Quality framework for remote antenatal care: qualitative study with women, healthcare professionals and system-level stakeholders

Author:

Hinton LisaORCID,Dakin Francesca H,Kuberska Karolina,Boydell Nicola,Willars Janet,Draycott Tim,Winter Cathy,McManus Richard J,Chappell Lucy C,Chakrabarti Sanhita,Howland Elizabeth,George Jenny,Leach Brandi,Dixon-Woods Mary

Abstract

BackgroundHigh-quality antenatal care is important for ensuring optimal birth outcomes and reducing risks of maternal and fetal mortality and morbidity. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the usual provision of antenatal care, with much care shifting to remote forms of provision. We aimed to characterise what quality would look like for remote antenatal care from the perspectives of those who use, provide and organise it.MethodsThis UK-wide study involved interviews and an online survey inviting free-text responses with: those who were or had been pregnant since March 2020; maternity professionals and managers of maternity services and system-level stakeholders. Recruitment used network-based approaches, professional and community networks and purposively selected hospitals. Analysis of interview transcripts was based on the constant comparative method. Free-text survey responses were analysed using a coding framework developed by researchers.FindingsParticipants included 106 pregnant women and 105 healthcare professionals and managers/stakeholders. Analysis enabled generation of a framework of the domains of quality that appear to be most relevant to stakeholders in remote antenatal care: efficiency and timeliness; effectiveness; safety; accessibility; equity and inclusion; person-centredness and choice and continuity. Participants reported that remote care was not straightforwardly positive or negative across these domains. Care that was more transactional in nature was identified as more suitable for remote modalities, but remote care was also seen as having potential to undermine important aspects of trusting relationships and continuity, to amplify or create new forms of structural inequality and to create possible risks to safety.ConclusionsThis study offers a provisional framework that can help in structuring thinking, policy and practice. By outlining the range of domains relevant to remote antenatal care, this framework is likely to be of value in guiding policy, practice and research.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Health Policy

Reference82 articles.

1. Office for National Statistics . Births in England and Wales: 2019. ons.gov.uk, 2020.

2. Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency . Registrar General annual report 2019. nisra.gov.uk, 2020.

3. National Records of Scotland . Vital events reference tables 2019. nrscotland.gov.uk, 2020.

4. Stillbirth rates, service outcomes and costs of implementing NHS England's saving babies' lives care bundle in maternity units in England: a cohort study;Widdows;PLoS One,2021

5. Knight MBK , Tuffnell D , Shakespeare J , et al , eds. on behalf of MBRRACE-UK,. Saving Lives, Improving Mothers’ Care - Lessons learned to inform maternity care from theUK and Ireland Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths and Morbidity 2016-18. Oxford: d: National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, 2020.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3