Table 2 Comparison of audit and reaudit findings between 2019 and 2022

CTG Paper speed set at 1 cm/hour (SLCOG)

55 (79.7)

101 (100)

The date and time settings validated on the machine and noted on the CTG (SLCOG)

53 (76.8)

100 (99.0)

Name of the mother documented on the relevant CTG (SLCOG)

56 (81.2)

100 (99.0)

Age of the mother documented on the relevant CTG (SLCOG)

6 (8.8)

0 (0.0)

BHT number documented on the relevant CTG (SLCOG)

36 (52.2)

94 (93.1)

Maternal risk factors appropriately documented (SLCOG)

5 (7.2)

101 (100)

Maternal pulse rate documented (NICE/SLCOG)

9 (13.0)

101 (100)

Maternal temperature documented (NICE)

3 (4.3)

95 (94.1)

Uterine contractions documented (NICE)

2 (2.9)

58 (57.4)

Fetal heart rate documented (NICE)

7 (10.1)

101 (100)

Interpretation

 The CTG was interpreted and attended to immediately (GPP)

63 (91.30)

93 (98.9)

 Baseline heart rate documented (FIGO, NICE, SLCOG)

14 (20.29)

101 (100)

 Accelerations accurately documented (FIGO, NICE, SLCOG)

13 (18.84)

5 (17.9)

 Deceleration interpreted accurately and documented (FIGO, NICE, SLCOG)

19 (27.54)

57 (81.4)

 Maternal uterine contractions noted and documented (FIGO, NICE, SLCOG)

13 (18.84)

27 (29.7)

 Overall impression of the CTG has been recorded (SLCOG)

34 (54.84)

48 (51.1)

Interventions

 Oxytocin infusion stopped immediately in response to the CTG (FIGO, NICE, SLCOG)

27 (96.4)

28 (90.3)

 Continuous CTG was advised (FIGO, NICE, SLCOG)

10 (16.7)

37 (40.7)

 A repeat CTG was performed (FIGO, NICE)

46 (73.0)

45 (46.9)

 Patient placed in the left lateral position (FIGO, NICE, SLCOG)

17 (27.9)

19 (95.0)

 IV fluids were administered (FIGO, NICE)

14 (58.3)

18 (94.7)

 Seniors were informed regarding the CTG (NICE, SLCOG)

62 (98.4)

96 (99.0)

 A vaginal examination was performed (SLCOG)

41 (64.0)

76 (76.8)

 Cervical dilation noted (GPP)

43 (65.2)

74 (74.7)