Maternity staff views on implementing a national perinatal mortality review tool: understanding barriers and facilitators.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Journal of Perinatal Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-19 Print Date: 2025-05-26 DOI:10.1515/jpm-2024-0601
Emily O'Connor, Aenne Helps, Richard Greene, Keelin O'Donoghue, Sara Leitao
{"title":"Maternity staff views on implementing a national perinatal mortality review tool: understanding barriers and facilitators.","authors":"Emily O'Connor, Aenne Helps, Richard Greene, Keelin O'Donoghue, Sara Leitao","doi":"10.1515/jpm-2024-0601","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Perinatal death reviews investigate the causes of perinatal mortality, identify potentially avoidable factors, and may help prevent further deaths. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a standardised perinatal mortality review tool in Irish maternity units by engaging with healthcare professionals about their opinions on the existing system and implementing a standardised system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study involved semi-structured interviews with staff from three maternity units of various sizes in Ireland. Recruitment involved purposive and snowball sampling. Interviews took place from May to December 2022 and covered topics such as the existing perinatal mortality review process, staff experiences with reviews and proposed changes to the system. Thematic analysis was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants (n=32) included medical and midwifery staff with varying levels of seniority and experience with perinatal mortality reviews. Four themes were identified: the review process, time challenges of reviews, institutional culture and staff needs. Our findings demonstrated that the review process was structured differently across units, with varying levels of staff involvement. Institution culture, leadership and transparency were highlighted as essential aspects of the review process. Reviews have an impact on staff wellbeing, emphasising the need for continued support.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Implementing a standardised perinatal mortality review system is viewed positively by staff, though addressing the highlighted barriers to change is important. A standardised perinatal mortality review tool and review process may help strengthen perinatal death reviews, provide more information and opportunity for involvement for bereaved parents and help reduce future perinatal deaths.</p>","PeriodicalId":16704,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Perinatal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"454-466"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Perinatal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2024-0601","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Perinatal death reviews investigate the causes of perinatal mortality, identify potentially avoidable factors, and may help prevent further deaths. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a standardised perinatal mortality review tool in Irish maternity units by engaging with healthcare professionals about their opinions on the existing system and implementing a standardised system.

Methods: This study involved semi-structured interviews with staff from three maternity units of various sizes in Ireland. Recruitment involved purposive and snowball sampling. Interviews took place from May to December 2022 and covered topics such as the existing perinatal mortality review process, staff experiences with reviews and proposed changes to the system. Thematic analysis was performed.

Results: Participants (n=32) included medical and midwifery staff with varying levels of seniority and experience with perinatal mortality reviews. Four themes were identified: the review process, time challenges of reviews, institutional culture and staff needs. Our findings demonstrated that the review process was structured differently across units, with varying levels of staff involvement. Institution culture, leadership and transparency were highlighted as essential aspects of the review process. Reviews have an impact on staff wellbeing, emphasising the need for continued support.

Conclusions: Implementing a standardised perinatal mortality review system is viewed positively by staff, though addressing the highlighted barriers to change is important. A standardised perinatal mortality review tool and review process may help strengthen perinatal death reviews, provide more information and opportunity for involvement for bereaved parents and help reduce future perinatal deaths.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
产科工作人员对实施国家围产期死亡率审查工具的看法:了解障碍和促进因素。
目的:围产期死亡审查调查围产期死亡的原因,确定潜在的可避免因素,并可能有助于预防进一步的死亡。本研究旨在通过与医疗保健专业人员接触,了解他们对现有系统和实施标准化系统的意见,确定在爱尔兰产科单位实施标准化围产期死亡率审查工具的障碍和促进因素。方法:本研究采用半结构化访谈的工作人员从三个不同规模的妇产单位在爱尔兰。招募包括有目的和滚雪球抽样。访谈于2022年5月至12月进行,涉及的主题包括现有的围产期死亡率审查程序、工作人员在审查方面的经验以及拟议的系统变更。进行了专题分析。结果:参与者(n=32)包括具有不同级别资历和围产期死亡率审查经验的医疗和助产人员。确定了四个主题:审查进程、审查的时间挑战、机构文化和工作人员需要。我们的研究结果表明,不同单位的审查过程结构不同,员工参与程度也不同。他们强调,机构文化、领导和透明度是审查过程的基本方面。审查对员工的福利有影响,强调需要持续的支持。结论:实施标准化的围产期死亡率审查系统得到了工作人员的积极评价,尽管解决改变的突出障碍很重要。标准化的围产期死亡率审查工具和审查程序可能有助于加强围产期死亡审查,为丧失亲人的父母提供更多信息和参与的机会,并有助于减少未来的围产期死亡。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Perinatal Medicine
Journal of Perinatal Medicine 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Perinatal Medicine (JPM) is a truly international forum covering the entire field of perinatal medicine. It is an essential news source for all those obstetricians, neonatologists, perinatologists and allied health professionals who wish to keep abreast of progress in perinatal and related research. Ahead-of-print publishing ensures fastest possible knowledge transfer. The Journal provides statements on themes of topical interest as well as information and different views on controversial topics. It also informs about the academic, organisational and political aims and objectives of the World Association of Perinatal Medicine.
期刊最新文献
Maternal and fetal outcomes in patients with Crohn's disease: a population-based cohort study. Fighting preterm birth with the scalpel: lessons from a decade of total cervical occlusion. Ex-utero intrapartum treatment of a breech fetus: a case report and review of the literature. Histological chorioamnionitis and maternal inflammatory biomarkers: implications beyond clinical diagnosis. Response to letter to the editor.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1