Audrey Lyndon

Abstract

Objective: To determine the incidence and risk factors for maternal morbidity during childbirth hospitalization. Methods: Maternal morbidities were determined using ICD9-CM and vital records codes from linked hospital discharge and vital records data for 1,572,909 singleton births in California during 2005-2007. Socio-demographic, obstetric and hospital volume risk factors were estimated using mixed effects logistic regression models. Results: The maternal morbidity rate was 241/1000 births. The most common morbidities were episiotomy, pelvic trauma, maternal infection, postpartum hemorrhage and severe laceration. Preeclampsia (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 2.96; 95% confidence interval 2.8,3.13), maternal age over 35 years, (AOR: 1.92; 1.79,2.06), vaginal birth after cesarean, (AOR: 1.81; 1.47,2.23) and repeat cesarean birth (AOR: 1.99; 1.87,2.12) conferred the highest odds of severe morbidity. Non-white women were more likely to suffer morbidity. Conclusions: Nearly one in four California women experienced complications during childbirth hospitalization. Significant health disparities in maternal childbirth outcomes persist in the USA.

Abstract

Objective: To solicit input from registered nurse members of the Association of Women's Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses (AWHONN) on critical considerations for review and revision of existing nurse staffing guidelines. Design: Thematic analysis of responses to a cross-sectional on-line survey question: "Please give the staffing task force your input on what they should consider in the development of recommendations for staffing of perinatal units." Participants: Members of AWHONN (N = 884). Results: Descriptions of staffing concerns that should be considered when evaluating and revising existing perinatal nurse staffing guidelines. Consistent themes identified included the need for revision of nurse staffing guidelines due to requirements for safe care, increases in patient acuity and complexity, invisibility of the fetus and newborn as separate and distinct patients, difficulties in providing comprehensive care during labor and for mother-baby couplets under current conditions, challenges in staffing small volume units, and the negative effect of inadequate staffing on nurse satisfaction and retention. Conclusion: Participants overwhelmingly indicated current nurse staffing guidelines were inadequate to meet the needs of contemporary perinatal clinical practice and required revision based on significant changes that had occurred since 1983 when the original staffing guidelines were published.

Abstract

Background: Despite widespread emphasis on promoting 'assertive communication' by care givers as essential to patient-safety-improvement efforts, little is known about when and how clinicians speak up to address safety concerns. In this cross-sectional study, the authors use a new measure of speaking up to begin exploring this issue in maternity care. Methods: The authors developed a scenario-based measure of clinician's assessment of potential harm and likelihood of speaking up in response to perceived harm. The authors embedded this scale in a survey with measures of safety climate, teamwork climate, disruptive behaviour, work stress, and personality traits of bravery and assertiveness. The survey was distributed to all registered nurses and obstetricians practising in two US Labour & Delivery units. Results: The response rate was 54% (125 of 230 potential respondents). Respondents were experienced clinicians (13.7611 years in specialty). A higher perception of harm, respondent role, specialty experience and site predicted the likelihood of speaking up when controlling for bravery and assertiveness. Physicians rated potential harm in common clinical scenarios lower than nurses did (7.5 vs 8.4 on 2-10 scale; p<0.001). Some participants (12%) indicated they were unlikely to speak up, despite perceiving a high potential for harm in certain situations. Discussion: This exploratory study found that nurses and physicians differed in their harm ratings, and harm rating was a predictor of speaking up. This may partially explain persistent discrepancies between physicians and nurses in teamwork climate scores. Differing assessments of potential harms inherent in everyday practice may be a target for teamwork intervention in maternity care.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To estimate risk factors for premature neonates not receiving antenatal steroids in a population-based cohort and to determine whether the gains of a quality-improvement collaborative project on antenatal steroid administration were sustained long-term. METHODS: Clinical data for premature neonates born in 2005-2007 were obtained from the California Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative, which collects data on more than 90% of neonatal admissions in California. Eligible neonates had a birth weight of less than 1,500 g or gestational age less than 34 weeks and were born at a Collaborative hospital. These data were linked to administrative data from California Vital Statistics. Sociodemographic and medical risk factors for not receiving antenatal steroids were determined. We also examined the effect of birth hospital participation in a previous quality-improvement collaborative project. A random effects logistic regression model was used to determine independent risk factors. RESULTS: Of 15,343 eligible neonates, 23.1% did not receive antenatal steroids in 2005-2007. Hispanic mothers (25.6%), mothers younger than age 20 (27.6%), and those without prenatal care (52.2%) were less likely to receive antenatal steroids. Mothers giving birth vaginally (26.8%) and mothers with a diagnosis of fetal distress (26.5%) were also less likely to receive antenatal steroids. Rupture of membranes before delivery and multiple gestations were associated with higher likelihood of antenatal steroid administration. Hospitals that participated in a quality-improvement collaborative in 1999-2000 had higher rates of antenatal steroid administration (85% compared with 69%, P<.001). CONCLUSION: A number of eligible mothers do not receive antenatal steroids. Quality-improvement initiatives to improve antenatal steroid administration could target specific high-risk groups.

Abstract

Effective communication is a hallmark of safe patient care. Challenges to effective interprofessional communication in maternity care include differing professional perspectives on clinical management, steep hierarchies, and lack of administrative support for change. We review principles of high reliability as they apply to communication in clinical care and discuss principles of effective communication and conflict management in maternity care. Effective clinical communication is respectful, clear, direct, and explicit. We use a clinical scenario to illustrate an historic style of nurse-physician communication and demonstrate how communication can be improved to promote trust and patient safety. Consistent execution of successful communication requires excellent listening skills, superb administrative support, and collective commitment to move past traditional hierarchy and professional stereotyping.

Abstract

Purpose: The mission of the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative is to eliminate preventable maternal death and injury and to promote equitable maternity care in California. This article describes California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative's (CMQCC's) statewide multistakeholder quality improvement initiative to improve readiness, recognition, response, and reporting of maternal hemorrhage at birth and details the essential role of nurses in its success. Project Design and Approach: In partnership with the State Department of Maternal, Child, and Adolescent Health, CMQCC identified maternal hemorrhage as a significant quality improvement opportunity. CMQCC organized a multidisciplinary, multistakeholder task force to develop a strategy for addressing obstetric (OB) hemorrhage. Project Description: The OB Hemorrhage Task Force, co-chaired by nurse and physician team leaders, identified four priorities for action and developed a comprehensive hemorrhage guideline. CMQCC is using a multilevel strategy to disseminate the guideline, including an open access toolkit, a minimal support-mentoring model, a county partnership model, and a 30-hospital learning collaborative. Clinical Implications: In participating hospitals, nurses have been the primary drivers in developing both general and massive hemorrhage policies and procedures, ensuring the availability of critical supplies, organizing team debriefing after a stage 2 (or greater) hemorrhage, hosting skills stations for measuring blood loss, and running obstetric (OB) hemorrhage drills. Each of these activities requires effort and leadership skill, even in hospitals where clinicians are convinced that these changes are needed. In some hospitals, the burden to convince physicians of the value of these new practices has rested primarily upon nurses. Thus, the statewide initiative in which nurse and physician leaders work together models the value of teamwork and provides a real-time demonstration of the potential for effective interdisciplinary collaboration to make a difference in the quality of care that can be achieved. Nurses provide significant leadership in multidisciplinary, multistakeholder quality projects in California. Ensuring that nurses have the opportunity to participate in formal leadership of these teams and are represented at all workgroup levels is critical to the overall initiative. Nurses brought key understanding of operational issues within and across departments, mobilized engagement across the state through the regional perinatal programs, and developed innovative approaches to solving clinical problems during implementation. Nursing leadership and integrated participation was especially critical in considering the needs of lower-resource settings, and was essential to the toolkit's enthusiastic adoption at the unit/service level in facilities across the state.