Perineal massage and warm compresses–Implementation study of a complex intervention in health

Objectives

To determine the effect of using tailored and multifaceted strategies on the acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility and adoption of a perineal massage and warm compress intervention by midwives in a maternity ward of a tertiary hospital in Portugal.

Methods

The complex intervention in health was developed based on the Medical Research Council framework and guided by the Theory of Change. Tailored and multifaceted strategies, including dissemination, integration and implementing process strategies, were applied. A mixed-methods approach was adopted, with a combination of qualitative (semi-open interviews) and quantitative (surveys, audits and electronic health records) methods. Surveys were applied to assess the acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of the intervention. In order to evaluate adoption of the intervention, data from interviews were introduced into NVivo Version 10 to perform thematic analysis, and each audit checklist criterion was analysed using McNemar's exact test to determine differences in paired proportion.

Results

This study found high acceptability (mean±standard deviation 4.28±0.45), high appropriateness (4.32±0.47) and high feasibility (4.26±0.43) of the intervention by midwives. Differences were reported for most topics between interviews conducted before and after implementation of the intervention. Pre-intervention, the midwives reported that the main factor affecting the application of perineal protection techniques was the lack of continuous presence of the midwife. The birth position was the alternative birth position (hands and knees, side-lying, squatting and semi-sitting), avoiding the lithotomy position. Techniques used for perineal protection were warm compresses, hands-on techniques, hands-off techniques and spontaneous pushing; and the reasons given for performing an episiotomy were large (high-birthweight) baby, Kristeller manoeuvre, tense perineum and previous obstetric sphincter injury. Post-intervention, the midwives reported that the presence of a second person increases the safety of professionals and women and improves working relations. The technique used for perineal protection was autonomy to adapt the intervention with perineal massage and warm compresses. A comfortable birth position for woman was used, and the rate of episiotomy reduced (only performed in the case of fetal distress). Regarding audits, significant differences (p < 0.05) were found for all audit criteria (pre- and post-intervention), which means that midwives adopted the intervention into their clinical practice.

Conclusion

Acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility and adoption of the intervention by midwives were high. Thus, tailored and multifaceted strategies were effective to achieve the implementation outcomes.