The distribution of maternity services across rural and remote Australia: does it reflect population need?

BACKGROUND: Australia has a universal health care system and a comprehensive safety net. Despite this, outcomes for Australians living in rural and remote areas are worse than those living in cities. This study will examine the current state of equity of access to birthing services for women living in small communities in rural and remote Australia from a population perspective and investigates whether services are distributed according to need. METHODS: Health facilities in Australia were identified and a service catchment was determined around each using a one-hour road travel time from that facility. Catchment exclusions: metropolitan areas, populations above 25,000 or below 1,000, and a non-birthing facility within the catchment of one with birthing. Catchments were attributed with population-based characteristics representing need: population size, births, demographic factors, socio-economic status, and a proxy for isolation - the time to the nearest facility providing a caesarean section (C-section). Facilities were dichotomised by service level - those providing birthing services (birthing) or not (no birthing). Birthing services were then divided by C-section provision (C-section vs no C-section birthing). Analysis used two-stage univariable and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 259 health facilities identified after exclusions. Comparing services with birthing to no birthing, a population is more likely to have a birthing service if they have more births, (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR): 1.50 for every 10 births, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) [1.33-1.69]), and a service offering C-sections 1 to 2 h drive away (aOR: 28.7, 95% CI [5.59-148]). Comparing the birthing services categorised by C-section vs no C-section, the likelihood of a facility having a C-section was again positively associated with increasing catchment births and with travel time to another service offering C-sections. Both models demonstrated significant associations with jurisdiction but not socio-economic status. CONCLUSIONS: Our investigation of current birthing services in rural and remote Australia identified disparities in their distribution. Population factors relating to vulnerability and isolation did not increase the likelihood of a local birthing facility, and very remote communities were less likely to have any service. In addition, services are influenced by jurisdictions.

A review of rural and remote health service indexes: are they relevant for the development of an Australian rural birth index?

BACKGROUND: Policy informs the planning and delivery of rural and remote maternity services and influences the perinatal outcomes of the 30 per cent of Australian women and their babies who live outside the major cities. Currently however, there are no planning tools that identify the optimal level of birthing services for rural and remote communities in Australia. To address this, the Australian government has prioritised the development of a rigorous methodology in the Australian National Maternity Services Plan to inform the planning of rural and remote maternity services. METHODS: A review of the literature was undertaken to identify planning indexes with component variables as outlined in the Australian National Maternity Services Plan. The indexes were also relevant if they described need associated with a specific type and level of health service in rural and remote areas of high income countries. Only indexes that modelled a range of socioeconomic and or geographical variables, identified access or need for a specific service type in rural and remote communities were included in the review. RESULTS: Four indexes, two Australian and two Canadian met the inclusion criteria. They used combinations of variables including: geographical placement of services; isolation from services and socioeconomic vulnerability to identify access to a type and level of health service in rural and remote areas within 60 minutes. Where geographic isolation reduces access to services for high needs populations, additional measures of disadvantage including indigeneity could strengthen vulnerability scores. CONCLUSION: Current planning indexes are applicable for the development of an Australian rural birthing index. The variables in each of the indexes were relevant, however use of flexible sized catchments to accurately account for population births and weighting for extreme geographic isolation needs to be considered. Additionally, socioeconomic variables are required that will reflect need for services particularly for isolated high needs populations. These variables could be used with Australian data and appropriate cut-off points to confirm applicability for maternity services. All of the indexes used similar types of variables and are relevant for the development of an Australian Rural Birth Index.

Identifying maternity services in public hospitals in rural and remote Australia.

OBJECTIVE: This paper articulates the importance of accurately identifying maternity services. It describes the process and challenges of identifying the number, level and networks of rural and remote maternity services in public hospitals serving communities of between 1000 and 25000 people across Australia, and presents the findings of this process. METHODS: Health departments and the national government's websites, along with lists of public hospitals, were used to identify all rural and remote Australian public hospitals offering maternity services in small towns. State perinatal reports were reviewed to establish numbers of births by hospital. The level of maternity services and networks of hospitals within which services functioned were determined via discussion with senior jurisdictional representatives. RESULTS: In all, 198 rural and remote public hospitals offering maternity services were identified. There were challenges in sourcing information on maternity services to generate an accurate national picture. The nature of information about maternity services held centrally by jurisdictions varied, and different frameworks were used to describe minimum requirements for service levels. Service networks appeared to be based on a combination of individual links, geography and transport infrastructure. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of readily available centralised and comparable information on rural and remote maternity services has implications for policy review and development, equity, safety and quality, network development and planning. Accountability for services and capacity to identify problems is also compromised.

Primary Maternity Units in rural and remote Australia: Results of a national survey.

BACKGROUND: Primary Maternity Units (PMUs) offer less expensive and potentially more sustainable maternity care, with comparable or better perinatal outcomes for normal pregnancy and birth than higherlevel units. However, little is known about how these maternity services operate in rural and remote Australia, in regards to location, models of care, service structure, support mechanisms or sustainability. This study aimed to confirm and describe how they operate. DESIGN: a descriptive, cross-sectional study was undertaken, utilising a 35-item survey to explore current provision of maternity care in rural and remote PMUs across Australia. Data were subjected to simple descriptive statistics and thematic analysis for free text answers. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Only 17 PMUs were identified in rural and remote areas of Australia. All 17 completed the survey. RESULTS: the PMUs were, on average, 56km or 49minutes from their referral service and provided care to an average of 59 birthing women per year. Periodic closures or downgrading of services was common. Low-risk eligibility criteria were universally used, but with some variability. Medically-led care was the most widely available model of care. In most PMUs midwives worked shift work involving both nursing and midwifery duties, with minimal uptake of recent midwifery workforce innovations. Perceived enablers of, and threats to, sustainability were reported. KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: a small number of PMUs operate in rural Australia, and none in remote areas. Continuing overreliance on local medical support, and under-utilisation of the midwifery workforce constrain the restoration of maternity services to rural and remote Australia.

Reconceptualising risk: Perceptions of risk in rural and remote maternity service planning.

OBJECTIVE: to explore perceptions and examples of risk related to pregnancy and childbirth in rural and remote Australia and how these influence the planning of maternity services. DESIGN: data collection in this qualitative component of a mixed methods study included 88 semi-structured individual and group interviews (n=102), three focus groups (n=22) and one group information session (n=17). Researchers identified two categories of risk for exploration: health services risk (including clinical and corporate risks) and social risk (including cultural, emotional and financial risks). Data were aggregated and thematically analysed to identify perceptions and examples of risk related to each category. SETTING: fieldwork was conducted in four jurisdictions at nine sites in rural (n=3) and remote (n=6) Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 117 health service employees and 24 consumers. MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: examples and perceptions relating to each category of risk were identified from the data. Most medical practitioners and health service managers perceived clinical risks related to rural birthing services without access to caesarean section. Consumer participants were more likely to emphasise social risks arising from a lack of local birthing services. KEY CONCLUSIONS: our analysis demonstrated that the closure of services adds social risk, which exacerbates clinical risk. Analysis also highlighted that perceptions of clinical risk are privileged over social risk in decisions about rural and remote maternity service planning. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: a comprehensive analysis of risk that identifies how social and other forms of risk contribute to adverse clinical outcomes would benefit rural and remote people and their health services. Formal risk analyses should consider the risks associated with failure to provide birthing services in rural and remote communities as well as the risks of maintaining services.