Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSmall, Kirsten A
dc.contributor.authorSidebotham, Mary
dc.contributor.authorFenwick, Jennifer
dc.contributor.authorGamble, Jenny
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-16T04:32:39Z
dc.date.available2021-06-16T04:32:39Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.issn1871-5192
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.wombi.2021.05.006
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/405052
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Central fetal monitoring systems transmit cardiotocograph data to a central site in a maternity service. Despite a paucity of evidence of safety, the installation of central fetal monitoring systems is common. AIM: This qualitative research sought to explore whether, and how, clinicians modified their clinical safety related behaviours following the introduction of a central monitoring system. METHODS: An Institutional Ethnographic enquiry was conducted at an Australian hospital where a central fetal monitoring system had been installed in 2016. Informants (n=50) were midwifery and obstetric staff. Data collection consisted of interviews and observations that were analysed to understand whether and how clinicians modified their clinical safety related behaviours. FINDINGS: The introduction of the central monitoring system was associated with clinical decision making without complete clinical information. Midwives' work was disrupted. Higher levels of anxiety were described for midwives and birthing women. Midwives reported higher rates of intervention in response to the visibility of the cardiotocograph at the central monitoring station. Midwives described a shift in focus away from the birthing woman towards documenting in the central monitoring system. DISCUSSION: The introduction of central fetal monitoring prompted new behaviours among midwifery and obstetric staff that may potentially undermine clinical safety. CONCLUSION: This research raises concerns that central fetal monitoring systems may not promote safe intrapartum care. We argue that research examining the safety of central fetal monitoring systems is required.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherElsevier BV
dc.relation.ispartofjournalWomen and Birth
dc.subject.fieldofresearchBiomedical and clinical sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchReproductive medicine
dc.subject.fieldofresearchMidwifery
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode32
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode3215
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode4204
dc.subject.keywordsBehaviour
dc.subject.keywordsCardiotocography
dc.subject.keywordsCentral monitoring
dc.subject.keywordsElectronic fetal monitoring
dc.subject.keywordsParturition
dc.title"I'm not doing what I should be doing as a midwife": An ethnographic exploration of central fetal monitoring and perceptions of clinical safety
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dcterms.bibliographicCitationSmall, KA; Sidebotham, M; Fenwick, J; Gamble, J, "I'm not doing what I should be doing as a midwife": An ethnographic exploration of central fetal monitoring and perceptions of clinical safety, Women and Birth, 2021
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-05-20
dcterms.licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.date.updated2021-06-09T06:40:27Z
dc.description.versionAccepted Manuscript (AM)
gro.description.notepublicThis publication has been entered as an advanced online version in Griffith Research Online.
gro.rights.copyright© 2021 Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, providing that the work is properly cited.
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorGamble, Jenny A.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record