No abstract

BackgroundAntibiotic resistance is a global problem. Irrational use of antibiotics is rampant. Guidelines recommend administration of single dose of antibiotic for surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SSAP) for elective obstetrical and gynaecological surgeries. However, it is not usually adhered to in practice. Majority of women undergoing elective major gynaecological surgeries and caesarean sections in the department of obstetrics and gynaecology of our tertiary level heavy case load public health facility were receiving therapeutic antibiotics (for 7–10 days) instead of recommended SSAP. Our aim was to increase the SSAP in our setting from a baseline 2.1% to more than 60% within 6 months.MethodsAfter root cause analysis, we formulated the departmental antimicrobial policy, spread awareness and sensitised doctors and nursing officers regarding antimicrobial resistance and asepsis through lectures, group discussions and workshops. We initiated SSAP policy for elective major surgeries and formed an antimicrobial stewardship team to ensure adherence to policy and follow processes and outcomes. The point of care quality improvement (QI) methodology was used. Percentage of patients receiving SSAP out of all low-risk women undergoing elective surgery was the process indicator and percentage of patients developing surgical site infection (SSI) of all patients receiving SSAP was the outcome indicator. The impact of various interventions on these indicators was followed over time with run charts.ResultsSSAP increased from a baseline 2.1%–67.7% within 6 months of initiation of this QI initiative and has since been sustained at 80%–90% for more than 2 years without any increase in SSI rate.ConclusionQI methods can rapidly improve the acceptance and adherence to evidence-based guidelines in a busy public healthcare setting to prevent injudicious use of antibiotics.

BackgroundPeripartum hysterectomy (PRH) is the surgical removal of the uterus performed in obstetrical complications such as uncontrolled postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), unrepairable uterine rupture, and sepsis. Its incidence has increased in recent years. The objective of this study was to review all the cases of PRH in a tertiary care teaching hospital over three years (January 2017-December 2019) to determine its incidence and analyse clinico-demographic characteristics in these women. MethodAll women undergoing PRH from January 2017 to December 2019 were included in the study. Data were collected retrospectively from medical records, of patients who underwent a PRH at the time of delivery, or within 24 hours, or performed any time before discharge from the same hospitalization and obstetric event. The total number of deliveries including caesarean and vaginal deliveries were recorded. Main outcome measures were the incidence of PRH, indication for hysterectomy, management option used, maternal outcomes (PPH, bladder injury and maternal death) and fetal outcomes (stillbirth). ResultsThere were a total of 3904,4 deliveries; 27,337 vaginal and 11,697 caesarean sections in three years. A total of 50 patients underwent a PRH. The incidence of PRH in our study was 1.3 per 1,000 deliveries and 3.5/1,000 caesareans, respectively. PRH was found to be more common following cesarean sections than vaginal deliveries (odds ratio 22.86 [95% CI: 8.16 to 63.98]). Morbid adherent placenta (MAP) (n=30, 62%) was the most common indications of PRH. Seven (15%) women had PRH due to uterine rupture. Twentyseven women of the 30 women (90%) with the MAP had a previous caesarean delivery. The case fatality rate per hysterectomy was 4%. Stillbirth rate (SBR: n=8,16%) among women having PRH was seven-fold higher than overall SBR in our country. ConclusionThere has been a rise in MAP as an indication of PRH in our study for a decade in comparison to uterine atony. Caesarean delivery is a significant risk factor for PRH. Previous caesarean section and major placenta previa were common occurring obstetric risk factors present in the MAP in our cohort. Our maternal mortality in PRH was low and the stillbirth rate was high when compared with national data.

Aim The COVID‐19 pandemic adversely affected the essential care of newborns. In a tertiary care hospital in India, all COVID‐19 suspect post‐natal mothers awaiting COVID results were transferred to a ward shared with symptomatic COVID suspect female patients from other clinical specialities, due to shortage of space and functional health workforce. Babies born to COVID‐19 suspect mothers were moved to a separate ward with a caretaker until their mothers tested negative. Due to shortage of beds and delay in receiving COVID results, mothers and babies were often discharged separately 2–3 days apart to their home. This deprived babies of their mother's milk and bonding. We, therefore, undertook a quality improvement (QI) initiative aiming to improve rooming‐in of eligible COVID‐19 suspect mother–newborn dyads from 0% to more than 90% over a period of 6 weeks. Methods A QI team was formed which ran multiple Plan‐Do‐Study‐Act cycles. The results were reviewed at regular intervals and interventions were adopted, adapted or abandoned. These included advocacy, rearrangement of wards, counselling of mothers and caretakers regarding infection prevention practices and coordination between labour room, post‐natal ward and nursery staff. Results An improvement in rooming‐in from 0% to more than 90% was achieved. Conclusion QI methodology is a systematic approach in addressing and solving unexpected unforeseen problems effectively.

A single undiagnosed COVID-19 positive patient admitted in the green zone has the potential to infect many Health Care Workers (HCWs) and other patients at any given time with resultant spread of infection and reduction in the available workforce. Despite the existing triaging strategy at the Obstetric unit of a tertiary hospital in New Delhi, where all COVID-19 suspects obstetric patients were tested and admitted in orange zone and non-suspects in green zone, asymptomatic COVID-19 positive patients were found admitted in the green zone. This was the trigger to undertake a quality improvement (QI) initiative to prevent the admission of asymptomatic COVID-19 positive patients in green zones. The QI project aimed at reducing the admission of COVID-19 positive patients in the green zone of the unit from 20% to 10% in 4 weeks’ time starting 13/6/2020 by means of dynamic triaging. A COVID-19 action team was made and after an initial analysis of the problem multiple Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were run to test the change ideas. The main change ideas were revised testing strategies and creating gray Zones for patients awaiting COVID-19 test results. The admission of unsuspected COVID-19 positive cases in the green zone of the unit reduced from 20% to 0% during the stipulated period. There was a significant reduction in the number of HCWs, posted in the green zone, being quarantined or test positive for COVID-19 infection as well. The authors conclude that Quality Improvement methods have the potential to develop effective strategies to prevent spread of the deadly Corona virus.