncomfortable but understood its importance. Free-text responses aligned with quantitative results.

Conclusions

Many women did not recall MPP or rectal examination. The reported experiences for those who recalled these components do not support concerns that the OASI care bundle has negative effects on women's experiences.

Abstract Image

旨在降低产科肛门括约肌损伤风险的护理包:一项妇女经验调查
研究在实施“护理包”质量改进倡议以减少产科肛门括约肌损伤(OASI)和相关发病率的产科单位分娩的妇女的经验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
5.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BJOG is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). The Journal publishes original, peer-reviewed work in all areas of obstetrics and gynaecology, including contraception, urogynaecology, fertility, oncology and clinical practice. Its aim is to publish the highest quality medical research in women''s health, worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信