In 2015, the National Partnership for Maternal Safety (NPMS) developed an obstetric hemorrhage consensus bundle to provide birthing facilities in the United States with consistent, validated practice guidelines for postpartum hemorrhage management. The process of implementing each bundle element at a large tertiary labor and delivery unit has not been described; we sought to identify practice deficiencies and perceived barriers to bundle implementation among multidisciplinary providers.
We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional, consensus-building study based on the Delphi method. A multidisciplinary expert panel comprised of anesthesiologists, obstetricians, nurses, and surgical technicians was assembled and participated in 4 sequential questionnaires. The first round identified bundle elements that experts determined as not currently adequate and perceived barriers to implementation. The second round established prioritization of elements within each professional group; and the third round ranked the elements with at least 60% agreement on feasibility of implementation and positive impact on patient care. The last round revealed responses across all 4 professional groups to derive a final consensus. Descriptive statistics were performed.
A total of 38 experts completed the study (11 anesthesiologists, 11 obstetricians, 10 nurses, and 6 surgical technicians). While all 13 (100%) NPMS obstetric bundle elements were described as deficient in our labor and delivery unit by a provider in at least 1 discipline, consensus among at least 3 of the 4 disciplines was achieved for 6 element deficiencies. Barriers to implementation were determined. The initiatives that achieved consensus as possessing high patient impact and implementation feasibility were protocol-driven management, unit-based simulation drills, blood loss quantification, and team huddles and debriefings.
The NPMS obstetric hemorrhage bundle was created to help guide practice and systems improvement for US birthing facilities. The Delphi method enabled identification of deficient elements and perceived barriers to element implementation, as well as group consensus on elements with highest patient impact and feasibility. Multidisciplinary group consensus can identify deficiencies and promote tangible, quality improvements in a large, tertiary-care labor and delivery unit. Institutions may utilize our described technique to guide implementation of future care bundles.
From the *Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
†Department of Anesthesiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
‡Department of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
§Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Published ahead of print 4 December 2018.
Accepted for publication April 12, 2018.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal’s website (www.anesthesia-analgesia.org).
Institutional Research Ethics Board: Partners HealthCare Institutional Review Board, Partners Human Research Committee, 116 Huntington Ave, Suite 1002, Boston, MA 02116.
Clinical trial number and registry URL: NCT03018119 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03018119.
Reprints will not be available from the authors.
Address correspondence to Annemaria De Tina, MD, FRCPC, Department of Anesthesiology, McMaster University, Third Floor, 237 Barton St E, Hamilton, ON L8L 2X2, Canada. Address e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org.