Tagged / midwifery

Successful BU Festival of Learning debate of media and fear in childbirth!

BU research, Festival of Learning, Research news

Yesterday saw the lively debate organised by Prof. Vanora Hundley on the motion: ‘The media is responsible for creating fear in childbirth.’

 

Elizabeth Duff from the NCT and HSC Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen affiliated with the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health and against the motion argued Joanne Dewberry (http://joannedewberry.co.uk/about-joanne/ ), independent blogger, journalist and successful business woman and Dr. Ann Luce from BU’s  Journalism and Communication Academic Group. 

The debate was part of BU’s Festival of Learning event to explore the role of the mass media in shaping such beliefs and identify whether media portrayals are responsible for rising rates of intervention.  The audience voted in favour of the motion, but the media team managed to get some people to reconsider their views on the impact of the mass media on women’s view of childbirth.

Professors Vanora Hundley and Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

Strong CMMPH presence at ICM conference in Prague!

BU research, Featured academics, PG research, Publishing, Research news, Training, Uncategorized

Dr. Carol Wilkins

In the first week of June members of the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal and Perinatal Health presented BU’s midwifery research and education at the 30th ICM (International Confederation of Midwives) Congress in Prague (Czech Republic).

There were four oral presentations in total, one workshop and three poster presentations.  The oral presentations comprised:

  1. Dr. Carol Wilkins (see picture) presented from her Ph.D. work ‘Emotional processing in childbirth study: exploration of the relationship between maternal emotions in pregnancy and risk of postnatal depression’.
  2. HSC Professor Vanora Hundley presented her international work on clean birth kits.
  3. Senior Lecturer in Midwifery Alison Taylor gave a paper under the title ‘Letting off steam! Video diaries to share breastfeeding experiences.  Her Ph.D. thesis research uses a novel approach of giving hand-held cameras to make home video diaries about their ‘realities’ of breastfeeding.
  4. HSC student Sheetal Sharma presented her Ph.D. research ‘Getting women to care: mixed–methods evaluation of maternity care intervention in rural Nepal’.

Dr Susan Way led a workshop on escalating concerns in relation to poor clinical practice and disrespectful care.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Furthermore, three HSC posters were displayed as part of a special session on Midwifery in South Asia, all three related to different CMMPH maternity care studies conducted in Nepal.

  1. Sharma, S.  Sicuri, E., Belizan, JM., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Stephens J.,  Hundley, V., Angell, C.,  Getting women to care in Nepal: A Difference in Difference analysis of a health promotion intervention
  2. Milne, L, Hundley, V, van Teijlingen, E, Ireland, J, Simkhada, P, Staff perspectives of barriers to women accessing birthing services in Nepal: A qualitative study,
  3. Sharma, S., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V. Simkhada, P., Angell, C. Pregnant & Dirty?

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

Highest marks for International Fellowship for Midwives research in Nepal

BU research, Research news, Uncategorized

 

In 2013 Wellbeing of Women joined the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) to offer the International Fellowship for Midwives (worth £20,000).  Their first ever recipient was BU Lesley Milne with her supporting team.  Lesley is a Senior Lecturer in Midwifery based at BU’s Portsmouth Branch Campus and her proposal set out to undertake a research project to explore barriers to facility birth in Nepal.

 

Delivery bed small hospital Nepal

Apart from Lesley herself the BU team comprises Vanora Hundley, Professor in Midwifery, Edwin van Teijlingen, Professor of Reproductive Health Research, and two HSC Visiting Faculty members, namely Dr. Padam Simkhada, Senior Lecturer at the University of Sheffield, and Ms. Jillian Ireland, Community Midwife NHS Poole Hospitals.

 

Small commercial pharmacy outside local hospital (Nepal)

Small commercial pharmacy outside local hospital (Nepal)

At the end of March 2014 we submitted the final report on the research to Well-Being of Women and the RCM and this report gained an ‘A’ in their scoring system.  Last week at the feedback meeting in Well-Being of Women’s office in London Lesley presented some of her key findings which she illustrated with some of her photographs.  The comments from those round the table were that the topic was well researched and that the qualitative research findings could help focus the funders in their future work.

 

Having reached the dissemination stage, we are planning scientific papers as well as a feedback session in Kathmandu (in September this year). Currently we are working on two academic papers, one is in an advanced stage approaching submission and the other is just passed its draft stage.

 

 

Lesley Milne, Vanora Hundley, Jillian Ireland (Visiting Faculty),Edwin van Teijlingen & Padam Simkhada (Visiting Faculty)

 

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health

School of Health & Social Care

 


EXON by the sea!

Training

 

After many months of negotiation I packed my weekend bag and set off to Eastbourne to provide the first of a six day programme spread over three months on newborn examination, to a select cohort of nine midwives who work for the East Sussex NHS Healthcare Trust. The nearest university (Brighton) does not provide the module and I regularly have midwives travelling up from Brighton to attend the two courses provided annually at the Lansdowne Campus.

Midwives from the midwife led unit (EMU as it is fondly referred to) at Eastbourne Hospital, the acute trust at Hastings and Crowbridge Birthing Unit all joined the module at the beginning of January 2014. Some of the midwives were undertaking the unit in work time and some during their annual leave, but all were enthusiastic and very excited to be finally learning the skills and competencies necessary to become newborn examiners. Currently no midwives in the combined trusts undertake newborn examination and all babies are either examined by junior doctors in training or general practitioners (GPs) in the community setting. For a number of years there have been concerns expressed in the literature around the quality of the newborn examination when undertaken by junior doctors and GPs mainly around training and on-going education. Traditionally doctors in NHS hospitals were taught newborn examination under the mantra ‘see one – do one – teach one’, midwives on the other hand, have had to undergo many months of extra training and are required to undertake between 40 & 60 newborn examinations before being deemed competent. These conditions became onerous for midwives as it became difficult for them to find mentors and assessors to support them in practice. Many requested extensions and in some cases took almost two years to complete. This model of learning was not sustainable in the long run for both the clinical workplace and for university processes. Therefore an opportunity arose to change how BU provided examination of the newborn (EXON) when the post registration framework was re-validated in 2012, with the main difference being in relation to the examinations.

Midwifery is a self-regulating profession; therefore it is up to individual practitioners to judge whether they are component when providing midwifery care. The philosophy of self-regulation underpinning competency guided the provision of the new EXON course in relation to the number of examinations required. Midwives have to carry out a minimum of 10 mentored newborn checks, with five examinations being directly supervised. Once 10 examinations have been carried out midwives can undertake as many self-assessed newborn checks until they feel competent. Once they have reached this point they put themselves forward for one summative assessment which is a newborn examination evaluated in practice.  Midwives have nine months to complete the module. In addition, to further support midwives in training for this role, experienced midwives around the BU patch and as far as West Wiltshire have been provided with a half day update focusing on mentoring/assessing and understanding the EXON paperwork. These midwives have now taken on the role of mentoring and assessing midwives through EXON.

Now having delivered the six day programme the midwives in Eastbourne have successfully completed the academic requirement,s with all passing their ‘enquiry-based learning’ presentations which focused on an aspect of newborn physiology/pathology. The presentations were of an extremely high standard and feedback from the unit leader recommended writing up their work for publication in the British Journal of Midwifery. Their unit evaluations were 100% positive. One of the main benefits centered on the midwives forming a cohesive group and getting to know each other better.  These midwives are leading the way at East Sussex Healthcare. Once they qualify, they in turn, can become mentors and assessors for the next cohort. Perhaps even more importantly, evidence demonstrates that when midwives undertake this expanded role, women’s satisfaction and midwifery autonomy is increased and crucially, there is continuity of care for the woman and her baby and for the midwife herself.

 

For further information on the EXON module please contact Luisa Cescutti-Butler, Senior Lecturer, Lansdowne Campus: lcbutler@bournemouth.ac.uk

 

Good start of the year: Early crop of 2014 publications

BU research, Publishing, Research Ethics, Research news, Uncategorized

HSC staff saw the fruit of their hard work in 2013 as a great number of papers have been accepted for publication or actually appeared in print in the first three weeks of January.  

 

 

There are a number of 2014 papers in health care journals, including papers in Nurse Education in Practice, The Practising Midwife, Journal of Clinical Nursing, Birth, ISRN Family Medicine, Perspective in Public Health, an editorial in Midwifery and two in the same issue of Health Science Journal.  There was also an early contribution from our social science colleagues in The Journal of Adult Protection and, last but not least a book chapter in Case Studies in e-Learning Research.

 

  1. Morley, D., 2014. Supporting student nurses in practice with online communication tools. Nurse Education in Practice, 14, 69-75.
  2. Bennett, S and Scammell, J (2014) Midwives caring for asylum-seeking women: research findings.  The Practising Midwife. 17 (1) p9-12
  3. Whitford, H., Aitchison, P., Entwistle V.A., van Teijlingen, E., Davidson, T., Humphrey, T., Tucker, J. Use of a birth plan within woman-held maternity records: a qualitative study with women and staff in northeast Scotland, Birth (accepted).
  4. Norton, E. 2014 The application of humanization theory to health-promoting practice. Perspectives in Public Health, (online first 2013)
  5. Sapkota, T., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2014) Nepalese health workers’ migration to the United Kingdom: A qualitative study.  Health Science Journal 8(1):  57-74.
  6. Hunt, J.A., Hutchings, M. (2014) Innovative group-facilitated peer and educator assessment of nursing students’ group presentations, Health Science Journal 8(1): 22-31.
  7. Harding, A., Sanders, F., Medina Lara, A., van Teijlingen, E., Wood, C., Galpin, D. Baron, S., Crowe, S., Sharma, S. Patient choice for older people in English NHS primary care: theory & practice,  ISRN Family Medicine (accepted).
  8. Norton, E., Holloway, I., Galvin K. 2014. Comfort vs risk: a grounded theory about female adolescent behaviour in the sun. Journal of Clinical Nursing. (online first 2013)
  9. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Matthews, Z., Lewis, G., Graham, W.J., Campbell, J., ten Hoope-Bender, P., Sheppard, Z.A., Hulton, L. (2014) Millennium Development Goals: All good things must come to an end, so what next? Midwifery 30: 1-2.
  10. Parker, J.,  Ashencaen Crabtree, S. (2014) Covert research and adult protection and safeguarding: an ethical dilemma? The Journal of Adult Protection (accepted).
  11. Hutchings, M, Quinney, A., Galvin, K.  Clark, V. book chapter IN: ‘The Yin/Yang of Innovative Technology Enhanced Assessment for Promoting Student Learning’ Case Studies in e-Learning Research.   Book is now available at:  http://www.academic-bookshop.com/ourshop/prod_2915879-Case-Studies-in-eLearning-Research-for-Researchers-teachers-and-Students.html

 

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health

BU presents at first National Midwifery Conference in Nepal

BU research

 

Lesley Milne, senior lecturer in Midwifery at Bournemouth University, presented this weekend at the First National Midwifery Conference in Kathmandu, Nepal.  She is part of a team studying why women in Nepal don’t use health services when giving birth in areas where such facilities are available.    After her presentation Lesley (picture first right) was awarded a certificate and token in true Nepali style.

Lesley is currently in Nepal for fieldwork as part of the first International Fellowship for Midwives worth £20,000.  Her study uses a mixed-methods approach which comprises observation and interviews with staff.  The Fellowship has been awarded by the charity Wellbeing of Women, in association with the Royal College of Midwives (RCM), for research into maternity services and women’s health from an international perspective.

The team consists of Prof. Vanora Hundley, Professor in Midwifery, Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen, Professor of Reproductive Health Research at BU, and BU Visiting Faculty Dr. Padam Simkhada based at ScHARR, the University of Sheffield. 

A second paper with BU input was presented by Joy Kemp Global who is the RCM’s Professional Advisor (Global Midwifery Twinning Project).  The presentation ‘A Feasibility Study of Professional Midwives in Nepal’ is based on a paper recently accepted for publication by the international journal Midwifery.  This health policy planning paper is led by Swedish midwife Malin Bogren and in collaboration with Prof. Marie Berg (The Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen.

 

Professors Edwin van Teijlingen & Vanora Hundley

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health , HSC.

Comment on BU Blog leads to academic publication

BU research, Guidance, PG research, Publishing

Authorship differs between disciplines

Paper by Hundley et al. published 2013

Last year Prof. Matthew Bennett1 raised some interesting issues about academic authorship on this award-winning BU Blog.  Authorship is an issue that many academic colleague see as challenging.   On September 27th, 2012 two of us replied to this blog by adding some of our own observations on the web. 2   Having penned our online comments we discussed the issue with BU Visiting Faculty Dr. Padam Simkhada Senior Lecturer in International Health at ScHARR, University of Sheffield (www.shef.ac.uk/scharr/sections/ph/staff/profiles/padamsimkhada).  Between the three of us we came to the conclusion that the issue of academic authorship can be very confusing as well as tricky.

 

We discussed a wide-range of issues around academic authorship, including who should be an author and who should not be so, the order of authors, and that there are different conventions between different academic disciplines.  Being academic we rapidly came to the conclusion that there was a paper in this.  We drafted our ideas, searched the literature for other discussions on authorship, general guidelines on authorship, etc.   We wrote the paper and submitted it to the academic journal Health Renaissance; an Open-Access journal, which is freely available world-wide.  The editor liked it and published our paper ‘Academic authorship: who, why and in what order?’ this month as a guest editorial. 3

 

 

We would like to highlight that there are two separate messages in the publication of this paper.  The first message is about academic scholarship; some of our colleagues may find the content of this paper is a useful guide in deciding authorship order, or at least in helping to open the debate about who should be included as co-author and who is not eligible.  The second message is more about academic citizenship, namely that messages on the BU Blog and even comments in reply to other people’s messages may contain useful information to the wider academic community and should be taken further.  Our message here is don’t see the BU Blog as an end point, see it as a stepping stone to the wider academic world!

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen*, Prof. Vanora Hundley* & Dr. Padam Simkhada**

* Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, HSC, Bournemouth University

** ScHARR, The University of Sheffield

 

References:

1.      Bennett, M. (2012) What’s in a list?, BU Research Blog, http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/2012/09/27/whats-in-a-list/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily

 

2.      Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E. (2012) Response to What’s in a list?, http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/2012/09/27/whats-in-a-list/#comment-17234

 

3.      Hundley, V., van Teijlingen,      E., Simkhada, P. (2013) Academic authorship: who, why and in what order? Health Renaissance 11      (2):98-101  www.healthrenaissance.org.np/uploads/Download/vol-11-2/Page_99_101_Editorial.pdf

Prof. Hundley Associate Editor BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth

Featured academics, Publishing

Congratulations to BU Prof. Vanora Hundley who has been invited to become Associate Editor for BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.  BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth is an international journal with Open Access and it has a good Impact Factor (currently 2.83) in its field.    More details of BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth can be found at http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcpregnancychildbirth/

 

Prof. Hundley joins Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen as Associate Editor, giving Bournemouth University a very good representation on the editorial team.

More about Prof. Hundley: http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/vanora-hundley/16/b40/39b

WellBeing of Women – Two Calls

BU research, Funding opportunities

Research Training Fellowships

Wellbeing of Women in association with the RCOG invites applications for Research Training fellowships to encourage medical graduates to pursue a career in academic medicine.
 
The Fellowship must be undertaken in the UK or Eire and the research can be in basic science, clinical or translational research in one of the following three areas:

1. Gynaecological Cancers
2. Pregnancy and Birth including pre-term birth, miscarriage and fertility
3. Quality of Life issues including menopause, incontinence and prolapse, sexual health, menstrual disorders and endometriosis

The 2013 RTF round is now open. Applications must be received by Friday 7th September at 3pm

Fellowships are awarded for up to three years and cover the cost of a full time salary per annum for Specialty Registrars (or equivalent) and will be consistent with current NHS or academic scales.  Registration fees for a higher degree and reasonable research expenses may be allowed and should be specified in the application form.  The upper limit of this award is £200,000. Research Training Fellows will normally be expected to enrol for a higher degree.  A Fellowship will only be awarded to an applicant who has been accepted for a place in a department with established expertise in the specified field.  Candidates must also provide evidence of previous interest and a training component in research methodology.  Both the training and research project must be capable of being brought to a conclusion within the duration of the Fellowship.  Applications may be made for the financial support of work which is already in progress, or for a new project, provided a substantial element of training is provided during the course of the work.

Wellbeing of Women is delighted that our partnership with the Wellcome Trust which began in 2009 has continued. Suitable candidates may be considered by the Trust for the award of a Wellbeing of Women/Wellcome Trust Research Training Fellowship.

The award of a Fellowship is subject to the acceptance of the Wellbeing of Women’s Terms and Conditions for Research Grants and the following restrictions apply:

1.   Fellowships are not intended as a project grant and may not be used to fund sub-specialty training.

2.   Funds will not be released without evidence of ethical committee support.
3. 
WoW does not pay indirect costs.
4. 
Charges for administration by University or NHS Authorities will not be met.

The process:


Applications will be subject to external peer review.  Shortlisted applicants will be advised in late January and asked to attend for interview by members of the Wellbeing of Women Research Advisory Committee at the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in London usually in late January or early February . Reasonable interview expenses within the UK or Eire will be reimbursed. 

Shortlisted candidates will also be asked to formally agree to their application being considered by the Wellcome Trust, and may be asked to attend for interview at the Trust’s offices in London.These nominees will be required to sign up to the Wellcome Trust’s grant conditions, and any eventual award will be made in accordance with the Trust’s policy for costing Training Fellows.

Please complete the application form for Wellbeing of Women Research Training Fellowship 2013 and email a copy to Philip Matusavage at pmatusavage.wellbeingofwomen@rcog.org.uk. Please also send the original signed version to Philip Matusavage, Research Manager, 27 Sussex Place, Regent’s Park, London, NW1 4SP to be received by 3:00pm on Friday 7th September 2012

Please read the Research Training Fellowship Guidelines before completing the application form. Your application may be rejected if it does not follow these guidelines.

Application   Guidelines

Entry Level Research Scholarships

Wellbeing of Woman in association with the RCOG, College of Midwives and the British Maternal Fetal Medicine Society, invites applications for Entry Level Scholarships to enable medical graduates to train in basic science, clinical or translational research in one of the following three areas:

1. Gynaecological Cancers
2. Pregnancy and Birth, including pre-term birth, miscarriage and fertility
3. Quality of Life issues; including menopause, incontinence and prolapse, sexual health, menstrual disorders and endometriosis

The research must be undertaken in the UK or Eire.  One scholarship is reserved for midwives.

The 2013 ELS Round is now open. Applications must be received by Friday 14th September at 3pm

They are pleased to announce that they are again joining with the Royal College of Midwives and the British Maternal Fetal Medicine Society in offering these scholarships.

Entry-Level Research Scholarships are to provide ‘pump-priming’ funds to enable trainees to be exposed to a research environment, or to obtain pilot data for bids for definitive funding. Applicants will normally be within the first few years of graduation, and would not previously have been involved in substantial research projects. Scholarships are a single payment up to a maximum of £20,000 to go towards salary and/or laboratory costs.

Successful completion of an Entry-Level Research Scholarship will be viewed positively should an applicant subsequently choose to apply for a Wellbeing of Women Research Training Fellowship.

The award of a Scholarship is subject to the acceptance of Wellbeing of Women’s Terms and Conditions for Research Grants, and the following restrictions apply:

1. Funds will not be released without evidence of ethics committee support.
2. The research must be undertaken in the UK or Eire. 
3. WoW does not pay indirect costs.
4. Charges for administration by University or NHS Authorities will not be met.
5. WoW does not cover University fees.
6. Midwives must be a full member of the RCM at the time of application and for the duration of the project
 
Please complete the application form for Wellbeing of Women/RCM/BMFMS Entry-Level Research Scholarship 2013 and email a copy to Philip Matusavage at pmatusavage.wellbeingofwomen@rcog.org.uk. Please also send the original signed version to Philip Matusavage, Research Manager, 27 Sussex Place, Regent’s Park, London, NW1 4SP to be received by 3:00pm on Friday 14th September 2012
Please read the Entry-Level Research Scholarship Guidelines before completing the application form. Your application may be rejected if it does not follow these guidelines.
 

The RKE Operations team can help you with your application.

BUCRU – Seminar presenting Breaking News!

BU research, Post-award, Publishing, Research news, Uncategorized

 

BREAKING  NEWS…

We would like to invite you to an afternoon seminar by one of our Visiting Faculty, Professor Mike Wee, presenting some exciting new research findings to come out of a recently completed Research for Patient Benefit funded study comparing two methods of pain relief during labour (abstract and biography below).  This paper was just voted best paper of the conference at the Obstetric Anaesthetists Association Annual Conference in Liverpool and was featured recently in the Bournemouth Echo http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/9770928.Pain_relief_in_labour__study_at_Poole_hospital_makes_important_discovery/

The seminar is scheduled for Thursday 19th July 2-3pm in BG10 Bournemouth House (after the HSC end of term lunch and next door for your convenience).

We hope you can make it and look forward to seeing you then.

BUCRU

Website: http://microsites.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

Administrator: +44 (0)1202 961939 / wardl@bournemouth.ac.uk

Title: The IDvIP Trial: A two-centre double blind randomised controlled trial comparing i.m. diamorphine and i.m. pethidine for labour analgesia

Research team and affiliations: MYK Wee, JP Tuckey,* P Thomas,† S Burnard,* D Jackson.

Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Poole, UK, *Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK, †Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit, Bournemouth, UK.

Abstract:

Background: Intramuscular pethidine, the commonest parenteral opioid analgesic used in obstetrics and more recently diamorphine usage has increased in the UK.  The maternal, fetal and neonatal side effects are well known for pethidine but there are no sufficiently powered large RCTs comparing pethidine with diamorphine. The aim of this trial is to address this.

Methods: After ethical approval, informed consent was obtained from 484 women randomised to receive either 7.5mg diamorphine i.m. or 150mg pethidine i.m. for labour analgesia. The sample size calculation derived from a small RCT giving 90% power (at the 5% significance level) is based upon the maternal primary outcome measure of pain relief at 60mins and the neonatal primary outcome measures of Apgar Score of <7 at 1min and neonatal resuscitation. Secondary outcome measures include verbal pain intensity at 60mins and over 3hrs post-analgesia, pain relief over first 3hrs, maternal oxygen saturation, sedation, nausea and vomiting and maternal satisfaction with analgesia. Fetal and neonatal secondary outcomes include CTG trace, meconium staining, UApH, UVpH, time of delivery to first breath, Apgar Score at 5mins, naloxone use, neonatal oxygen saturations, sedation and feeding behaviour for the first 2hrs after delivery.

Results: Reported using CONSORT guidelines. At 60mins post-administration and over a 3hr period, diamorphine is better at reducing pain scores than pethidine (p<0.001). There were no statistical differences between the two groups regarding Apgar Scores of <7 at 1min and the need for neonatal resuscitation.  The time between first dose administered and delivery is on average 82mins longer with the diamorphine group compared to pethidine (p<0.001). The vast majority of women experienced moderate to severe pain at all times. Women receiving diamorphine were more satisfied with their analgesia. There were no statistically significant differences in maternal sedation, nausea and vomiting or oxygen saturations over the 3hr period. There were no statistically significant differences in the fetal and neonatal outcomes including feeding behaviour between the two groups within 2hrs of birth but neonates in the pethidine group were more likely to be moderately or severely sedated at delivery.

Discussion: Intramuscular 7.5mg diamorphine gives significantly better analgesia than 150mg pethidine but prolongs delivery by approx. 82mins.  Women given diamorphine are more likely to be satisfied with their analgesia.  The mechanism for the prolongation of delivery time in the diamorphine group should be investigated further.

Acknowledgement: This research was funded by the NIHR Research for Patient Benefit Programme (PB-PG-0407-13170).

References

1. Tuckey JP, Prout RE, Wee MYK. Prescribing intramuscular opioids for labour analgesia in consultant-led maternity units: a survey of UK practice. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia 2008, 17(1):3-8.

2. Fairlie FM, Marshall L, Walker JJ et al. Intramuscular opioids for maternal pain relief for labour: a randomised controlled trial comparing pethidine with diamorphine. British  Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1999; 106(11): 1181 -1187.

Biography of speaker:

Michael Wee is a consultant anaesthetist from Poole Hospital and Royal Bournemouth Hospitals.  He has a special interest in obstetric anaesthesia and is the lead obstetric anaesthetist at Poole Hospital.  He is chair of the Research and Innovations Group at Poole Hospital and is a Board member of the Western Comprehensive Local Research Network.  He was awarded a visiting professorship at Bournemouth University in 2009.  He is a referee for several medical journals.  His research interests include patient information, safety in anaesthesia, maternal analgesia and simulation in epidural anaesthesia.  He is a co-supervisor of a PhD student at BU and chief investigator of the MObs study investigating early warning scores in obstetrics.