Background: Attendance of skilled and experienced professionals at breech births has been associated with a reduction in adverse perinatal outcomes. We aimed to determine whether United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) sites could reliably provide attendants with OptiBreech training and/or advanced proficiency (intervention feasibility) and consistent care (fidelity) that meets women's needs (acceptability), with low neonatal admission rates (safety) and recruitment adequate to support a clinical trial (trial feasibility).Methods: Mixed methods implementation evaluation was used. Settings were 13 services in England and Wales. Participants were 82 women requesting support for a vaginal breech birth (VBB) at term. Outcomes were descriptively analyzed. Twenty‐one women were interviewed, and transcripts were analyzed using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Iterative analysis informed subsequent interviews and the ongoing process of implementation across sites.Results: Although we initially suggested multidisciplinary teams, actively recruiting Trusts yielded services where VBB care was provided through a dedicated clinic, organized and delivered primarily by a lead midwife who functioned as a specialist. This model achieved 87.5% fidelity with the intervention's goal of ensuring the attendance of OptiBreech‐trained professionals. Neonatal outcomes remained stable, with an admission rate of 5.5%. Women reported care from specialist midwives as highly acceptable, but the model is vulnerable without a strategic effort to develop additional proficient team members.Conclusions: Dedicated clinics coordinated by specialist midwives appear to be an acceptable and feasible implementation strategy to test the safety and effectiveness of proficient team care for VBB in a clinical trial. Back‐up arrangements should be maintained while additional members of the team develop proficiency.

Maternal vaccination during pregnancy, in general and against COVID-19 infection, offers protection to both mother and baby, but uptake remains suboptimal. This study aimed to explore the perceptions regarding COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy, particularly for marginalised populations and those living with social or medical complexity. A total of 96 semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 40 women, 15 partners, 21 HCPs, and 20 policy makers, across all four nations of the United Kingdom (UK), discussing their lived experience of utilising, delivering, or developing policy for COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy during the pandemic. Three themes were derived: (1) historical and social context, (2) communication of information and guidance, and (3) appraisal and action. Together these captured the participants’ legacy of mistrust in drugs during pregnancy; prior positive experiences; concerns about missing information, conflicting information, or false information about COVID-19 vaccines; and confusing guidance for pregnant women. The final theme describes the participants’ behaviour and actions undertaken consequent to their experiences and the available information. The findings suggest efforts to improve COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy may be best focused on personalised communication of information. A trusting relationship and prior positive experiences with other vaccines, both in and outside of pregnancy, positively influenced perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination.

Background: Women pregnant with a breech-presenting foetus at term are at increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. The most common intervention used to improve neonatal outcomes is planned delivery by caesarean section. But this is not always possible, and some women prefer to plan a vaginal birth. A number of providers have proposed alternative interventions, such as delivery protocols or specialist teams, but heterogeneity in reported outcomes and their measurements prevents meaningful comparisons. The aim of this paper is to present a protocol for a study to develop a Breech Core Outcome Set (Breech-COS) for studies evaluating the effectiveness of interventions to improve outcomes associated with term breech birth. Methods: The development of a Breech-COS includes three phases. First, a systematic literature review will be conducted to identify outcomes previously used in effectiveness studies of breech birth at term. A focus group discussion will be conducted with the study’s pre-established Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) group, to enable service user perspectives on the results of the literature review to influence the design of the Delphi survey instrument. Second, an international Delphi survey will be conducted to prioritise outcomes for inclusion in the Breech-COS from the point of view of key stakeholders, including perinatal care providers and families who have experienced a term breech pregnancy. Finally, a consensus meeting will be held with stakeholders to ratify the Breech-COS and disseminate findings for application in future effectiveness studies. Discussion: The expectation is that the Breech-COS will always be collected in all clinical trials, audits of practice and other forms of observation research that concern breech birth at term, along with other outcomes of interest. This will facilitate comparing, contrasting and combining studies with the ultimate goal of improved maternal and neonatal outcomes. Trial registration: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) #1749

Background: OptiBreech Care is a care pathway for breech presentation at term, including where chosen, physiological breech birth attended by professionals with advanced training and/or proficiency. We aimed to assess the feasibility of implementing OptiBreech team care prior to proceeding with a planned pilot randomised controlled trial.Methods: Our design was an observational implementation feasibility assessment across England and Wales, January 2021–June 2022. Our objectives were to determine whether Trusts could provide attendants with advanced training (implementation feasibility), who deliver protocol-consistent care (fidelity), within existing resources (costs), while maintaining low neonatal admission rates (safety) and adequate recruitment rates (trial feasibility). Participants included women > 37 weeks pregnant with a breech-presenting foetus, requesting support for a vaginal breech birth following standard counselling, and staff involved in the study. No randomisation occurred in this first stage of feasibility work.Results: Thirteen National Health Service sites were recruited. A total of 82 women planned births in the study. Sites with a breech specialist midwife recruited at double the rate of sites without (0.90/month, 95%CI0.64–1.16 vs 0.40, 95%CI0.12–0.68). Referrals into the study came from midwives (46%), obstetricians (34%) and women themselves (20%). Vaginal births were attended by staff with OptiBreech training at 87.5% (35/40, 95%CI0.732–0.958) and by staff who met additional proficiency criteria at 67.5% (27/40, 95%CI0.509–0.814). Fidelity criteria were more consistently met by staff who also met proficiency criteria. There were four neonatal admissions (4.9%, 4/82), including one serious adverse outcome (1.2%, 1/82).Conclusions: A prospective observational cohort of OptiBreech collaborative care, which could potentially support nested or cluster randomisation, appears feasible in sites willing to establish a dedicated clinic and strategically develop further proficient members of staff, with back-up plans for supporting rapidly progressing births. Randomisation procedures remain to be feasibility tested. It is funded by the NIHR (NIHR300582).

Testing positive for COVID-19 was associated with higher rates of detrimental psycho-social and physical health outcomes. The COVID-19 pandemic caused unprecedented disruption to everyday life. This included major reconfiguration of maternal, child, and perinatal mental health and care services and provision. This study aimed to investigate the experiences of those who tested positive for COVID-19 during pregnancy, labour and birth, or the early postnatal period. National on-line recruitment from across the United Kingdom resulted in sixteen mothers being invited to qualitative semi-structured interviews to understand the experiences of mothers who had been infected by COVID-19 during pregnancy, labour and birth, or the early postnatal period. Interviews were conducted, recorded, and transcribed using video-conferencing software. A Grounded Theory approach was used to analyse the data gathered pertaining to women’s experiences of their positive COVID-19 diagnosis during pregnancy, labour and birth, or the early postnatal period. The theory of ‘Oscillating Autonomy – Losing and Seeking to Regain Control by Striving for Agency’ was developed, comprising three main themes: ‘Anxious Anticipation: The fear of infection was worse than COVID-19 itself’; ‘Fluctuating Agency: What changed when COVID-19 took control’; and ‘Reclaiming Control: Seeking reassurance during COVID-19 positivity’. Testing positive for COVID-19 whilst pregnant, during labour or birth, or in the early postnatal period was associated with a perceived loss of control. Those who were able to regain that control felt more secure in their situation. Support was paramount to manage increased vulnerability, as was reassurance achieved by information seeking and positive action including increased health monitoring and COVID-19 vaccination.