1
|
Jackson L, Davies SM, Gaspar M, Podkujko A, Harrold JA, Pascalis LDE, Fallon V, Soulsby LK, Silverio SA. The social and healthcare professional support drawn upon by women antenatally during the COVID-19 pandemic: A recurrent, cross-sectional, thematic analysis. Midwifery 2024; 133:103995. [PMID: 38608542 DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2024.103995] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2023] [Revised: 04/06/2024] [Accepted: 04/08/2024] [Indexed: 04/14/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To explore antenatal experiences of social and healthcare professional support during different phases of social distancing restriction implementation in the UK. DESIGN Semi-structured interviews were conducted via telephone or video-conferencing software between 13 July 2020 - 2 September 2020. Interviews were transcribed and a recurrent, cross-sectional, thematic analysis was conducted. PARTICIPANTS Twelve antenatal women were interviewed during UK social distancing restrictions (Timepoint 1; T1) and a separate sample of twelve women were interviewed in the initial easing of these restrictions (Timepoint 2; T2). FINDINGS T1 themes were: 'Maternity care as non-essential' and 'Pregnancy is cancelled'. T2 themes were: 'Technology is a polarised tool' and 'Clinically vulnerable, or not clinically vulnerable? That is the question'. KEY CONCLUSIONS At T1, anxieties were ascribed to the exclusion of partners from routine care, and to perceived insensitivity and aggression from the public. For T2, insufficient Governmental transparency led to disillusionment, confusion, and anger. Covert workplace discrimination also caused distress at T2. Across timepoints: deteriorated mental wellbeing was attributed to depleted opportunities to interact socially and scaled back maternity care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Recommendations are made to: protect maternal autonomy; improve quality of mental health and routine care signposting; prioritise parental community support in the re-opening of 'non-essential' services; prioritise the option for face-to-face appointments when safe and legal; and protecting the rights of working mothers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leanne Jackson
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, England
| | - Siân M Davies
- School of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Liverpool John Moores University, England; Department of Women & Children's Health, School of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, England
| | - Monic Gaspar
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, England
| | - Anastasija Podkujko
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, England
| | - Joanne A Harrold
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, England
| | - Leonardo DE Pascalis
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, England
| | - Victoria Fallon
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, England
| | - Laura K Soulsby
- Department of Psychology, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, England
| | - Sergio A Silverio
- Department of Women & Children's Health, School of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, England.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Skelton E, Smith A, Harrison G, Rutherford M, Ayers S, Malamateniou C. The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK parent experiences of pregnancy ultrasound scans and parent-fetal bonding: A mixed methods analysis. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0286578. [PMID: 37267279 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2022] [Accepted: 05/18/2023] [Indexed: 06/04/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Companionship in antenatal care is important for facilitating positive parental experiences. During the COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions on partner attendance at fetal ultrasound scans were introduced nationally to minimise transmission of the virus. This study aimed to explore the effect of these restrictions on maternal and paternal experiences of pregnancy scans and evaluate their potential effect on parent-fetal bonding. METHODS A UK-wide, anonymous cross-sectional survey was completed by new and expectant parents (n = 714) who had, or were awaiting a pregnancy scan during the COVID-19 pandemic. The CORE-10 and an adapted version of the Prenatal Attachment Inventory were used to evaluate psychological distress and prenatal bonding. Additional survey questions captured parental experiences of scans. Separate statistical and thematic analyses of the data were undertaken. A joint display matrix was used to facilitate integration of quantitative and qualitative claims to generate a comprehensive interpretation of study findings. FINDINGS When fathers did not attend the scan, feelings of excitement and satisfaction were significantly reduced (p<0.001) and feelings of anxiety increased (p<0.001) in both parents. Mothers were concerned about receiving unexpected news alone and fathers felt excluded from the scan. Mean paternal bonding (38.22, SD 10.73) was significantly lower compared to mothers (47.01, SD 7.67) although no difference was demonstrated between those who had attended the scan and those who had not. CORE-10 scores suggested low-to-mild levels of psychological distress, although the mean difference between mothers and fathers was not significant. Key themes described both parents' sense of loss for their desired pregnancy scan experience and reflected on sonographers' central role in providing parent-centred care during scans. CONCLUSION Restrictions on partner attendance at scans during the COVID-19 pandemic had a negative effect on parental experiences of antenatal imaging. Provision of parent-centred care, which is inclusive of partners, is essential for improved parental experiences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily Skelton
- Division of Radiography and Midwifery, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Alison Smith
- Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Gill Harrison
- Society and College of Radiographers, London, United Kingdom
| | - Mary Rutherford
- Perinatal Imaging and Health, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Susan Ayers
- Centre for Maternal and Child Health Research, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Christina Malamateniou
- Division of Radiography and Midwifery, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Skelton E, Harrison G, Rutherford M, Ayers S, Malamateniou C. UK obstetric sonographers' experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic: Burnout, role satisfaction and impact on clinical practice. ULTRASOUND (LEEDS, ENGLAND) 2023; 31:12-22. [PMID: 36751510 PMCID: PMC9895286 DOI: 10.1177/1742271x221091716] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2021] [Accepted: 02/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic placed additional demands and stressors on UK obstetric sonographers, who were required to balance parent safety and service quality, alongside staff safety. Increased pressure can negatively impact a healthcare worker's well-being and the provision of person-centred care. The aim of this study was to explore obstetric sonographers' experiences of performing pregnancy ultrasound scans during the pandemic and to assess the impact on burnout, role satisfaction and clinical practice. Methods An online, anonymous cross-sectional survey was created to capture sonographers' experience alongside using the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory to evaluate burnout and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation 10 (CORE-10) to measure psychological distress. Results Responses were received from 138 sonographers. Of those completing the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (n = 89), 92.1% and 91.0% met the burnout thresholds for exhaustion and disengagement, respectively. Sonographers with a higher burnout score also perceived that COVID-19 had a greater, negative impact on their practice (p < 0.05). The mean CORE-10 score of 14.39 (standard deviation = 7.99) suggests mild psychological distress among respondents. A significant decrease in role satisfaction was reported from before to during the pandemic (p < 0.001), which was associated with higher scores for burnout and psychological distress (p < 0.001). Change in role satisfaction was correlated with sonographers' perception of safety while scanning during the pandemic (R 2 = 0.148, p < 0.001). Sixty-five sonographers (73.9%) reported they were considering leaving the profession, changing their area of practice or working hours within the next 5 years. Conclusion Job and context-specific interventions are required to mitigate burnout and its consequences on the workforce and service provision beyond the pandemic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily Skelton
- City, University of London, London,
UK
- King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Gill Harrison
- The Society and College of
Radiographers, London, UK
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Skelton E, Malamateniou C, Harrison G. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical guidance and risk assessments, and the importance of effective leadership to support UK obstetric sonographers. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2022; 53:S107-S115. [PMID: 36289027 PMCID: PMC9595413 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmir.2022.10.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2022] [Revised: 10/05/2022] [Accepted: 10/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on the provision of obstetric ultrasound services, leading to the publication of new guidance and requirement for individual departmental risk assessments in the UK. The impact of these changes on clinical practice for UK obstetric sonographers is not currently well reported in published literature. METHODS Obstetric sonographers working in the UK (n = 138) used the Qualtrics XMTM platform to complete an anonymous, online questionnaire about their experiences during the pandemic. Participants responded to closed-type questions about national guidance, risk assessment and their perception of support, and provided additional detail about their experiences in these areas through free-text response options. RESULTS Over 90% of respondents were aware of or had read guidance issued by professional organisations, although challenges for its implementation in departments were identified. These were commonly related to the clinical working environment and included limitations on physical space (76.3%), time constraints (67.5%) and ventilation (61.3%). Sonographers felt most supported by their ultrasound colleagues (83.5%) and line managers (41.2%). They felt least supported by senior management and leadership personnel (60.8%), other antenatal colleagues (51.5%) and professional organisations (41.2%). CONCLUSION Obstetric sonographers will need support from the wider service team and professional organisations to facilitate post-pandemic recovery of the workforce. Formal clinical supervision programmes may be beneficial in facilitating a more holistic approach to peer-support, although there is currently limited evidence of their use in sonographic practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily Skelton
- Division of Radiography and Midwifery, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, EC1V 0HB, UK; Perinatal Imaging and Health, King's College London, SE1 7EH, UK.
| | - Christina Malamateniou
- Division of Radiography and Midwifery, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, EC1V 0HB, UK; Perinatal Imaging and Health, King's College London, SE1 7EH, UK; Haute Ecole de Santé Vaud, Lausanne, Switzerland.
| | - Gill Harrison
- Division of Radiography and Midwifery, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, EC1V 0HB, UK; Society and College of Radiographers, 207 Providence Square, London, SE1 2EW, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Benzakour L, Gayet-Ageron A, Jubin M, Suardi F, Pallud C, Lombard FB, Quagliarini B, Epiney M. Traumatic Childbirth and Birth-Related Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in the Time of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Cohort Study. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:14246. [PMID: 36361124 PMCID: PMC9655079 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192114246] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2022] [Revised: 10/21/2022] [Accepted: 10/23/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Birth-related post-traumatic stress disorder occurs in 4.7% of mothers. No previous study focusing precisely on the stress factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic regarding this important public mental health issue has been conducted. However, the stress load brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic could have influenced this risk. METHODS We aimed to estimate the prevalence of traumatic childbirth and birth-related PTSD and to analyze the risk and protective factors involved, including the risk factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a prospective cohort study of women who delivered at the University Hospitals of Geneva between 25 January 2021 and 10 March 2022 with an assessment within 3 days of delivery and a clinical interview at one month post-partum. RESULTS Among the 254 participants included, 35 (21.1%, 95% CI: 15.1-28.1%) experienced a traumatic childbirth and 15 (9.1%, 95% CI: 5.2-14.6%) developed a birth-related PTSD at one month post-partum according to DSM-5. Known risk factors of birth-related PTSD such as antenatal depression, previous traumatic events, neonatal complications, peritraumatic distress and peritraumatic dissociation were confirmed. Among the factors related to COVID-19, only limited access to prenatal care increased the risk of birth-related PTSD. CONCLUSIONS This study highlights the challenges of early mental health screening during the maternity stay when seeking to provide an early intervention and reduce the risk of developing birth-related PTSD. We found a modest influence of stress factors directly related to the COVID-19 pandemic on this risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lamyae Benzakour
- Department of Psychiatry, Geneva University Hospitals, University of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, 1206 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Angèle Gayet-Ageron
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, 1206 Geneva, Switzerland
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Health and Community Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, University of Geneva, 1206 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Maria Jubin
- Department of Psychiatry, Geneva University Hospitals, University of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Francesca Suardi
- Department of Psychiatry, Geneva University Hospitals, University of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Chloé Pallud
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, 1206 Geneva, Switzerland
| | | | - Beatrice Quagliarini
- Department of Psychiatry, Geneva University Hospitals, University of Geneva, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Manuella Epiney
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, 1206 Geneva, Switzerland
- Department of the Woman, the Child and the Teenager, Geneva University Hospitals, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Brigante L, Morelli A, Jokinen M, Plachcinski R, Rowe R. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on midwifery-led service provision in the United Kingdom in 2020-21: findings of three national surveys. Midwifery 2022; 112:103390. [PMID: 35709677 PMCID: PMC9155188 DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2022.103390] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2021] [Revised: 05/24/2022] [Accepted: 05/31/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Background The COVID-19 pandemic required all healthcare systems to adapt quickly. There is some evidence about the impact of the pandemic on United Kingdom maternity services overall, but little is known about the impact on midwifery-led services, including midwifery units and home birth services. Objective To describe changes to midwifery-led service provision in the United Kingdom and the Channel Islands during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design Three national surveys were circulated using the United Kingdom Midwifery Study System (UKMidSS) and the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) Heads and Directors of Midwifery Network. The UKMidSS surveys took place in wave 1 (April to June 2020) and in wave 2 (February to March 2021). The RCM survey was conducted in April 2020. Findings The response rate to the UKMidSS surveys was 84% in wave 1 and 70% in wave 2, while 48% of Heads and Directors of Midwifery responded to the RCM survey. Around 60% of midwifery units reported being open as usual in wave 1, with the remainder affected by closures. Fewer unit closures (15%) were reported in the wave 2 survey. Around 40% of services reported some reduction in home birth services in wave 1, compared with 15% in wave 2. The apparent impact of the pandemic varied widely across the four nations of the United Kingdom and within the English regions. Conclusions The pandemic led to increased centralisation of maternity care and the disruption of midwifery-led services, especially in the first wave. Further research should focus on the reasons behind closures, the regional variation and the impact on maternity care experience and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lia Brigante
- Royal College of Midwives, London, United Kingdom
| | - Alessandra Morelli
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Rachel Rowe
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Thomson G, Balaam MC, Nowland Harris R, Crossland N, Moncrieff G, Heys S, Sarian A, Cull J, Topalidou A, Downe S. Companionship for women/birthing people using antenatal and intrapartum care in England during COVID-19: a mixed-methods analysis of national and organisational responses and perspectives. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e051965. [PMID: 35017241 PMCID: PMC8753093 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051965] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To explore stakeholders' and national organisational perspectives on companionship for women/birthing people using antenatal and intrapartum care in England during COVID-19, as part of the Achieving Safe and Personalised maternity care In Response to Epidemics (ASPIRE) COVID-19 UK study. SETTING Maternity care provision in England. PARTICIPANTS Interviews were held with 26 national governmental, professional and service-user organisation leads (July-December 2020). Other data included public-facing outputs logged from 25 maternity Trusts (September/October 2020) and data extracted from 78 documents from eight key governmental, professional and service-user organisations that informed national maternity care guidance and policy (February-December 2020). RESULTS Six themes emerged: 'Postcode lottery of care' highlights variations in companionship and visiting practices between trusts/locations, 'Confusion and stress around 'rules'' relates to a lack of and variable information concerning companionship/visiting, 'Unintended consequences' concerns the negative impacts of restricted companionship or visiting on women/birthing people and staff, 'Need for flexibility' highlights concerns about applying companionship and visiting policies irrespective of need, ''Acceptable' time for support' highlights variations in when and if companionship was 'allowed' antenatally and intrapartum and 'Loss of human rights for gain in infection control' emphasises how a predominant focus on infection control was at a cost to psychological safety and human rights. CONCLUSIONS Policies concerning companionship and visiting have been inconsistently applied within English maternity services during the COVID-19 pandemic. In some cases, policies were not justified by the level of risk, and were applied indiscriminately regardless of need. There is an urgent need to determine how to sensitively and flexibly balance risks and benefits and optimise outcomes during the current and future crisis situations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gill Thomson
- Maternal and Infant Nutrition & Nurture group, School of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| | - Marie-Claire Balaam
- Research in Childbirth and Health group, School of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| | - Rebecca Nowland Harris
- Maternal and Infant Nutrition & Nurture group, School of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| | - Nicola Crossland
- Maternal and Infant Nutrition & Nurture group, School of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| | - Gill Moncrieff
- Research in Childbirth and Health group, School of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| | | | - Arni Sarian
- School of Medicine, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| | - Joanne Cull
- Maternal and Infant Nutrition & Nurture group, School of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| | - Anastasia Topalidou
- Research in Childbirth and Health group, School of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| | - Soo Downe
- Research in Childbirth and Health group, School of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sanders J, Blaylock R. "Anxious and traumatised": Users' experiences of maternity care in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. Midwifery 2021; 102:103069. [PMID: 34186334 PMCID: PMC8437682 DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2021.103069] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2020] [Revised: 05/24/2021] [Accepted: 06/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Objective The COVID-19 pandemic saw universal, radical, and ultra-rapid changes to UK National Health Services (NHS) maternity care. At the onset of the pandemic, NHS maternity services were stripped of many of the features which support woman and family centred care. In anticipation of unknown numbers of pregnant women and maternity staff potentially sick with COVID-19, services were pared back to the minimum level considered to be required to keep women and their babies safe. The aim of this survey was to understand the impact of COVID-19 public health messaging and pandemic-related service changes on users of maternity care in the UK during the pandemic. Methods We conducted an online survey to explore user's experiences of COVID-19 public health messaging and ‘socially-distanced’ maternity care across the UK. The study population consisted of women who had experienced pregnancy after the 11th March 2020 (when the WHO declared a pandemic), whether or not they were still pregnant. We collected data between June and September 2020. We used framework analysis for the free-text data and generated descriptive statistics. Findings Women were generally happy to adopt a precautionary approach and stringently social distance in the context of a relatively unknown pathogen and in an environment of extreme anxiety and uncertainty, but were acutely aware of the negative impacts. The survey found that the widespread changes to services caused unintended negative consequences including essential clinical care being missed, confusion over advice, and distress and emotional trauma for women. COVID-19 restrictions have resulted in women feeling their antenatal and postnatal care to be inadequate and has also come at great emotional cost to users. Women reported feeling isolated and sad in the postnatal period, but also frustrated and upset by a lack of staff to help them care for their new baby. Key conclusions With growing evidence of the impact of the virus on pregnant women and an increased understanding of the unintended consequences of unclear public health messaging and overly precautious services, a more nuanced, evidence-based approach to caring for women during a pandemic must be prioritised. Implications for practice All maternity services should ensure they have clear lines of communication with women to keep them updated on changing care and visiting arrangements. Services should ensure that opportunities to provide safe face-to-face care and access for birth partners and visitors are maximised.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia Sanders
- School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, UK.
| | - Rebecca Blaylock
- Centre for Reproductive Research and Communication, British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), 30-31 Furnival Street, London, EC4A 1JQ.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian Walsh
- Cambridge Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK
| | | | - Rebecca Best
- Public Health Specialty Training Programme, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|