Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital Trust with significantly lower CS rate in scandal.

39 replies

RedToothBrush · 19/09/2018 23:30

Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Trust has got themselves embroiled in a huge scandal over their maternity unit. It now seems that 100 deaths are under review.

Why does this concern me particularly?

The main reason is because there is only now stuff coming out questioning this.

You see in 2016 the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists published a report on regional variation on outcomes in childbirth based on information relating to 3rd / 4th degree tears and CS rates. This was based on data from 2013/14.

From this data it was glaringly obvious from the data that questions should have been raised.

Shrewsbury and Telford not only had one of the lowest CS rates:

Proportion of deliveries by caesarean section (ALL CS)
National average Primiparous deliveries: 22.1%
The Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Trust: 12.8%

But it also had one of the lowest levels of CS rates from induced labour:
Proportion of induced labours resulting in emergency caesarean section
National average Primiparous deliveries: 29.9%
The Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Trust: 15.1%

Annoyingly the site that had all this data has been taken down, so it can't be compared easily but its out there. (And I'm glad I took the time to make a note of this at the time).

Shrewsbury's rates were abnormally low against other Trusts. It immediately begged a simple key point;

Either they were doing something amazing that other hospitals should be following to improve their own outcomes
or
They were doing something VERY wrong

(It also raised the question of whether they had a population which was particularly low risk but there isn't really anything about the area in terms of demographics which makes it distinct from other areas, so its relatively easy to dismiss).

If this data was like this for a single year, it looks bad. If its part of a similar pattern, its worse.

Its the type of stat that you look at going WHY? What ARE they doing there.

And here we are:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6186371/Shrewsbury-baby-scandal-covers-100-deaths-Probe-NHS-trust-grows.html

And the following lines immediately jump out at me.
Yet a number of families insist their babies died needlessly because midwives missed treatable infections or complications.

Other women claim they were forced to have natural labours without the use of caesareans or forceps.

Telford CCG has also recently introduced a blanket ban on maternal request CS against NICE guidance. The CCG are a separate body to the Trust, but my question here in the context of things going on, is to ask whether the CCG introduced this after a steep rise in requests in the area - following traumic births or women hearing particularly troubling stories?

This stinks to high heaven, and I hope that if there are any lurking journalists out there, they look into this angle. If this pans out to show that there really is a scandal like Morecombe here, then there seems to be a case to answer by BigWigs higher up the NHS food chain. Did they ignore stats that jump out, shout and do a little dance whilst they invite some attention.

I really hope this inquiry does not turn out the way I fear it is.

I know this message perhaps should be in another section, and maybe its just shouting into the abyss. But it is relevant to feminism and frankly I'm sick to death of maternity services being one of the sections of the NHS which is most neglected in terms of political interest, in part because women have been so conditioned into accepting sub standard care and new mothers being one of the groups least able to advocate/raise a complaint at the time.

I am maybe just hoping that a lurking journalist bumps into this one, and keeps an eye on it, cos if this does turn out to be another Morecambe, the story isn't about individual midwives and managers.

It would seriously suggest that this would be about something very much bigger, indicating a systematic failure to ask simple questions at the highest levels of the NHS. I want to make damn sure that there something out there posing those particular questions whilst hoping that these cases are properly reviewed.

I hope to god, I'm wrong about this and my spidey senses are just malfunctioning.

OP posts:
hackmum · 20/09/2018 11:03

Sloth: "My understanding is that many women whose vaginal births have resulted in life-limiting injuries such as serious sexual dysfunction or incontinence are often recorded as having had successful births, merely because they didn’t die."

Absolutely - these kinds of outcomes must be recorded.

What's interesting is that Shropshire's low caesarean rate wasn't driven by women demanding natural births in some kind of misguided belief that if they had scented candles and the rest, all would be OK. It was clearly a trust policy, and one not based on medical evidence. Whether it's because an ideological belief in natural birth was overriding appropriate decision-making during labour, or whether it was simply the result of a desire to save money by having fewer caesareans, is hard to say.

LassWiADelicateAir · 20/09/2018 16:38

CS can lead to complications such as loss of bladder and bowel control, adhesions, uterine prolapse. It's an added complication in childbirth that always requires antibiotics as well even if elective

And here we go - some one talking up the dangers of CS and ignoring the fact all of these things can happen with a natural birth.

I don't recall getting antibiotics after my elective cs.

LassWiADelicateAir · 20/09/2018 16:40

The narrative in the media, , for as long as I can remember has been the aim to reduce the number of CS births

That is my impression- and almost always pushed by women.

randomsabreuse · 20/09/2018 16:55

SATH is my local trust. There are lots of local debates about cuts - merging the 2 A&Es, consultant led births all at Telford in the new unit, local MLUs shut down with long journeys to hospital.

I was happy enough with my experience at the consultant led unit in Telford, Telford MLU perhaps a little overstretched and in hindsight was sent home inappropriately as "not in labour". Was in pushing stage 2 hours later... particularly annoying was the 20 minute plus wait to be reassessed when I got back there because the midwife clearly thought I was being wet and not in labour- the change in attitude when she examined me and found I was 7+ cm!

BitchyHen · 20/09/2018 17:00

Shrewsbury has had a low rate of CS births for a very long time. It was one of the lowest in the UK in 1998 when my DD1 was born. This is not because of a high level of care. I don't think I saw the same midwife or doctor twice in my three pregnancies. Shrewsbury and Telford hospitals trust have made a conscious decision to dissuade women from requesting C sections and this has been happening for at least 20 years.

crossparsley · 20/09/2018 17:18

It's a very long time since I had any contact with health policy, but one measure in the 90s for maternity units was called - and huge apologies for upsetting anyone - the 'take home baby rate'. That is, the baby should be well enough to go home, and the mother should be well enough to cope at home with her or him.

Clearly, some horrible things happen that even modern Western medicine can't always manage. But the PP who said that outcomes matter, not processes (we used to call that an 'input standard') is absolutely right. Why isn't every labour ruled by the absolute priority of two living humans?

AndhowcouldIeverrefuse · 20/09/2018 17:35

It's an added complication in childbirth that always requires antibiotics as well even if elective.
I didn't have antibiotics with my elective section - but I did with my VB.

Thank you for this thread Red.

placemats · 20/09/2018 17:43

It is good practice to be given antibiotics before the operation.

And here we go - some one talking up the dangers of CS and ignoring the fact all of these things can happen with a natural birth.

I'm not 'talking up the dangers' nor was I ignoring that these things happen with a vaginal birth. Stop twisting my words.

LassWiADelicateAir · 20/09/2018 19:44

What point were you trying to make in a thread about the risks to mothers and babies when a cs is not offered?

What point were you trying to make by stating , incorrectly, that antibiotics are always necessary in a cs- when that is not the case?

hellotoyellow · 20/09/2018 19:50

The RCOG's data has been replaced by the NMPA. See www.maternityaudit.org.uk .

sleepsleepandmoresleep · 20/09/2018 21:06

@placemats I've had one high forceps delivery and one elective CS delivery (because of the previous issues). I would rather have 10 ELCS deliveries than another high forceps one. For info (my CS was only 2 weeks ago) I was given antibiotics via IV during the surgery and was told that it's standard to give them to everyone now as a preventative measure.

Thanks for this thread OP. I don't normally post on this board but this is quite close to my heart given my personal experiences. I'm finding myself more and more disgusted at the way pregnant women are treated with regard to their birth choices.

RhymesWithOrange · 21/09/2018 00:26

I had my baby at Shrewsbury in 2007. Forceps birth. We were both injured but thankfully no major lasting effects, just scars. No question it should have been a c section. I'm going to write to the enquiry

My heart goes out to those poor parents and babies who have suffered and died.

basbousa · 21/09/2018 01:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Scout1774 · 27/09/2018 09:50

I used to live in this area. A number of work colleagues had babies at Telford Princess Royal hospital. I was quite young so not really paying attention to baby stuff at that point, but I remember several colleagues complaining that they were completely refused epidurals despite repeated requests.

Obviously this is not anywhere near the same league as being denied a CS and your child dying (I cannot imagine anything worse) but the general feeling was that the midwives were extremely unsympathetic.

One of my friends could afford to go private, and she did without even considering the NHS route.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page