ObjectivesThe ambulance service plays a pivotal role in the provision of care in out-of-hospital maternity emergencies. Telephone triage of this patient group is complex and must be sensitive to an emergency situation to prevent unnecessary delays in treatment. This study aimed to explore emergency medical dispatchers’ (EMDs) perceptions of the structured protocol they use.DesignVoluntary participation in semistructured phenomenological focus groups. The participants were asked to discuss their experiences of using Medical Priority Dispatch System Protocol 24 (pregnancy, childbirth and miscarriage). Thematic analysis was applied to code and group topics. Discussion between the EMDs is presented for each theme and their experiences, including quotes, are presented to offer an overview of the maternity protocol and its use.SettingA large urban UK ambulance service.Participants23 control room staff.ResultsPerceptions of maternity emergencies, challenges with key questions, the need for sensitivity surrounding miscarriage, using prearrival instructions and postdispatch instructions to help patients and ideas for additional ProQA functionality emerged as the five overarching themes. Protocol 24 was considered to reflect many of the clinical factors EMDs associate with maternity emergencies although further factors, including some non-clinical, were suggested for inclusion. Miscarriage and termination-related calls were thought to be challenging as the language of the protocol is designed for pregnancy. However, instructions were generally considered well written and user-friendly, although some were thought to be unnecessary. EMDs were largely positive regarding the ProQA software, but felt backward navigation was difficult if a situation changed.ConclusionsMaternity calls were considered rewarding but complex by EMDs. We suggest changes including the use of more sensitive language in response to miscarriage and termination and make recommendations for the omission and inclusion of specific instructions, as well as enhancements to key questions and functionality. Further research is needed to ensure focus group findings are generalisable to other services, particularly in other countries.