Pelvic floor muscle training during the childbirth period: a best practice implementation project.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Janet Israel, Clare Bennett, Judith Carrier, Anna Darbhamulla, Sarah Wolujewicz, Jitka Klugarová, Miloslav Klugar
{"title":"Pelvic floor muscle training during the childbirth period: a best practice implementation project.","authors":"Janet Israel, Clare Bennett, Judith Carrier, Anna Darbhamulla, Sarah Wolujewicz, Jitka Klugarová, Miloslav Klugar","doi":"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In the UK, the Royal College of Midwives and the Chartered Society for Physiotherapy advocate that women undertake early and effective pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) during the childbirth period to reduce the incidence of urinary incontinence (UI).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This project sought to assess and improve midwives' compliance with best practice recommendations for PFMT in a UK NHS maternity service, with the goal of improving PFMT for women.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This project used the JBI Evidence Implementation Framework and JBI's best practice recommendations for PFMT. Following a baseline audit of midwives' practice, the results were considered. The JBI Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) approach was used to identify barriers and facilitators to improve compliance with recommendations. A follow-up audit was undertaken after the development of a revised continuing professional development (CPD) program for midwives on PFMT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed improved compliance with all four audit criteria. Criterion 1 (midwives' engagement with PFMT) increased from 76% to 92%; Criterion 2 (PFMT during the antenatal period) rose from 50% to 92%; Criterion 3 (postnatal risk assessment for UI) rose from 45% to 67%; and Criterion 4 (PFMT for high-risk women during the postnatal period) increased from 49% to 92%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Whilst this study presented some challenges in implementing evidence-based initiatives in a UK NHS maternity service, it also demonstrated that an audit approach can overcome these, thereby improving compliance with best practices. In this case, changes to a CPD PFMT program increased midwives' compliance with evidence-based practice criteria. In the future, when implementing change in the NHS system, consideration should be given to organizational and leadership factors. Further audits will need to be carried out to monitor practice and effect change.</p><p><strong>Spanish abstract: </strong>http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A322.</p>","PeriodicalId":48473,"journal":{"name":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","volume":"23 S1","pages":"S19-S26"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jbi Evidence Implementation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000495","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: In the UK, the Royal College of Midwives and the Chartered Society for Physiotherapy advocate that women undertake early and effective pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) during the childbirth period to reduce the incidence of urinary incontinence (UI).

Objectives: This project sought to assess and improve midwives' compliance with best practice recommendations for PFMT in a UK NHS maternity service, with the goal of improving PFMT for women.

Methods: This project used the JBI Evidence Implementation Framework and JBI's best practice recommendations for PFMT. Following a baseline audit of midwives' practice, the results were considered. The JBI Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) approach was used to identify barriers and facilitators to improve compliance with recommendations. A follow-up audit was undertaken after the development of a revised continuing professional development (CPD) program for midwives on PFMT.

Results: The results showed improved compliance with all four audit criteria. Criterion 1 (midwives' engagement with PFMT) increased from 76% to 92%; Criterion 2 (PFMT during the antenatal period) rose from 50% to 92%; Criterion 3 (postnatal risk assessment for UI) rose from 45% to 67%; and Criterion 4 (PFMT for high-risk women during the postnatal period) increased from 49% to 92%.

Conclusion: Whilst this study presented some challenges in implementing evidence-based initiatives in a UK NHS maternity service, it also demonstrated that an audit approach can overcome these, thereby improving compliance with best practices. In this case, changes to a CPD PFMT program increased midwives' compliance with evidence-based practice criteria. In the future, when implementing change in the NHS system, consideration should be given to organizational and leadership factors. Further audits will need to be carried out to monitor practice and effect change.

Spanish abstract: http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A322.

分娩期盆底肌训练:最佳实践实施项目。
简介:在英国,皇家助产士学院和特许物理治疗协会提倡妇女在分娩期间进行早期有效的盆底肌肉训练(PFMT),以减少尿失禁(UI)的发生率。目的:本项目旨在评估和改善助产士对英国国民保健服务(NHS)产妇服务中PFMT最佳实践建议的依从性,目的是改善妇女的PFMT。方法:本项目采用JBI证据实施框架和JBI PFMT最佳实践建议。在对助产士的实践进行基线审计后,考虑了结果。JBI将研究付诸实践(GRiP)方法用于确定障碍和促进因素,以改善对建议的遵守情况。在制定了PFMT助产士的修订持续专业发展(CPD)计划后,进行了后续审计。结果:结果显示对所有四项审计标准的遵守情况有所改善。标准1(助产士参与PFMT)从76%增加到92%;标准2(产前PFMT)从50%上升到92%;标准3(产后尿失禁风险评估)从45%上升到67%;标准4(产后高危妇女的PFMT)从49%增加到92%。结论:虽然本研究提出了一些挑战,在英国国家医疗服务体系的产妇服务实施循证倡议,它也表明,审计方法可以克服这些,从而提高遵守最佳做法。在这种情况下,CPD PFMT项目的改变增加了助产士对循证实践标准的依从性。未来在实施NHS制度变革时,应考虑组织和领导因素。进一步的审计将需要进行,以监测实践和效果的变化。西班牙文摘要:http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A322。
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
3.20
自引率
13.00%
发文量
23
×
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