Cambridge Maternity Services Liaison Committee
We care about your care!
Cambridge Maternity Services Liaison Committee
We care about your care!
Sue Allen-Mills (Chair); Jan Butler; Angela D’Amore; Kate Evans; Ashley MacDonald; Maddie McMahon Anna Shasha; Heather Sturman; Jo Watt
Guests: Sue Woolley, Lynda Sinclair; Hayley Hill (NE Essex MSLC), Mary Rothwell (NE Essex MSLC)
Guests Hayley Hill and Mary Rothwell from NE Essex MSLC were welcomed to the meeting.
Apologies were received from: Nicola Clapperton; Jo Forsyth; Cheryl France; Victoria Frost; Karen Holmes; Perpetua Nicholas; Sue Prytherch; Claire Thompson; Emma Tregenna Kate Wilson
Approved.
3.3.3.7 (i) - SA-M has had confirmation from CP that she will attend the meeting on January 24, which will be devoted to discussing caesareans. NC has informed Helen Geall about the meeting, but confirmation whether she will be able to attend has not yet been received.
3.3.5 - Links to the MSLC website have now been set up from the Rosie website.
AS sent SA-M a copy of the Rosie action plan in response to the 2010 CQC report. SA-M thought that updates of the plan should be presented to the committee as and when they are produced. SA-M to ask AS for this to be done. (AS not present for this item)
ACTION: SA-M
9 - Doula meet & greet: MMcM has been in contact with AS about this, and it is proposed to hold a session in February (date tbc).
MSLC operation
Revive welcome pack for new members: MMcM is aiming to work on this over Christmas, and to have the pack available by the time of the next meeting in January.
Member recruitment material: AMacD is still working on this, and hopes to have a draft available for circulation before Christmas.
Securing feedback from users
User rep links have now been arranged for all the Children’s Centres, and the reps have started contacting the centres to make arrangements to visit them. HS has received a very positive response from Histon CC.
SA-M reminded the committee that it was agreed previously that we would experiment with producing an online user questionnaire through SurveyMonkey. This costs £200 for a year, which SA-M would like to take out of this year’s budget, which means the payment being made by the end of March. Before spending the money, and devoting time to formulating the questions, we need to be clear on how we would make parents aware of the questionnaire’s existence. It was suggested that this could be done through CC’s, antenatal classes, and health visitors. Hayley Hill said that in Colchester, paper questionnaires are distributed through CCs, but that they also use QR codes, allowing users to access and complete the questionnaire through their phones. CC-B will look into how this works.
SA-M will begin working on the questionnaire in January, and will circulate the committee for views on questions to include.
ACTION: CC-B, SA-M
Service issues – maximising normality
antenatal classes: SA-M emailed the committee to ask for suggestions and comments about what antenatal classes should cover. Three members replied. If others would still like to express their views on this, please e-mail SA-M.
SA-M has attended one meeting with Louise Mitton, who is leading on the Trust’s review of antenatal classes, and some of the group working with her on this. The group is currently trying to get an overview of the classes provided by the different midwifery teams, with the aim of standardising a structure for these.
VF has not been able to progress the formulation of a publicity programme, but is hoping to be able to give some time to this in the new year.
Through NC, SA-M has been in touch with Sue Last, Assistant Director of Patient Experience and Public Engagement, at the PCT and sent her some information to be forwarded to GPs in the weekly GP round-up. SA-M also contacted Wilma Smith, GP Liaison Officer, to ask if a representative from the MSLC could attend a GP Liaison Committee meeting to inform GPs about the MSLC. The GP Liaison Committee has now been disbanded, and a new group, with a more clinical focus, has been set up, which Wilma did not feel was an appropriate forum for the MSLC to attend. SA-M has since been in touch with PN, who has spoken to the chair of CATCH (Cambridge Association to Commission Health), which is likely to play a part in the new clinical commissioning groups. PN is in contact with CATCH, and will look for opportunities for the MSLC to engage with them.
The slide for the concourse display screen should be completed before Christmas.
MMcM drew attention to a petition she has placed on ipetitions.com http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/tongue-tie-cambs/ calling on NHS Cambridgeshire to provide a safe, reliable, prompt, accessible, skilled and knowledgeable tongue-tie division service for the county, in line with NICE guidance. To date, the petition has received 280 signatures. MMcM asked if members of the committee would read the petition, and sign it if they feel able to.
JW pointed out that Caroline Tomes, Public Health Specialty Registrar at the PCT, is undertaking an evidence-based review of tongue tie. She has been collecting research evidence, and is now asking for parents’ personal stories. The aim of this is to explore what options there are in terms of managing tongue tie. JW felt that the clinicians were currently as committed to tongue tie division as they wish to be. SA-M asked if there were any BFI criteria in relation to offering a tongue tie division service: there are not
MMcM requested clarification on what steps, if any, have been taken to avoid the situation occurring of a Bounty representative entering a room on the DU at an inappropriate time (as had happened with a client of hers). KE said it was necessary for Bounty reps to be on the DU as some women are discharged directly from there, but the committee was assured that the reps would enter a room only when invited to do so by a midwife or a mother, and that the situation that arose for MMcM’s client would not recur
Sue Woolley presented a draft of the proposed new antenatal notes. She showed an example of a folder that she would like to be introduced to hold the notes, test results, letters etc, but providing these has cost implications. Currently paperwork is held together using treasury tags.
Various questions were raised about the notes, but in general the committee liked them. AMacD asked if a space could be provided for women to write about their previous birth experiences(s). SA-M asked for the MSLC to be mentioned.
A PDF of the notes will be circulated to all the committee. SW asked for any comments on them to be sent to her by December 19th.
SA-M tabled reports on three visits to the antenatal clinic (ANC) made in September, October and November by herself, AMacD and MMcM, together with a report on the Romsey Mill Young Persons’ Health Fair in October. A fourth visit to the ANC had been planned for last week but had to be cancelled.
The main issues that emerged from the feedback contained in the reports were: issues with the diabetes clinic (both in terms of information given to women and the organisation of the clinic); disappointment among some women (mostly multips) about community midwifery care; young mothers feeling that they had not been treated with respect; levels of care immediately after birth.
KE said that there were issues with the diabetes clinic relating to the high numbers of women now using it. Increasing the number of clinics and moving it to an alternative venue had been considered, but there were problems with staffing both of these. It is possible that the clinic might be held in the new building when this is finished. KE will review the situation with the diabetic team in the light of the feedback received.
With regard to issues relating to community midwifery care, JB and AS said it was important to manage women’s expectations. The new antenatal notes will help with this. JB said more information on community care and procedures could be included on the Rosie website. She also requested the MSLC’s help in promoting awareness of the new arrangements. It was pointed out the dissatisfaction was mainly among multips, who had experienced the previous system. It was felt that the situation would stabilise over time.
The importance of how young mothers are engaged with/spoken to was emphasised.
With regard to care after birth, KE said that there was the possibility of having more maternity support workers to help with cleaning up.
AS said that these sorts of surveys were very helpful, and she hoped the MSLC would continue with them. SA-M said it was planned to continue with the ANC visits once a month, and for the programme of Children’s Centre visits to be started next year. She suggested that feedback should become a standing agenda item.
KE said she would make the feedback available to the DU team.
At the last meeting, AS suggested holding a meeting for mums and health professionals midway between the last and the next AGMs. SA-M said that if such a meeting is to be held in April, planning for it needs to begin now. It was agreed to find a date in April (during school holidays), and to ask The Fields Children Centre if the meeting could be held there. SA-M will contact the new head once she is in post in January. Invitations can be distributed via community midwives, antenatal classes, Children’s Centres, and on the MSLC Facebook page. SA-M asked about doing a press release, which was felt to be a good idea.
ACTION: SA-M
Unit statistics were not presented.
AS reported that a midwives’ ‘show & tell’ had been held at the Rosie on December 9th, and about 80 people had attended. Displays were provided on a range of different aspects of midwives’ activities, including improving organisation on the DU, supervision, rotation and other working practices, patient pathways, neonatal care, and breastfeeding.
The practice of intentional rounding, that AS mentioned at the last meeting, which involves maternity care workers speaking to every woman on Lady Mary ward every three to four hours to check whether they need anything, is working well.
AS drew the committee’s attention to three important new publications: the new NICE guidelines on caesarean sections, the Birthplace study report, and the RCM report on the state of midwifery. The NICE guidelines will be discussed by the committee at the January meeting. It was agreed to include the Birthplace report in the Agenda for the March meeting.
The Trust will be applying for Standard 1 of BFI on December 16th.
The new building is progressing well. Internal colour schemes have been agreed and signed off. AS made the point that staff will be tied up with getting ready for occupying the new building in the first half of next year (the move into the building is expected to take place in August), and asked for the committee’s understanding that they may have less time for MSLC activities.
CC-B reported that she has become a member of the UK Hynopbirthing Institute Board, so is able to feed information back to the board.
JB reported that there are now working documents for two new patient pathways, those for antenatal care and postnatal care. She will circulate these to the committee for comment
January 24, 2012, Addenbrooke's Treatment Centre, Seminar Room 6A, 12.00 - 2.00
This meeting will be devoted to a discussion of caesarean sections, without most of the usual standing items being included.
powered by Typomania
