Objective(Primary) To establish the effect of antenatal group self-hypnosis for nulliparous women on intra-partum epidural use.DesignMulti-method randomised control trial (RCT).SettingThree NHS Trusts.PopulationNulliparous women not planning elective caesarean, without medication for hypertension and without psychological illness.MethodsRandomisation at 28–32 weeks’ gestation to usual care, or to usual care plus brief self-hypnosis training (two × 90-minute groups at around 32 and 35 weeks’ gestation; daily audio self-hypnosis CD). Follow up at 2 and 6 weeks postnatal.Main outcome measuresPrimary: epidural analgesia. Secondary: associated clinical and psychological outcomes; cost analysis.ResultsSix hundred and eighty women were randomised. There was no statistically significant difference in epidural use: 27.9% (intervention), 30.3% (control), odds ratio (OR) 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64–1.24], or in 27 of 29 pre-specified secondary clinical and psychological outcomes. Women in the intervention group had lower actual than anticipated levels of fear and anxiety between baseline and 2 weeks post natal (anxiety: mean difference −0.72, 95% CI −1.16 to −0.28, P = 0.001); fear (mean difference −0.62, 95% CI −1.08 to −0.16, P = 0.009) [Correction added on 7 July 2015, after first online publication: ‘Mean difference’ replaced ‘Odds ratio (OR)’ in the preceding sentence.]. Postnatal response rates were 67% overall at 2 weeks. The additional cost in the intervention arm per woman was £4.83 (CI −£257.93 to £267.59).ConclusionsAllocation to two-third-trimester group self-hypnosis training sessions did not significantly reduce intra-partum epidural analgesia use or a range of other clinical and psychological variables. The impact of women's anxiety and fear about childbirth needs further investigation.Tweetable abstractGoing to 2 prenatal self-hypnosis groups didn't reduce labour epidural use but did reduce birth fear & anxiety postnatally at < £5 per woman.

A systematic search of studies of intrapartum management of the nuchal umbilical cord at term found no published controlled studies in this area. A postal survey containing both structured and open questions and a request for local protocols and guidelines was sent to all 637 midwives in 7 maternity units in England. There were 401 (63%) responses. There appeared to be no unit guidelines for this area of practice. Midwife approaches to nuchal cord during birth varied, and included clamping and cutting of loose nuchal cords and a hands-off approach to tight nuchal cords. Reasons for specific actions included doing what had been taught during midwifery training and learning from previous personal experiences. Theories of diffusion of innovation and of planned behaviour may provide a conceptual basis for understanding the adoption of specific practices. Future qualitative and controlled studies are needed to explore the nature and consequences of varying approaches to intrapartum nuchal cord management.

(BJOG. 2015; 122:1226–1234) There has been a rising demand from the parturient population for alternative forms of labor pain relief beyond epidural analgesia. One of these alternatives, hypnosis, might be able to reduce the use of epidural analgesia for labor and potentially decrease the need for interventions (eg, instrumental birth, neonatal antibiotic administration related to maternal fever). Subsequently, in this multicenter, nonblinded, randomized-controlled trial, undertaken in the United Kingdom, the authors established a self-hypnosis group program for nulliparous women in their third trimester of pregnancy (27 to 32 wk gestation) and examined the program’s effect on epidural use during labor.

Background Around 1 in 150 babies are stillborn or die in the first month of life in the UK. Most women conceive again, and subsequent pregnancies are often characterised by feelings of stress and anxiety, persisting beyond the birth. Psychological distress increases the risk of poor pregnancy outcomes and longer-term parenting difficulties. Appropriate emotional support in subsequent pregnancies is key to ensure the wellbeing of women and families. Substantial variability in existing care has been reported, including fragmentation and poor communication. A new care package improving midwifery continuity and access to emotional support during subsequent pregnancy could improve outcomes. However, no study has assessed the feasibility of a full-scale trial to test effectiveness in improving outcomes and cost-effectiveness for the National Health Service (NHS). Methods A prospective, mixed-methods pre-and post-cohort study, in two Northwest England Maternity Units. Thirty-eight women, (≤ 20 weeks’ gestation, with a previous stillbirth, or neonatal death) were offered the study intervention (allocation of a named midwife care coordinator and access to group and online support). Sixteen women receiving usual care were recruited in the 6 months preceding implementation of the intervention. Outcome data were collected at 2 antenatal and 1 postnatal visit(s). Qualitative interviews captured experiences of care and research processes with women (n = 20), partners (n = 5), and midwives (n = 8). Results Overall recruitment was 90% of target, and 77% of women completed the study. A diverse sample reflected the local population, but non-English speaking was a barrier to participation. Study processes and data collection methods were acceptable. Those who received increased midwifery continuity valued the relationship with the care coordinator and perceived positive impacts on pregnancy experiences. However, the anticipated increase in antenatal continuity for direct midwife contacts was not observed for the intervention group. Take-up of in-person support groups was also limited. Conclusions Women and partners welcomed the opportunity to participate in research. Continuity of midwifery care was supported as a beneficial strategy to improve care and support in pregnancy after the death of a baby by both parents and professionals. Important barriers to implementation included changes in leadership, service pressures and competing priorities. Trial registration ISRCTN17447733 first registration 13/02/2018.