Search

Clinical research in intensive care units (ICUs) is essential for improving treatments for critically ill patients. However, invitations to participate in clinical research in this situation pose numerous challenges. Studies are frequently initiated within a narrow time window when patients are often unconscious and unable to consent. Consultations or consent discussions must therefore be held with consultees or representatives, usually the patient’s relatives. Conversations about research participation in this setting may be difficult, as relatives are often overwhelmed and may feel uneasy about making decisions on behalf of their relatives. In some circumstances, legislation allows doctors to act as consultees or representatives to enrol patients in research. However, there is little good quality evidence on UK stakeholders’ perspectives to inform how recruitment is carried out in ICU studies. The Perspectives Study collected evidence on the views of over 1400 stakeholders, including patients, relatives and healthcare practitioners, many of whom had first-hand experience of ICU treatment and research. This evidence was used to inform good practice guidance on recruitment of critically ill patients to research. Established social science methods and empirical ethics were employed to reflect the interests of stakeholders and justify recommendations. This guidance aims to bridge the gap between the legal frameworks and the realities of ICU studies and to ensure that research recruitment processes reflect the views of patients and families. Researchers and an expert Advisory Group brought different perspectives to interpreting the evidence to develop the guidance. In this article we present guidance for future ICU studies.

Action needs to be taken to map out the fairest way to meet the needs of all NHS stakeholders in the post-pandemic ‘new normal’. In this article, we review the NHS Constitution, looking at it from a relational perspective and suggesting that it offers a useful starting point for such a project, but that new ways of thinking are required to accommodate the significant changes the pandemic has made to the fabric of the NHS. These new ways of thinking should encompass concepts of solidarity, care, and (reciprocal) responsibility, grounded in an acceptance of the importance of relationships in society. To this end, we explore and emphasise the importance of our interconnections as NHS stakeholders and ‘re-view’ the NHS Constitution from a relational perspective, concentrating on the rights and responsibilities it describes for patients and the public as NHS stakeholders. We argue that the NHS Constitution, of which most stakeholders are probably unaware, can be used as a tool to engage us, and to catalyse conversation about how our responsibilities as NHS stakeholders should change in the post-pandemic ‘new normal’.

Introduction: Covid‐19 expanded the use of remote working to engage with public contributors in health and social care research. These changes have the potential to limit the ability to participate in patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) for some public contributors. It is therefore important to understand public contributors' preferences, so that remote working can be organized in an optimal way to encourage rather than discourage participation. Methods: We use an economic preference elicitation tool, a discrete choice experiment (DCE), via an online survey, to estimate public contributors’ preferences for and trade‐offs between different features of remote meetings. The features were informed by previous research to include aspects of remote meetings that were relevant to public contributors and amenable to change by PPIE organizers. Results: We found that public contributors are more likely to participate in a PPIE project involving remote meetings if they are given feedback about participation; allowed to switch their camera off during meetings and step away if/when needed; were under 2.5 h long; organized during working hours, and are chaired by a moderator who can ensure that everyone contributes. Different combinations of these features can cause estimated project participation to range from 23% to 94%. When planning PPIE and engaging public contributors, we suggest that resources are focused on training moderators and ensuring public contributors receive meeting feedback. Discussion and Conclusion: Project resources should be allocated to maximize project participation. We provide recommendations for those who work in public involvement and organize meetings on how resources, such as time and financial support, should be allocated. These are based on the preferences of existing public contributors who have been involved in health and social care research. Patient or Public Contribution: We had a public contributor (Naheed Tahir) as a funded c

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of switching from a pressurised metered dose inhaler (pMDI)-based to a dry powder inhaler (DPI)-based maintenance therapy versus continued usual care on greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide equivalents, CO2e) and asthma control. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis was based on a subset of 2236 (53%) patients from the Salford Lung Study in Asthma who at baseline were using a pMDI-based controller therapy. During the study patients were randomised to fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) via the ELLIPTA DPI (switched from pMDI to DPI) (n=1081) or continued their usual care treatment (n=1155), and were managed in conditions close to everyday clinical practice. Annual CO2e (kg) was calculated for the total number of maintenance and rescue inhalers prescribed. Asthma control was assessed by the proportion of ACT responders (composite of ACT total score ≥20 and/or increase from baseline ≥3). RESULTS: The groups were well matched for demographic characteristics and baseline Asthma Control Test (ACT) total score (mean age: 49 years; mean ACT score: usual care, 16.6; FF/VI, 16.5). Annual CO2e kg per patient (maintenance plus rescue therapy) was significantly lower with FF/VI DPI treatment ('switch' group) than usual care (least squares geometric mean 108 kg (95% CI 102 to 114) vs 240 kg (95% CI 229 to 252), p<0.001). Asthma control was consistently superior over the 12 months in the FF/VI DPI group compared with usual care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients switching from a pMDI-based to a DPI-based maintenance therapy more than halved their inhaler carbon footprint without loss of asthma control. The remaining inhaler carbon footprint could be reduced through switches from pMDI to DPI rescue medications or alternative lower-carbon footprint rescue inhalers if available. Asthma control improved in both groups, with greater control demonstrated in those initiated on FF/VI DPI. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01706198.

Background: This paper considers remote working in patient public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care research. With the advent of the Covid-19 pandemic and associated lock-down measures in the UK (from March 2020), PPIE activities switched to using remote methods (e.g., online meetings), to undertake involvement. Our study sought to understand the barriers to and facilitators for remote working in PPIE by exploring public contributors’ and PPIE professionals’ (people employed by organisations to facilitate and organise PPIE), experiences of working remotely, using online and digital technologies. A particular focus of our project was to consider how the ‘digital divide’ might negatively impact on diversity and inclusion in PPIE in health and social care research. Methods: We used a mixed method approach: online surveys with public contributors involved in health and social care research, online surveys with public involvement professionals, and qualitative interviews with public contributors. We co-produced the study with public contributors from its inception, design, subsequent data analysis and writing outputs, to embed public involvement throughout the study. Results: We had 244 respondents to the public contributor survey and 65 for the public involvement professionals (PIPs) survey and conducted 22 qualitative interviews. Our results suggest public contributors adapted well to working remotely and they were very positive about the experience. For many, their PPIE activities increased in amount and variety, and they had learnt new skills. There were both benefits and drawbacks to working remotely. Due to ongoing Covid restrictions during the research project, we were unable to include people who did not have access to digital tools and our findings have to be interpreted in this light. Conclusion: Participants generally favoured a mixture of face-to-face and remote working. We suggest the following good practice recommendations for remo

Aim: Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) are randomized trials implemented through routine clinical practice, where design parameters of traditional randomized controlled trials are modified to increase generalizability. However, this may introduce statistical challenges. We aimed to identify these challenges and discuss possible solutions leading to best practice recommendations for the design and analysis of PCTs. Methods: A modified Delphi method was used to reach consensus among a panel of 11 experts in clinical trials and statistics. Statistical issues were identified in a focused literature review and aggregated with insights and possible solutions from experts collected through a series of survey iterations. Issues were ranked according to their importance. Results: Twenty-seven articles were included and combined with experts' insight to generate a list of issues categorized into participants, recruiting sites, randomization, blinding and intervention, outcome (selection and measurement) and data analysis. Consensus was reached about the most important issues: risk of participants' attrition, heterogeneity of “usual care” across sites, absence of blinding, use of a subjective endpoint and data analysis aligned with the trial estimand. Potential issues should be anticipated and preferably be addressed in the trial protocol. The experts provided solutions regarding data collection and data analysis, which were considered of equal importance. Discussion: A set of important statistical issues in PCTs was identified and approaches were suggested to anticipate and/or minimize these through data analysis. Any impact of choosing a pragmatic design feature should be gauged in the light of the trial estimand.

OBJECTIVES: Obtaining informed consent from patients in intensive care units (ICUs) prior to enrolment in a study is practically and ethically complex. Decisions about the participation of critically ill patients in research often involve substitute decision makers (SDMs), such as a patient's relatives or doctors. We explored the perspectives of different stakeholder groups towards these consent procedures. DESIGN AND METHODS: Mixed-methods study comprising surveys completed by ICU patients, their relatives and healthcare practitioners in 14 English ICUs, followed by qualitative interviews with a subset of survey participants. Empirical bioethics informed the analysis and synthesis of the data. Survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics of Likert responses, and analysis of interview data was informed by thematic reflective approaches. RESULTS: Analysis included 1409 survey responses (ICU patients n=333, relatives n=488, healthcare practitioners n=588) and 60 interviews (ICU patients n=13, relatives n=30, healthcare practitioners n=17). Most agreed with relatives acting as SDMs based on the perception that relatives often know the patient well enough to reflect their views. While the practice of doctors serving as SDMs was supported by most survey respondents, a quarter (25%) disagreed. Views were more positive at interview and shifted markedly depending on particularities of the study. Participants also wanted reassurance that patient care was prioritised over research recruitment. Findings lend support for adaptations to consent procedures, including collaborative decision-making to correct misunderstandings of the implications of research for that patient. This empirical evidence is used to develop good practice guidance that is to be published separately. CONCLUSIONS: Participants largely supported existing consent procedures, but their perspectives on these consent procedures depended on their perceptions of what the research involved and the safegua

Background The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on women’s birth experiences. To date, there are no studies that use both quantitative and qualitative data to compare women’s birth experiences before and during the pandemic, across more than one country. Aim To examine women’s birth experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic and to compare the experiences of women who gave birth in the United Kingdom (UK) or the Netherlands (NL) either before or during the pandemic. Method This study is based on analyses of quantitative and qualitative data from the online Babies Born Better survey. Responses recorded by women giving birth in the UK and the NL between June and December 2020 have been used, encompassing women who gave birth between 2017 and 2020. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and chi-squared tests were performed to compare women who gave birth pre- versus during pandemic and separately by country. Qualitative data was analysed by inductive thematic analysis. Findings Respondents in both the UK and the NL who gave birth during the pandemic were as likely, or, if they had a self-reported above average standard of life, more likely to rate their labour and birth experience positively when compared to women who gave birth pre-pandemic. This was despite the fact that those labouring in the pandemic reported a lack of support and limits placed on freedom of choice. Two potential explanatory themes were identified in the qualitative data: respondents had lower expectations of care during the pandemic, and they appreciated the efforts of staff to give individualised care, despite the rules. Conclusion Our study implies that many women labouring during the COVID-19 pandemic experienced restrictions, but their experience was mitigated by staff actions. However, personalised care should not be maintained by the good will of care providers, but should be a priority in maternity care policy to benefit all service users equitably.

Objective Clinical trials and studies in intensive care units (ICUs) have complex consent processes and often encounter problems in recruiting patients. By interviewing research team members about the challenges in critical care research, we aimed to identify strategies to enhance recruitment and consent to ICU studies. Methods Semistructured interviews with UK-based researchers (N=17) and patient–public involvement (PPI) contributors (N=8) with experience of ICU studies. Analysis of transcripts of audio-recorded interviews drew on thematic approaches. Results Seven themes were identified. Participants emphasised the need for substitute decision-making processes in critical care studies, yet some researchers reported that research ethics committees (RECs) were reluctant to approve such processes. Researchers spoke about the potential benefits of research without prior consent (RWPC) for studies with narrow recruitment windows but believed RECs would not approve them. Participants indicated that the activity of PPI contributors was limited in critical care studies, though researchers who had involved PPI contributors more extensively were clear that their input when designing consent processes was important. Researchers and PPI contributors pointed to resource and staffing limitations as barriers to patient recruitment. Researchers varied in whether and how they used professional consultees as substitute decision-makers, in whether they approached families by telephone to discuss research and in whether they disclosed details of research participation to bereaved relatives. Conclusion Critical care research could benefit from RECs having expertise in consent processes that are suited to this setting, better staffing at research sites, more extensive PPI and an evidence base on stakeholder perspectives on critical care research processes. Guidance on professional consultee processes, telephoning relatives to discuss research, RWPC and disclosure of research participat

Background Variations in intervention rates, without subsequent reductions in adverse outcomes, can indicate overuse. We studied variations in and associations between commonly used childbirth interventions and adverse outcomes, adjusted for population characteristics. Methods and findings In this multinational cross-sectional study, existing data on 4,729,307 singleton births at ≥37 weeks in 2013 from Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Ireland, England, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany (Hesse), Malta, the United States, and Chile were used to describe variations in childbirth interventions and outcomes. Numbers of births ranged from 3,987 for Iceland to 3,500,397 for the USA. Crude data were analysed in the Netherlands, or analyseddata were shared with the principal investigator. Strict variable definitions were used and information on data quality was collected. Intervention rates were described for each country and stratified by parity. Uni- and multivariable analyses were performed, adjusted for population characteristics, and associations between rates of interventions, population characteristics, and outcomes were assessed using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. Considerable intercountry variations were found for all interventions, despite adjustments for population characteristics. Adjustments for ethnicity and body mass index changed odds ratios for augmentation of labour and episiotomy. Largest variations were found for augmentation of labour, pain relief, episiotomy, instrumental birth, and cesarean section (CS). Percentages of births at ≥42 weeks varied from 0.1% to 6.7%. Rates among nulliparous versus multiparous women varied from 56% to 80% versus 51% to 82% for spontaneous onset of labour; 14% to 36% versus 8% to 28% for induction of labour; 3% to 13% versus 7% to 26% for prelabour CS; 16% to 48% versus 12% to 50% for overall CS; 22% to 71% versus 7% to 38% for augmentation of labour; 50% to 93% versus 25% to 86% for any intrapartum pa

We have been researching the distinctive ethical issues raised by what we have called “the reset period,” when non-Covid services resumed alongside the continuing pandemic in the UK. In this commentary, we will first consider the similarities and differences between the reset and contingency phases, as described by Alfandre et al. We will then unpack Alfandre et al.’s position that the contingency phase should be characterized by operating a standard of care that is functionally equivalent to “usual” practice, arguing that in the reset and contingency phases, the standards of “usual” care may be unobtainable and, in these circumstances, we cannot fall back on the primacy of “patient centered care.” Consequently, different ethical principles and balancing strategies are needed when care is neither “crisis light” nor “business as usual.” We will conclude by reflecting on what these should be.

Objective To identify ethical values guiding decision making in resetting non-COVID-19 paediatric surgery and maternity services in the National Health Service (NHS). Design A rapid review of academic and grey literature sources from 29 April to 31 December 2020, covering non-urgent, non-COVID-19 healthcare. Sources were thematically synthesised against an adapted version of the UK Government’s Pandemic Flu Ethical Framework to identify underpinning ethical principles. The strength of normative engagement and the quality of the sources were also assessed. Setting NHS maternity and paediatric surgery services in England. Results Searches conducted 8 September–12 October 2020, and updated in March 2021, identified 48 sources meeting the inclusion criteria. Themes that arose include: staff safety; collaborative working – including mutual dependencies across the healthcare system; reciprocity; and inclusivity in service recovery, for example, by addressing inequalities in service access. Embedded in the theme of staff and patient safety is embracing new ways of working, such as the rapid roll out of telemedicine. On assessment, many sources did not explicitly consider how ethical principles might be applied or balanced against one another. Weaknesses in the policy sources included a lack of public and user involvement and the absence of monitoring and evaluation criteria. Conclusions Our findings suggest that relationality is a prominent ethical principle informing resetting NHS non-COVID-19 paediatric surgery and maternity services. Sources explicitly highlight the ethical importance of seeking to minimise disruption to caring and dependent relationships, while simultaneously attending to public safety. Engagement with ethical principles was ethics-lite, with sources mentioning principles in passing rather than explicitly applying them. This leaves decision makers and healthcare professionals without an operationalisable ethical framework to apply to difficult reset de

This paper advances the case for a ‘sociology of donation’. We aim to establish that there is a need for such a sociology, to bring together the many, often disparate, elements that make up the theorizing, practice and experience of donation. We argue that bringing together different forms of donation illuminates the distinctive place both in social meaning and regulation that the body and its products hold. In developing this, we are primarily focusing on the donation of body parts and body products within high-income countries. We will first outline the standard western accounts of donation, and consider how relevant these are to donation practices and policies in the twenty first century. We will then critically discuss how a sociology of donation can be used to further current understandings of ‘donation’ and identify the challenges facing such a proposal, posing questions to encourage reflection on research practices in this area. Finally, we will explore what a sociology of donation might entail.

In 2014, the EU funded a four-year European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action to address the topic of childbirth. The COST Birth Action was a cross-European network, that brought together over 120 scientists, practitioners, activists and policy makers from 34 countries to work on intrapartum care. The central aim was to advance the state of research and practice in a specific area of great clinical and social importance, intrapartum care. The Action used inter and trans-disciplinary approaches to address birth from multiple perspectives and drew on complexity theory and the concept of salutogenesis (wellbeing). This special collection presents six papers produced from the Action and gives a sense of the range and depth of the work conducted. The Collection illustrates the knowledge that can be generated when a diverse group of people come together with a similar goals and perspectives.

This paper advances the case for a ‘sociology of donation’. We aim to establish that there is a need for such a sociology, to bring together the many, often disparate, elements that make up the theorizing, practice and experience of donation. We argue that bringing together different forms of donation illuminates the distinctive place both in social meaning and regulation that the body and its products hold. In developing this, we are primarily focusing on the donation of body parts and body products within high-income countries. We will first outline the standard western accounts of donation, and consider how relevant these are to donation practices and policies in the twenty first century. We will then critically discuss how a sociology of donation can be used to further current understandings of ‘donation’ and identify the challenges facing such a proposal, posing questions to encourage reflection on research practices in this area. Finally, we will explore what a sociology of donation might entail.

Population-level biomedical research offers new opportunities to improve population health, but also raises new challenges to traditional systems of research governance and ethical oversight. Partly in response to these challenges, various models of public involvement in research are being introduced. Yet, the ways in which public involvement should meet governance challenges are not well understood. We conducted a qualitative study with 36 experts and stakeholders using the World Café method to identify key governance challenges and explore how public involvement can meet these challenges. This brief report discusses four cross-cutting themes from the study: the need to move beyond individual consent; issues in benefit and data sharing; the challenge of delineating and understanding publics; and the goal of clarifying justifications for public involvement. The report aims to provide a starting point for making sense of the relationship between public involvement and the governance of population-level biomedical research, showing connections, potential solutions and issues arising at their intersection. We suggest that, in population-level biomedical research, there is a pressing need for a shift away from conventional governance frameworks focused on the individual and towards a focus on collectives, as well as to foreground ethical issues around social justice and develop ways to address cultural diversity, value pluralism and competing stakeholder interests. There are many unresolved questions around how this shift could be realised, but these unresolved questions should form the basis for developing justificatory accounts and frameworks for suitable collective models of public involvement in population-level biomedical research governance.

What is the recommended management for women and transgender men with regards to fertility preservation (FP), based on the best available evidence in the literature?, SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

In recent years, following the improved prognosis of patients with cancer, interest and attention has grown around fertility issues in these patients. International guidelines on fertility preservation in patients with cancer recommend that physicians discuss with all patients of reproductive age (or their parents/guardians, if children) the risk of infertility arising from their cancer or its treatment. Oncofertility counselling is recommended at the earliest opportunity and prior to cancer treatment, to help patients make informed decisions on pursuing fertility preservation. Currently, however, such discussions are not being routinely held. In June 2017, an esteemed group of European oncofertility experts met to discuss current unfulfilled needs in oncofertility for female cancer patients. This expert group has produced here a number of key recommendations in order to guide oncologists, haematologists, and other involved professionals with oncofertility discussions and appropriate referrals for further fertility preservation counselling and follow-up.

Introduction: There are growing concerns about the increase in rates of commonly used childbirth interventions. When indicated, childbirth interventions are crucial for preventing maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, but their routine use in healthy women and children leads to avoidable maternal and neonatal harm. Establishing ideal rates of interventions can be challenging. This study aims to describe the range of variations in the use of commonly used childbirth interventions in high-income countries around the world, and in outcomes in nulliparous and multiparous women. Methods and analysis: This multinational cross-sectional study will use data from births in 2013 with national population data or representative samples of the population of pregnant women in high-income countries. Data from women who gave birth to a single child from 37 weeks gestation onwards will be included and the results will be presented for nulliparous and multiparous women separately. Anonymised individual level data will be analysed. Primary outcomes are rates of commonly used childbirth interventions, including induction and/or augmentation of labour, intrapartum antibiotics, epidural and pharmacological pain relief, episiotomy in vaginal births, instrument-assisted birth (vacuum or forceps), caesarean section and use of oxytocin postpartum. Secondary outcomes are maternal and perinatal mortality, Apgar score below 7 at 5 min, postpartum haemorrhage and obstetric anal sphincter injury. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses will be conducted to investigate variations among countries, adjusted for maternal age, body mass index, gestational weight gain, ethnic background, socioeconomic status and infant birth weight. The overall mean rates will be considered as a reference category, weighted for the size of the study population per country.

Background: This paper critically reviews published tools and indicators currently used to measure maternity care performance within Europe, focusing particularly on whether and how current approaches enable systematic appraisal of processes of minimal (or non-) intervention in support of physiological or “normal birth”. The work formed part of COST Actions IS0907: “Childbirth Cultures, Concerns, and Consequences: Creating a dynamic EU framework for optimal maternity care” (2011-2014) and IS1405: Building Intrapartum Research Through Health – an interdisciplinary whole system approach to understanding and contextualising physiological labour and birth (BIRTH) (2014-). The Actions included the sharing of country experiences with the aim of promoting salutogenic approaches to maternity care. Methods: A structured literature search was conducted of material published between 2005 and 2013, incorporating research databases, published documents in English in peer-reviewed international journals and indicator databases which measured aspects of health care at a national and pan-national level. Given its emergence from two COST Actions the work, inevitably, focused on Europe, but findings may be relevant to other countries and regions. Results: A total of 388 indicators were identified, as well as seven tools specifically designed for capturing aspects of maternity care. Intrapartum care was the most frequently measured feature, through the application of process and outcome indicators. Postnatal and neonatal care of mother and baby were the least appraised areas. An over-riding focus on the quantification of technical intervention and adverse or undesirable outcomes was identified. Vaginal birth (no instruments) was occasionally cited as an indicator; besides this measurement few of the 388 indicators were found to be assessing non-intervention or “good” or positive outcomes more generally. Conclusions: The tools and indicators identified largely enable measurement of tec

Given increasing globalisation, the continuing prevalence of emergencies, and the importance of rigorous research to ensure the mental health needs of populations exposed to emergencies are effectively met, cross-language research will continue to arise. Drawing upon the lead author’s experience of conducting a cross-language qualitative study in three post-conflict settings in South Asia, this article discusses methodological considerations raised when interviewing with interpreters. These include considering interpreter positionality and matching; the approach to cross-language mediation during interviews; and assessing the quality of interpreter facilitated interviews. Drawing upon approaches taken in this study, the important choices researchers face about how these are managed are examined, considering the roles of researcher and interpreter positionality, the research context, and the epistemological underpinnings of the research. The discussion further illuminates the interrelated methodological, practical and ethical considerations for other researchers embarking upon similar research.

Recognising that one way to address the logistical and safety considerations of research conducted in humanitarian emergencies is to use internet communication technologies to facilitate interviews online, this article explores some practical and methodological considerations inherent to qualitative online interviewing. Method: Reflections from a case study of a multi-site research project conducted in post-conflict countries are presented. Synchronous online cross-language qualitative interviews were conducted in one country. Although only a small proportion of interviews were conducted online (six out of 35), it remains important to critically consider the impact upon data produced in this way. Results: A range of practical and methodological considerations are discussed, illustrated with examples. Results suggest that whilst online interviewing has methodological and ethical potential and versatility, there are inherent practical challenges in settings with poor internet and electricity infrastructure. Notable methodological limitations include barriers to building rapport due to partial visual and non-visual cues, and difficulties interpreting pauses or silences. Conclusions: Drawing upon experiences in this case study, strategies for managing the practical and methodological limitations of online interviewing are suggested, alongside recommendations for supporting future research practice. These are intended to act as a springboard for further reflection, and operate alongside other conceptual frameworks for online interviewing.

Given increasing globalisation, the continuing prevalence of emergencies, and the importance of rigorous research to ensure the mental health needs of populations exposed to emergencies are effectively met, cross-language research will continue to arise. Drawing upon the lead author’s experience of conducting a cross-language qualitative study in three post-conflict settings in South Asia, this article discusses methodological considerations raised when interviewing with interpreters. These include considering interpreter positionality and matching; the approach to cross-language mediation during interviews; and assessing the quality of interpreter facilitated interviews. Drawing upon approaches taken in this study, the important choices researchers face about how these are managed are examined, considering the roles of researcher and interpreter positionality, the research context, and the epistemological underpinnings of the research. The discussion further illuminates the interrelated methodological, practical and ethical considerations for other researchers embarking upon similar research.

This chapter looks at migrant women and maternity care in Europe from a salutogenic perspective drawing on the work of Aaron Antonovsky and other key scholars in the area of wellbeing and public health. 1-3 It considers the ways in which a salutogenic approach would deepen our understanding of the maternity needs and experiences of women who migrate to Europe. Using case studies from research work in Norway we assert that a salutogenic approach, while acknowledging the challenges faced by migrant women, would also recognise more fully the strengths, resilience and coping strategies of these women as they navigate pregnancy and motherhood in their new countries.

Background: This paper critically reviews published tools and indicators currently used to measure maternity care performance within Europe, focusing particularly on whether and how current approaches enable systematic appraisal of processes of minimal (or non-) intervention in support of physiological or "normal birth". The work formed part of COST Actions IS0907: "Childbirth Cultures, Concerns, and Consequences: Creating a dynamic EU framework for optimal maternity care" (2011-2014) and IS1405: Building Intrapartum Research Through Health - an interdisciplinary whole system approach to understanding and contextualising physiological labour and birth (BIRTH) (2014-). The Actions included the sharing of country experiences with the aim of promoting salutogenic approaches to maternity care. Methods: A structured literature search was conducted of material published between 2005 and 2013, incorporating research databases, published documents in english in peer-reviewed international journals and indicator databases which measured aspects of health care at a national and pan-national level. Given its emergence from two COST Actions the work, inevitably, focused on Europe, but findings may be relevant to other countries and regions. Results: A total of 388 indicators were identified, as well as seven tools specifically designed for capturing aspects of maternity care. Intrapartum care was the most frequently measured feature, through the application of process and outcome indicators. Postnatal and neonatal care of mother and baby were the least appraised areas. An over-riding focus on the quantification of technical intervention and adverse or undesirable outcomes was identified. Vaginal birth (no instruments) was occasionally cited as an indicator; besides this measurement few of the 388 indicators were found to be assessing non-intervention or "good" or positive outcomes more generally. Conclusions: The tools and indicators identified largely enable measurement of tec

Objectives. This paper explores how ethnicity has been represented in research on the health practices of Chinese populations in the UK and suggests ways in which such research might be enriched by adopting an interdisciplinary approach. Design. A systematic literature review of studies was conducted on research with ‘Chinese’ in the UK. Results. The review highlighted that research with Chinese populations is frequently grounded in assumptions about the homogeneity of Chinese ethnic and cultural identities, and health practices, which undermines the generalizability of findings and conclusions. Conclusions. There was a lack of clarity surrounding the term ‘Chinese’ as an ethnic and national label that can lead to racialised constructions of ethnicity. An interdisciplinary approach is a valuable tool for enriching understandings of culturally-specific accounts of health and illness, and to address ways in which Chinese populations negotiate different health care systems and models of health.

Objectives. This paper explores how ethnicity has been represented in research on the health practices of Chinese populations in the UK and suggests ways in which such research might be enriched by adopting an interdisciplinary approach. Design. A systematic literature review of studies was conducted on research with ‘Chinese’ in the UK. Results. The review highlighted that research with Chinese populations is frequently grounded in assumptions about the homogeneity of Chinese ethnic and cultural identities, and health practices, which undermines the generalizability of findings and conclusions. Conclusions. There was a lack of clarity surrounding the term ‘Chinese’ as an ethnic and national label that can lead to racialised constructions of ethnicity. An interdisciplinary approach is a valuable tool for enriching understandings of culturally-specific accounts of health and illness, and to address ways in which Chinese populations negotiate different health care systems and models of health.

This paper presents a case study on the organisation of maternity healthcare in Switzerland, which has a costly healthcare system with high intervention rates within an obstetric-led maternity care model. Evidence has shown that midwifery care is associated with lower cost, higher satisfaction rates amongst women and less intervention. However, in the current model, midwives are both marginalised and underutilised. The paper focusses on the distribution of power and knowledge between midwives, women and the medical model. The varying power structures that shape the maternity care system in Switzerland are examined, using a case study approach that draws on Foucault’s concepts of the gaze, surveillance, disciplinary power, and the docile body. This paper will critically analyses the model of maternity care received by women in Switzerland and how it negatively impacts on both women’s personal and midwives’ professional autonomy whilst simultaneously driving up costs. A better understanding of the underlying power structures operating within the maternity care system may facilitate the implementation of more midwifery led care currently being endorsed by the Swiss Midwifery Association and some government agencies. This could result in reduced cost and lower intervention rates.