Testing the birth unit design spatial evaluation tool (BUDSET) in Australia: A pilot study

Objective: To pilot test the Birth Unit Design Spatial Evaluation Tool (BUDSET) in an Australian maternity care setting to determine whether such an instrument can measure the optimality of different birth settings. Background: Optimally designed spaces to give birth are likely to influence a woman's ability to experience physiologically normal labor and birth. This is important in the current industrialized environment, where increased caesarean section rates are causing concerns. The measurement of an optimal birth space is currently impossible, because there are limited tools available. Methods: A quantitative study was undertaken to pilot test the discriminant ability of the BUDSET in eight maternity units in New South Wales, Australia. Five auditors trained in the use of the BUDSET assessed the birth units using the BUDSET, which is based on 18 design principles and is divided into four domains (Fear Cascade, Facility, Aesthetics, and Support) with three to eight assessable items in each. Data were independently collected in eight birth units. Values for each of the domains were aggregated to provide an overall Optimality Score for each birth unit. Results: A range of Optimality Scores was derived for each of the birth units (from 51 to 77 out of a possible 100 points). The BUDSET identified units with low-scoring domains. Essentially these were older units and conventional labor ward settings. Conclusion: The BUDSET provides a way to assess the optimality of birth units and determine which domain areas may need improvement. There is potential for improvements to existing birth spaces, and considerable improvement can be made with simple low-cost modifications. Further research is needed to validate the tool. © 2011, Vendome Group, LLC. All rights reserved

Methodological insights from a study using video-ethnography to conduct interdisciplinary research in the study of birth unit design

© eContent Management Pty Ltd. Little is known about how the physical design of a birthing unit can influence the experiences of labour and birth for women, their supporters and midwives. We proposed that an interdisciplinary approach (disciplines of midwifery, architecture, design, communication and public health) was likely to be the most effective way to better understand the complexities and interactions of design, behaviour, communication and experiences. In this methodological paper we aim to provide a roadmap that other researchers may find helpful when considering the use of video as a data collection technique, especially in the study of the powerful and intimate setting of childbirth. The paper also outlines our process for engaging both researchers and participants in reviewing video footage with the aim to contribute multiple perspectives to the analysis process

Using video in childbirth research: Ethical approval challenges

© The Author(s) 2015. Background: Conducting video-research in birth settings raises challenges for ethics review boards to view birthing women and research-midwives as capable, autonomous decision-makers. Aim: This study aimed to gain an understanding of how the ethical approval process was experienced and to chronicle the perceived risks and benefits. Research design: The Birth Unit Design project was a 2012 Australian ethnographic study that used video recording to investigate the physical design features in the hospital birthing space that might influence both verbal and non-verbal communication and the experiences of childbearing women, midwives and supporters. Participants and research context: Six women, 11 midwives and 11 childbirth supporters were filmed during the women’s labours in hospital birth units and interviewed 6 weeks later. Ethical considerations: The study was approved by an Australian Health Research Ethics Committee after a protracted process of negotiation. Findings: The ethics committee was influenced by a traditional view of research as based on scientific experiments resulting in a poor understanding of video-ethnographic research, a paradigmatic view of the politics and practicalities of modern childbirth processes, a desire to protect institutions from litigation, and what we perceived as a paternalistic approach towards protecting participants, one that was at odds with our aim to facilitate situations in which women could make flexible, autonomous decisions about how they might engage with the research process. Discussion: The perceived need for protection was overly burdensome and against the wishes of the participants themselves; ultimately, this limited the capacity of the study to improve care for women and babies. Conclusion: Recommendations are offered for those involved in ethical approval processes for qualitative research in childbirth settings. The complexity of issues within childbirth settings, as in most modern healthcare settings, should be analysed using a variety of research approaches, beyond efficacy-style randomised controlled trials, to expand and improve practice-based results

Group versus conventional antenatal care for women

© 2015 The Cochrane Collaboration. Background: Antenatal care is one of the key preventive health services used around the world. In most Western countries, antenatal care traditionally involves a schedule of one-to-one visits with a care provider. A different way of providing antenatal care involves use of a group model. Objectives: 1. To compare the effects of group antenatal care versus conventional antenatal care on psychosocial, physiological, labour and birth outcomes for women and their babies. 2. To compare the effects of group antenatal care versus conventional antenatal care on care provider satisfaction. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2014), contacted experts in the field and reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria: All identified published, unpublished and ongoing randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing group antenatal care with conventional antenatal care were included. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible, and one has been included. Cross-over trials were not eligible. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data; all review authors checked data for accuracy. Main results: We included four studies (2350 women). The overall risk of bias for the included studies was assessed as acceptable in two studies and good in two studies. No statistically significant differences were observed between women who received group antenatal care and those given standard individual antenatal care for the primary outcome of preterm birth (risk ratio (RR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 1.00; three trials; N = 1888). The proportion of low-birthweight (less than 2500 g) babies was similar between groups (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.23; three trials; N = 1935). No group differences were noted for the primary outcomes small-for-gestational age (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.24; two trials; N = 1473) and perinatal mortality (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.25; three trials; N = 1943). Satisfaction was rated as high among women who were allocated to group antenatal care, but this outcome was measured in only one trial. In this trial, mean satisfaction with care in the group given antenatal care was almost five times greater than that reported by those allocated to standard care (mean difference 4.90, 95% CI 3.10 to 6.70; one study; N = 993). No differences in neonatal intensive care admission, initiation of breastfeeding or spontaneous vaginal birth were observed between groups. Several outcomes related to stress and depression were reported in one trial. No differences between groups were observed for any of these outcomes. No data were available on the effects of group antenatal care on care provider satisfaction. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess evidence for seven prespecified outcomes; results ranged from low quality (perinatal mortality) to moderate quality (preterm birth, low birthweight, neonatal intensive care unit admission, breastfeeding initiation) to high quality (satisfaction with antenatal care, spontaneous vaginal birth). Authors' conclusions: Available evidence suggests that group antenatal care is positively viewed by women and is associated with no adverse outcomes for them or for their babies. No differences in the rate of preterm birth were reported when women received group antenatal care. This review is limited because of the small numbers of studies and women, and because one study contributed 42% of the women. Most of the analyses are based on a single study. Additional research is required to determine whether group antenatal care is associated with significant benefit in terms of preterm birth or birthweight

Assistive care loop with electronic maternity records

Surprisingly women-held pregnancy health records (paper based) are still predominantly used in most hospitals in Australia. These records are not standardized as each hospital or state has a slightly different version. Early efforts have been made to standardize pregnancy records and make them available electronically. Electronic record systems do not allow dynamic interaction between users and they are not accessible when users are mobile. This paper describes an Assistive Maternity Care (AMC) system that addresses a number of important issues: 1) transforming a women-held paper-based record for pregnancy care into an Electronic Maternity Record (EMR); 2) investigating mechanisms to make the record active; 3) creating a system whereby details of the pregnant women and their carers can be recorded, updated over wired and wireless networks; and 4) creating a pregnancy care loop over which midwives and doctors and pregnant women under their care can communicate effectively anywhere, anytime for the duration of pregnancy. © 2008 IEEE

The relationship between birth unit design and safe, satisfying birth: Developing a hypothetical model

Recent advances in cross-disciplinary studies linking architecture and neuroscience have revealed that much of the built environment for health-care delivery may actually impair rather than improve health outcomes by disrupting effective communication and increasing patient and staff stress. This is also true for maternity care provision, where it is suggested that the design of the environment can also impact on the experiences and outcomes for birthing women.The aim of this paper is to describe the development of a conceptual model based on literature and understandings of design, communication, stress and model of care. The model explores potential relationships among a set of key variables that need to be considered by researchers wishing to determine the characteristics of optimal birth environments in relation to birth outcomes for women and infants. The conceptual model hypothesises that safe satisfying birth is reliant on the level of stress experienced by a woman and the staff around her, stress influences the quality of communication with women and between staff, and this process is mediated by the design of the birth unit and model of care.The conceptual model is offered as a starting point for researchers who have an appreciation of the complexity of birth and the ability to bring together colleagues from a range of disciplines to explore the pre-requisites for safe and effective maternity care in new ways. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd

Developing an interactive electronic maternity record

Women have a strong need to be involved in their own maternity care. Pregnancy hand-held records encourage women's participation in their maternity care; gives them an increased sense of control and improves communication among care providers. They have been successfully used in the UK and New Zealand for almost 20 years. Despite evidence that supports the use of hand-held records, widespread introduction has not occurred in Australia. The need for an electronic version of pregnancy hand-held records has become apparent, especially after the introduction of the Electronic Medical Record in Australia. A personal digital assistant (PDA) was developed as an interactive antenatal electronic maternity record that health-care providers could use in any setting and women could access using the internet. This article will describe the testing of the antenatal electronic maternity record