Methods
All inpatients to the maternity unit were offered the SARS-CoV-2
nasopharyngeal swab test from 22 April 2020 to 5 May 2020. Details of
patients who had the swab taken were recorded in a secure electronic
database to ensure follow-up. Results were made available within 12-24
hours, at which point patients were informed of their result. Those who
tested positive were managed and given self-isolation advice
accordingly.
The patient questionnaire was developed by a focus group of
Obstetricians, after performing a literature review and evaluating
previously published patient satisfaction
tools[10-15]. In particular, the questionnaire was
adapted from the validated HIV universal screening
toolkit.[15] The first half of the questionnaire
included questions on patient demographics. The second half explored
attitude towards COVID-19 and screening where responses were rated on a
five-point Likert scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly
agree”.
Cluster random sampling was used to select participants to complete the
anonymous pre-screening questionnaire, with all eligible patients’
beings offered the opportunity to complete the survey at set points
during the screening period. This was performed before the patient was
informed of their SARS-CoV-2 test results. A post-result survey was
performed over the telephone with the same questions asked to re-assess
attitudes towards SARS-CoV-2 and screening. Follow-up began seven days
after the result became available. If contact was not possible,
reattempts were made up until day ten. At the time of data analysis, the
first 110 women to have undergone universal screening were within the
allocated time frame to assess post-screening attitudes and therefore
were included in the study. This timeframe was chosen to allow
sufficient time for screened women to have returned to their normal
daily routine and make the necessary adjustments in their households.
All completed questionnaires were collected by maternity staff and
entered onto an electronic database without any patient identifiers to
ensure anonymity.
As this was an anonymous service evaluation, ethics approval was not
required. The study was registered under the local clinical
effectiveness team and underwent review by the COVID-19 Committee.