Category / Nursing & Midwifery

First BU paper accepted for 2021

NHS, open access, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to Prof. Vanora Hundley whose article ‘Escalation triggers and expected responses in obstetric early warning systems used in UK consultant-led maternity units’ is now available Open Access online. The paper has been accepted in Resuscitation Plus. Co-authors include FHSS Visiting Faculty Prof. Gary Smith and Dr. Richard Isaacs.

The paper reports on a review of OEWS [Obstetric Early Warning Systems] charts and escalation policies across consultant-led maternity units in the UK (n = 147). OEWS charts were analysed for variation in the values of physiological parameters triggering different levels of clinical escalation. The observed variations in the trigger thresholds used in OEWS charts and the quality of information included within the accompanying escalation protocols is likely to lead to suboptimal detection and response to clinical deterioration during pregnancy and the post-partum period. The paper concludes the development of a national OEWS and escalation protocol would help to standardise care across obstetric units.

 

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

Midwifery and the Media

international, NHS, Publishing, writing

Today we received an end-of-year good-news message from ResearchGate telling us that 700 people had ‘read’ our book Midwifery, Childbirth and the Media [1].  Lee Wright, Senior Lecturer in the School of Nursing and Midwifery at Birmingham City University wrote in his review of our edited volume: “…our media image and digital foot print are rapidly becoming the most important window into our profession. In a rapidly changing environment this book provides an up to date and informative insight into how our profession is affected by the media and how our profession can inform and influence the image of midwifery. This area is going to become even more important in the future universities and trusts increasingly use broadcast and social media to manage information and inform our clients of the services we provide.  This book will be the important first text in a new growth area. It brings together an internationally recognised group of authors who are experts in this field. I wholeheartedly recommend it to you.”

This edited collection was published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2017 and it is part of a larger body of Bournemouth University research on the topic [2-6].

 

Professor Edwin van Teijlingen, Professor Vanora Hundley and Associate Professor Ann Luce

 

References:

  1. Luce, A., Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E. (Eds.) (2017) Midwifery, Childbirth and the Media, London: Palgrave Macmillan [ISBN: 978-3-319-63512-5].
  2. Luce, A., Cash, M., Hundley, V., Cheyne, H., van Teijlingen, E., Angell, C. (2016) “Is it realistic?” the portrayal of pregnancy and childbirth in the media BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth 16: 40 http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-016-0827-x
  3. Angell, C. (2017) An Everyday Trauma: How the Media Portrays Infant Feeding, In: Luce, A. et al. (Eds.) Midwifery, Childbirth and the Media, London: Palgrave Macmillan pp: 45-59.
  4. Hundley, V., Luce, A., van Teijlingen, E., Edlund, S. (2019) Changing the narrative around childbirth: whose responsibility is it? Evidence-based Midwifery 17(2): 47-52.
  5. Hundley, V., Duff, E., Dewberry, J., Luce, A., van Teijlingen, E. (2014) Fear in childbirth: are the media responsible? MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 24(4): 444-447.
  6. Hundley, V., Luce, A., van Teijlingen, E. (2015) Do midwives need to be more media savvy? MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 25(1):5-10.

New interdisciplinary COVID-19 paper

international, open access, Publishing, writing

An evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach on risk zoning, personal and transmission risk assessment in near real-time, and risk communication would support the optimized decisions to minimize the impact of coronavirus on our lives. This interdisciplinary paper [1], pubished today in Scientific Reports, offers a framework to assess the individual and regional risk of COVID-19 along with risk communication tools and mechanisms. Relative risk scores on a scale of 100 represent the integrated risk of influential factors. The personal risk model incorporates age, exposure history, symptoms, local risk and existing health condition, whereas regional risk is computed through the actual cases of COVID-19, public health risk factors, socioeconomic condition of the region, and immigration statistics. A web application tool (http://www.covira.info) has been developed, where anyone can assess their risk and find the guided information links primarily for Nepal. This study provides regional risk for Nepal, but the framework is scalable across the world. 

The authors comprised researchers from the University of Bristol, Science Hub (Nepal), University of the West of England, Public Health Perspective Nepal, Nepal Open University, Center for Molecular Dynamics Nepal, Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, the University of Huddersfield and Bournemouth University.

 

Reference:

  1. Parajuli, R.R., Mishra, B., Banstola, A. Multidisciplinary approach to COVID-19 risk communication: a framework and tool for individual and regional risk assessment. 21650 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-78779-0

BU Book up for National Award

NHS

Professor Tim Darvill, Kerry Barrass, Yvette Staelens from the Department of Archaeology and Anthropology (BU) together with Dr Vanessa Heaslip from the Department of Nursing  Science (BU) worked with Laura Drysdale of the Restoration Trust to edit a book exploring how historic landscapes could support mental health well-being.

 

Our book titled ‘Historic Landscapes and Mental Health Well-being’ has been nominated as a contender in the 2021 Current Archaeology Book of the Year competition. This is fantastic news and really shows the benefits of cross disciplinary research and working.

Voting is open now at www.archaeology.co.uk/vote so do please cast your votes for the book, and encourage anyone else you can think of to do the same. Please also feel free to share this excellent news in your social media sites as it would be really excellent to win this award. The results will be announced at the Archaeology in Britain conference in February.

Please keep your fingers crossed for us and thank you for your votes

Midwifery education publication published today

Centre for Excellence in Learning, Fusion, NHS, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to Prof. Sue Way, Dr. Luisa Cescutti-Butler and Dr. Michelle Irving on the publication today of their latest article ‘A study to evaluate the introduction of the Newborn Infant Physical Examination knowledge and skills into an undergraduate pre-registration midwifery education programme’ [1].  This paper published in  Nurse Education Today  uses the principles of FUSION, bring together Education (undergraduate midwifery education), Practice (examination of the newborn) and Research (evaluation study).  This paper adds to the growing list of publication on aspects of midwifery education by academics in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perintal Health (CMMPH).

 

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

Reference:

  1. Way, S., Cescutti-Butler, L., Irving, M. (2020) A study to evaluate the introduction of the Newborn Infant Physical Examination knowledge and skills into an undergraduate pre-registration midwifery education programme, Nurse Education Today, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104656.

 

The PhD examiner

international, PG research

Being asked to examine a PhD thesis is a honour for most academics.  As an examiner you always learn something new.  If not about the topic itself, you may learn different ways of applying a research method or new theoretical explanations or even new ideas for supervising your own PhD students.  It is a joy to have an in-depth scientific discussion with a dedicated and motivated candidate. Usually the candidate is a little nervous, especially at the start of the viva, and I see it as one of my tasks as an examiner to help the candidate to relax a little.

Today I had the pleasure of being one of the examiners for a PhD at the University of Maastricht (the Netherlands).   The PhD candidate (now Dr.) Franka Cadée was a little nervous according to her supervisors, although it did not show during the viva.

Interestingly, enough I also felt nervous!  Before today I had examined 50th PhD thesis in seven different countries.  However, I probably had not felt this nervous since my own viva nearly three decades ago.  Why was I nervous?  First, although I am Dutch and I have studied in the Netherlands and the UK, I had never attended a PhD examination in the Netherlands.  And PhD examinations really do differ between the UK and most northern European countries, especially the public defence of the thesis by the candidate in front of examiners, colleagues, friends and family.  Secondly, the candidate today is the president of the ICM (the International Confederation of Midwives).  Of course, this does not make any difference in the examination process, this candidate was treated the same as any other student would have been.  Thirdly, and most importantly, the ICM had globally advertised the public defence of Dr. Cadée’s thesis to midwives, maternity policy-makers, member of International Non-Governmental Organisations and maternity care providers and invited ‘everybody’ to watch on ZOOM.

I really think it was the latter that made me more nervous than the much more private UK PhD viva with perhaps five or six people in a small class room, or, these days, on ZOOM.

Finally, my congratulations to Dr. Franka Cadée on the successful defence of her thesis Twinning, a promising dynamic process to strengthen the agency of midwives.

 

Professor Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

NIHR Grant Applications Seminar ONLINE

Funding opportunities, HSS Our 9 Research Entities, innovation, NHS, writing

  

Dear colleagues

– Do you have a great idea for research in health, social care or public health?
– Are you planning to submit a grant application to NIHR?

Our popular seminar has now moved online and will take place on Tuesday 24th November 2020 from 10.00am – 12.30pm.

The seminar provides an overview of NIHR funding opportunities and research programme remits, requirements and application processes. We will give you top tips for your application and answer specific questions with experienced RDS South West advisers.

Find out more and book a place.

Your local branch of the NIHR RDS (Research Design Service) is based within the BU Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)

We can help with your application. We advise on all aspects of developing an application and can review application drafts as well as put them to a mock funding panel (run by RDS South West) known as Project Review Committee, which is a fantastic opportunity for researchers to obtain a critical review of a proposed grant application before this is sent to a funding body.

Come as early as possible to benefit fully from the advice

Feel free to call us on 01202 961939 or send us an email.

 

COVID-19 affects research into other diseases

international, Publishing, Research Integritiy, Training, writing

A systematic review published late last week assesses the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on on-going and new clinical trials and research on a range of diseases [1]. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a series of public health policies, including lock down, that have crippled the healthcare systems of many countries. These measures hugely impact on study participants, care providers, researchers, trial sponsors, and research organizations conducting clinical trials. This pandemic has a substantial impact on the trial sites as they experience difficulty in the continuation of trial activities which eventually hampers the progress of the trial and delays study timelines. Most sites are struggling due to delayed subject enrolment, shortfalls in monitoring, and risks of compromised data integrity, and this situation also has a negative impact on the start of future. Researchers are also concerned regarding the delay or cancellations of trials in the pandemic, which will have financial consequences for research organizations/human resources.

According to one survey, about two-thirds of the respondents have stopped or will soon halt subject enrolment in ongoing clinical trials, one-third halted randomization, and fifty percent of respondents are delaying or planning to delay the studies.  Adopting new approaches and understanding the key risk indicators will help managers support trial sites with flexibility and ingenuity. For instance, switching patient site visits to new-trial virtualization, and telemedicine to interact with patients will help manage current clinical trials also beneficial for the post-pandemic era.

 

Reference:

  1. Sathian B, Asim M,  Banerjee I, Pizarro AB, Roy B, van Teijlingen ER, Borges do Nascimento IJ, Alhamad HK.  Impact of COVID-19 on clinical trials and clinical research: A systematic review. Nepal J Epidemiol. 2020;10(3); 878-887

 

New CMMPH nutrition paper published

open access, Publishing, student research, writing

Congratulations to FHSS authors on the publication of their paper “A Priori and a Posteriori Dietary Patterns in Women of Childbearing Age in the UK” which has been published in the scientific journal Nutrients [1].  The authors highlight that a poor diet quality is a major cause of maternal obesity. They investigated investigate a priori and a-posteriori derived dietary patterns in childbearing-aged women in the United Kingdom. An online survey assessed food intake, physical activity (PA), anthropometry and socio-demographics.  A poor diet quality was found among childbearing-aged women; notably in the younger age category, those of white ethnicity, that were more physically inactive and with a lower socioeconomic background.

The article is Open Access and freely available (click here!).

 

 

Reference:

  1. Khaled, K.; Hundley, V.; Almilaji, O.; Koeppen, M.; Tsofliou, F. (2020) A Priori and a Posteriori Dietary Patterns in Women of Childbearing Age in the UK. Nutrients 2020, 12, 2921.

New FHSS nutrition publication

Publishing, student research, writing

Congratulations to Dr. Jib Acharya on the publication of his latest research paper ‘Exploring Food-Related Barriers and Impact on Preschool-Aged Children in Pokhara, Nepal: A Qualitative Review’ which is based on his PhD research [1].  Dr. Acharya has published several papers [2-3] from his PhD thesis in collaboration with his supervisors, Prof. Jane Murphy, Dr. Martin Hind and Prof, Edwin van Teijlingen.

Congratulations!

 

References:

  1. Acharya, J., van Teijlingen, E., Murphy, J., Hind, M., Ellahi, B., Joshi, A. (2020) Exploring Food-Related Barriers and Impact on Preschool-Aged Children in Pokhara, Nepal: A Qualitative Review, Participation 22(20): 98-110.
  2. Acharya, J., van Teijlingen E., Murphy, J., Hind, M. (2015) Assessment of knowledge, beliefs & attitudes towards healthy diet among mothers in Kaski, Nepal, Participation 17(16): 61-72.
  3. Acharya, J., van Teijlingen E, Murphy, J., Hind, M. (2015) Study of nutritional problems in preschool aged children in Kaski District Nepal, Journal of Multidisciplinary Research in Healthcare 1(2): 97-118. http://dspace.chitkara.edu.in/jspui/bitstream/1/560/1/12007_JMRH_Acharya.pdf

 

 

 

New CMMPH midwifery paper

NHS, Publishing, writing

Today the European Journal of Midwifery published our paper ‘Midwives’ views towards women using mHealth and eHealth to self-monitor their pregnancy: A systematic review of the literature’.  There are many apps to help women to monitor aspects of their own pregnancy and maternal health. This literature review aims to understand midwives’ perspectives on women self-monitoring their pregnancy using eHealth and mHealth, and establish gaps in research. mHealth (mobile health) is the use of mobile devices, digital technologies for health, health analytics, or tele-health, whilst eHealth (electronic health) is the health care supported by electronic processes.

It established that midwives generally hold ambivalent views towards the use of eHealth and mHealth technologies in antenatal care. Often, midwives acknowledged the potential benefits of such technologies, such as their ability to modernise antenatal care and to help women make more informed decisions about their pregnancy. However, midwives were quick to point out the risks and limitations of these, such as the accuracy of conveyed information, and negative impacts on the patient-professional relationship.  The authors conclude that with COVID-19 making face-to-face maternity service provision more complicated and with technology is continuously developing, there is a compelling need for studies that investigate the role of eHealth and mHealth in self-monitoring pregnancy, and the consequences this has for pregnant women, health professionals and organisations, as well as midwifery curricula.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

Reference:

  1. Vickery, M., Way, S., Hundley, V., Smith, G., van Teijlingen, E., Westwood G. (2020) Midwives’ views women’s use of mHealth and eHealth to self-monitor their pregnancy: A systematic review of the literature, European Journal of Midwifery 4: 36 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18332/ejm/126625