University of Leicester
Browse
1-s2.0-S0277953619300334-main.pdf (473.55 kB)

How to be a very safe maternity unit: An ethnographic study.

Download (473.55 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2019-05-22, 15:03 authored by EG Liberati, C Tarrant, J Willars, T Draycott, C Winter, S Chew, M Dixon-Woods
Maternity care continues to be associated with avoidable harm that can result in serious disability and profound anguish for women, their children, and their families, and in high costs for healthcare systems. As in other areas of healthcare, improvement efforts have typically focused either on implementing and evaluating specific interventions, or on identifying the contextual features that may be generative of safety (e.g. structures, processes, behaviour, practices, and values), but the dialogue between these two approaches has remained limited. In this article, we report a positive deviance case study of a high-performing UK maternity unit to examine how it achieved and sustained excellent safety outcomes. Based on 143 h of ethnographic observations in the maternity unit, 12 semi-structured interviews, and two focus groups with staff, we identified six mechanisms that appeared to be important for safety: collective competence; insistence on technical proficiency; monitoring, coordination, and distributed cognition; clearly articulated and constantly reinforced standards of practice, behaviour, and ethics; monitoring multiple sources of intelligence about the unit's state of safety; and a highly intentional approach to safety and improvement. These mechanisms were nurtured and sustained through both a specific intervention (known as the PROMPT programme) and, importantly, the unit's contextual features: intervention and context shaped each other in both direct and indirect ways. The mechanisms were also influenced by the unit's structural conditions, such as staffing levels and physical environment. This study enhances understanding of what makes a maternity unit safe, paving the way for better design of improvement approaches. It also advances the debate on quality and safety improvement by offering a theoretically and empirically grounded analysis of the interplay between interventions and context of implementation.

Funding

The first phase of data collection and analysis of the data for this paper was supported by Mary Dixon-Woods’ Wellcome Trust Senior Investigator Award (WT097899MA). The SCALING study, funded by the Health Foundation, supported the second phase of data collection and analysis. MDW and EGL are supported by the Health Foundation’s grant to the University of Cambridge for The Healthcare Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute. THIS Institute is supported by the Health Foundation—an independent charity committed to bringing about better health and health care for people in the UK. MDW is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator (NF-SI-0617-10026). The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. We thank the staff and patients of Southmead Maternity Unit for their cooperation and support in the conduct of the study.

History

Citation

Social Science and Medicine, 2019, 223, pp. 64-72

Author affiliation

/Organisation/COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES/School of Medicine/Department of Health Sciences

Version

  • VoR (Version of Record)

Published in

Social Science and Medicine

Publisher

Elsevier

eissn

1873-5347

Acceptance date

2019-01-18

Copyright date

2019

Available date

2019-05-22

Publisher version

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953619300334?via=ihub

Language

en

Usage metrics

    University of Leicester Publications

    Categories

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC