Search

Rapid changes to how maternity health care is delivered has occurred in many countries across the globe in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Maternity care provisions have been challenged attempting to balance the needs and safety of pregnant women and their care providers. Women experiencing a pregnancy after loss (PAL) during these times face particularly difficult circumstances. In this paper we highlight the situation in three high income countries (Australia, Ireland and USA) and point to the need to remember the unique and challenging circumstances of these PAL families. We suggest new practices may be deviating from established evidence-based guidelines and outline the potential ramifications of these changes. Recommendations for health care providers are suggested to bridge the gap between the necessary safety requirements due to the pandemic, the role of the health care provider, and the needs of families experiencing a pregnancy after loss. Changes to practices i.e. limiting the number of antenatal appointments and access to a support person may have detrimental effects on both mother, baby, and their family. However, new guidelines in maternity care practices developed to account for the pandemic have not necessarily considered women experiencing pregnancy after loss. Bereaved mothers and their families experiencing a pregnancy after loss should continue to be supported during the COVID-19 pandemic to limit unintended consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The idea of scholarship within disciplines has long been discussed in the relevant literature. The concept of scholarship in teaching and learning has its foundations in Boyer's (1990) seminal work Scholarship Reconsidered. In this, Boyer made the case for teaching to be enhanced and made public and to be credited with equal weight as research activity within academic institutions. The activities of teaching and learning are truly academia's raison d'être however they get obscured in the mists of the importance placed on research activity. To this end it is vital that educators begin to critically examine their teaching to fully inform research and practice. One of the lenses through which this can be done is through the act of reflection. Reflection on action as a process first described by Schön in 1983 (Schön, 2005) necessitates not only the critical examination of what we do but also what are the underlying assumptions about why we do what we do. The paper outlines such reflective portfolio submitted as part requirement for Postgraduate Diploma in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. It examines student midwives learning using the reflective lens of the benchmark course portfolio. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Background: The Trauma Redesign Team sought to examine, and where required redesign, the trauma patient journey and trauma team process within the Emergency Department (ED) at Westmead Hospital, a Level 1 Trauma Centre. This initiative was born from the perceived growing disharmony between professions and services involved in the resuscitation and treatment of trauma patients. The aim of the project was to improve the staff experience and the patient journey within the ED. Method: By adopting Redesign methodology, the ‘as is’ state was identified using a multidisciplinary approach to develop and examine detailed process maps of the trauma patient journey and the staff roles within the trauma team. Patient, family and staff interviews were also conducted to develop a detailed review of the process. Data obtained from these activities were analysed and grouped into themes enabling prioritisation for review and implementation. Outcome: The process of Trauma Redesign delineated many features of the ‘trauma team’ at Westmead Hospital which were either redundant, non value adding or affecting the cohesion and function of the team. Five predominant themes were identified and targeted for solution development planning and sustainable change, with a focus on patient safety and feasibility. Conclusion: Redesign is a complex, inclusive and detailed process that has effectively, comprehensively and clearly highlighted areas of need in the trauma process. This has been an invaluable experience for staff and patients and highly recommended for those considering reviewing their departmental practices and systems. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]