Investigating obstetric near misses (life-threatening obstetric complications) provides crucial information to prevent maternal mortality and morbidity.

To investigate the rate and type of obstetric near misses among women with serious mental illness (SMI).

We conducted a historical cohort study, using de-identified electronic mental health records linked with maternity data from Hospital Episode Statistics. The English Maternal Morbidity Outcome Indicator was used to identify obstetric near misses at the time of delivery in two cohorts: (1) exposed cohort – all women with a live or still birth in 2007–2016, and a history of secondary mental healthcare before delivery in south-east London (n = 13 570); (2) unexposed cohort – all women with a live or still birth in 2007–2016, resident within south-east London, with no history of mental healthcare before delivery (n = 223 274).

The rate of obstetric near misses was 884.3/100 000 (95% CI 733.2–1057.4) maternities in the exposed group compared with 575.1/100 000 (95% CI 544.0–607.4) maternities in the unexposed group (adjusted odds ratio 1.6, 95% CI 1.3–2.0, P < 0.001). Highest risks were for acute renal failure (adjusted odds ratio 2.1, 95% CI 1.1–3.8, P = 0.022); cardiac arrest, failure or infarction (adjusted odds ratio 2.3, 95% CI 1.1–4.8, P = 0.028); and obstetric embolism (adjusted odds ratio 3.1, 95% CI 1.6–5.8, P < 0.001).

Findings emphasise the importance of integrated physical and mental healthcare before and during pregnancy for women with SMI.

Electronic healthcare records provide information about patient care over time which not only affords the opportunity to improve patient care directly through effective monitoring and identification of care requirements but also offers a unique platform for both clinical and service-model research essential to the longer-term development of the health service. The quality of the recorded data can, however, be variable and can compromise the validity of data use both for primary and secondary purposes.

In order to explore the challenges and benefits of and approaches to recording high quality primary care electronic records, a Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) sponsored workshop was held at the Society of Academic Primary Care (SAPC) conference in 2014 with the aim of engaging GPs and other data users.

The workshop was held as a structured discussion, led by an expert panel and focused around three questions: (1) What are the data quality priorities for clinicians and researchers? How do these priorities differ or overlap? (2) What challenges might GPs face in provision of good data quality both for treating their patients and for research? Do these aims conflict? (3) What tools (such as data metrics and visualisations or software components) could assist the GP in improving data quality and patient management and could this tie in with analytical processes occurring at the research stage?

The discussion highlighted both overlap and differences in the perceived data quality priorities and challenges for different user groups. Five key areas of focus were agreed upon and recommendations determined for moving forward in improving quality.

The importance of good high quality electronic healthcare records has been set forth along with the need for a practical user-considered and collaborative approach to its improvement.