Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33872334›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Stillbirth rates, service outcomes and costs of implementing NHS England's Saving Babies' Lives care bundle in maternity units in England: A cohort study.

Kate Widdows, Stephen A Roberts, Elizabeth M Camacho, Alexander E P Heazell

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03231007 (Saving Babies' Lives Project Impact and Results Evaluation), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03231007 completednot on this map

Saving Babies' Lives Project Impact and Results Evaluation: a Mixed Methodology Study

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of ManchesterRan2017 to 2018Enrolled4,952ConditionsStillbirthArmsQuestionnaire
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kate WiddowsFaculty of Biological, Medical and Health, Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Stephen A RobertsCentre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Elizabeth M CamachoManchester Centre for Health Economics, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9574-7710
Alexander E P HeazellFaculty of Biological, Medical and Health, Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, School of Medical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4303-7845
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess implementation of the Saving Babies Lives (SBL) Care Bundle, a collection of practice recommendations in four key areas, to reduce stillbirth in England.

designA retrospective cohort study of 463,630 births in 19 NHS Trusts in England using routinely collected electronic data supplemented with case note audit (n = 1,658), and surveys of service users (n = 2,085) and health care professionals (n = 1,064). The primary outcome was stillbirth rate. Outcome rates two years before and after the nominal SBL implementation date were derived as a measure of change over the implementation period. Data were collected on secondary outcomes and process outcomes which reflected implementation of the SBL care bundle.

resultsThe total stillbirth rate, declined from 4.2 to 3.4 per 1,000 births between the two time points (adjusted Relative Risk (aRR) 0.80, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 0.70 to 0.91, P<0.001). There was a contemporaneous increase in induction of labour (aRR 1.20 (95%CI 1.18-1.21), p<0.001) and emergency Caesarean section (aRR 1.10 (95%CI 1.07-1.12), p<0.001). The number of ultrasound scans performed (aRR 1.25 (95%CI 1.21-1.28), p<0.001) and the proportion of small for gestational age infants detected (aRR 1.59 (95%CI 1.32-1.92), p<0.001) also increased. Organisations reporting higher levels of implementation had improvements in process measures in all elements of the care bundle. An economic analysis estimated the cost of implementing the care bundle at ~£140 per birth. However, neither the costs nor changes in outcomes could be definitively attributed to implementation of the SBL care bundle.

conclusionsImplementation of the SBL care bundle increased over time in the majority of sites. Implementation was associated with improvements in process outcomes. The reduction in stillbirth rates in participating sites exceeded that reported nationally in the same timeframe. The intervention should be refined to identify women who are most likely to benefit and minimise unwarranted intervention.

trial registrationThe study was registered on (NCT03231007); www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Indexed as

AdultCesarean SectionCohort StudiesEnglandFemaleGovernment ProgramsHumansInfantInfant MortalityInfant, NewbornInfant, Small for Gestational AgeLabor, InducedPatient Care BundlesPregnancyRetrospective StudiesState Medicine

Identifiers

PMID33872334
PMCPMC8055032
OpenAlexW3153936811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.