Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Induction of labour during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national survey of impact on practice in the UK

M Harkness, C Yuill, H Cheyne, SJ Stock, C McCourt On behalf of the CHOICE Study Team
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.27.21250521
M Harkness
1Nursing Midwifery and Allied Health Professionals Research Unit (NMHAP-RU), University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4NF
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: mairi.harkness{at}stir.ac.uk
C Yuill
2Centre for Maternal and Child Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, 1 Myddleton Street, London, EC1R 1UB
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
H Cheyne
1Nursing Midwifery and Allied Health Professionals Research Unit (NMHAP-RU), University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4NF
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SJ Stock
3Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh NINE Edinburgh BioQuarter, 9 Little France Road, Edinburgh EH16 4UX
4MRC Centre for Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh Queen’s Medical Research Institute, 47 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh EH16 4TJ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
C McCourt
2Centre for Maternal and Child Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, 1 Myddleton Street, London, EC1R 1UB
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Induction of labour (IOL) is one of the most commonly performed interventions in maternity care, with outpatient cervical ripening increasingly offered as an option for women undergoing IOL. The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the context of practice and the option of returning home for cervical ripening may now assume greater significance. This work aimed to examine whether and how the COVID-19 pandemic has changed practice around IOL in the UK.

Method We used an online questionnaire to survey senior obstetricians and midwives at all 156 UK NHS Trusts and Boards that currently offer maternity services. Responses were analysed to produce descriptive statistics, with free text responses analysed using a conventional content analysis approach.

Findings Responses were received from 92 of 156 UK Trusts and Boards, a 59% response rate. Many Trusts and Boards reported no change to their IOL practice, however 23% reported change in methods used for cervical ripening; 28% a change in criteria for home cervical ripening; 28% stated that more women were returning home during cervical ripening; and 24% noted changes to women’s response to recommendations for IOL. Much of the change was reported as happening in response to attempts to minimise hospital attendance and restrictions on birth partners accompanying women.

Conclusions The pandemic has changed practice around induction of labour, although this varied significantly between NHS Trusts and Boards. There is a lack of formal evidence to support decision-making around outpatient cervical ripening: the basis on which changes were implemented and what evidence was used to inform decisions is not clear.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors report research grants paid to institutions from: NIHR; Wellcome Trust; Tommy's Charity, MRC during the course of the work

Funding Statement

The authors report research grants paid to institutions from: NIHR; Wellcome Trust; Tommy's Charity, MRC during the course of the work

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Ethics approval was obtained from the York & Humber Sheffield Research Ethics Committee in June 2020 (IRAS: 276788) as part of the wider CHOICE Study application. The survey was initiated in response to Committee questions about the impact of COVID-19 on IOL during the Proportionate Review.

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

The data sets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

  • List of Abbreviations

    COVID & COVID-19
    The name given by the World Health Organization (WHO) for the disease caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV2.
    AMLU
    Alongside Midwifery Led Unit
    BMI
    Body Mass Index
    CHOICE
    The CHOICE Study
    FM
    Fetal Movements
    FMLU
    Freestanding Midwifery Led Unit
    IOL
    Induction of Labour
    NICE
    National Institute of Clinical Excellence
    NHS
    National Health Service
    OIOL
    Outpatient Induction of Labour
    qCHOICE
    The qCHOICE Study
    WHO
    The World Health Organisation
    UK
    United Kingdom
  • Copyright 
    The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
    Back to top
    PreviousNext
    Posted January 29, 2021.
    Download PDF
    Data/Code
    Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

    NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Induction of labour during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national survey of impact on practice in the UK
    (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Share
    Induction of labour during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national survey of impact on practice in the UK
    M Harkness, C Yuill, H Cheyne, SJ Stock, C McCourt
    medRxiv 2021.01.27.21250521; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.27.21250521
    Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
    Citation Tools
    Induction of labour during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national survey of impact on practice in the UK
    M Harkness, C Yuill, H Cheyne, SJ Stock, C McCourt
    medRxiv 2021.01.27.21250521; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.27.21250521

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    Subject Area

    • Obstetrics and Gynecology
    Subject Areas
    All Articles
    • Addiction Medicine (349)
    • Allergy and Immunology (668)
    • Allergy and Immunology (668)
    • Anesthesia (181)
    • Cardiovascular Medicine (2648)
    • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (316)
    • Dermatology (223)
    • Emergency Medicine (399)
    • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (942)
    • Epidemiology (12228)
    • Forensic Medicine (10)
    • Gastroenterology (759)
    • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (4103)
    • Geriatric Medicine (387)
    • Health Economics (680)
    • Health Informatics (2657)
    • Health Policy (1005)
    • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (985)
    • Hematology (363)
    • HIV/AIDS (851)
    • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13695)
    • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (797)
    • Medical Education (399)
    • Medical Ethics (109)
    • Nephrology (436)
    • Neurology (3882)
    • Nursing (209)
    • Nutrition (577)
    • Obstetrics and Gynecology (739)
    • Occupational and Environmental Health (695)
    • Oncology (2030)
    • Ophthalmology (585)
    • Orthopedics (240)
    • Otolaryngology (306)
    • Pain Medicine (250)
    • Palliative Medicine (75)
    • Pathology (473)
    • Pediatrics (1115)
    • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (466)
    • Primary Care Research (452)
    • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3432)
    • Public and Global Health (6527)
    • Radiology and Imaging (1403)
    • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (814)
    • Respiratory Medicine (871)
    • Rheumatology (409)
    • Sexual and Reproductive Health (410)
    • Sports Medicine (342)
    • Surgery (448)
    • Toxicology (53)
    • Transplantation (185)
    • Urology (165)