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.