Assessment of childbirth-related post traumatic stress disorder in Australian mothers: Psychometric properties of the City Birth Trauma Scale.

BACKGROUND: The City Birth Trauma Scale (BiTS; Ayers, Wright & Thornton, 2018) is self-report measure of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms following childbirth, based on DSM-5 criteria. We report on the first study of the psychometric properties of the BiTS in the Australian population. METHODS: Participants were mothers of infants aged 0-12 months (N = 705), who completed the BiTS and measures of related constructs. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to assess the factor structure of the BiTS. Examination of the reliability, convergent, divergent and discriminant validity and acceptability of the BiTS was also examined. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis supported a bi-factor model of Birth-related Symptoms (BRS) and General Symptoms (GS) of post-partum PTSD as well as a global CB-PTSD factor. Internal consistency was found for the BiTS total scale and two proposed subscales (BRS and GS). BiTS total scores were significantly associated with an established measure of PTSD, providing support for convergent validity. Evidence of discriminant validity was examined by comparing the BiTS to an established measure of postpartum depression. LIMITATIONS: The present sample may over-represent participants with traumatic birth experiences in comparison to the general public. Furthermore, use of self-report measures limits the capacity to confirm the diagnostic status of participants. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the BiTS is a valid and reliable measure of childbirth-related PTSD, suited for use in postpartum populations. Total scores on the measure may be informative for clinical and research purposes, while evidence suggests strong support for interpretation of subscale scores.

Exploring the qualities of midwifery-led continuity of care in Australia (MiLCCA) using the quality maternal and newborn care framework.

PROBLEM: Midwifery-led continuity of care has well documented evidence of benefits for mothers and babies, however uptake of these models by Australian maternity services has been slow. BACKGROUND: It is estimated that only 10% of women have access to midwifery-led continuity of care in Australia. The Quality Maternal Newborn Care (QMNC) Framework has been developed as a way to implement and upscale health systems that meet the needs of childbearing women and their infants. The Framework can be used to explore the qualities of existing maternity services. AIM: We aimed to use the QMNC Framework to explore the qualities of midwifery-led continuity of care in two distinct settings in Australia with recommendations for replication of the model in similar settings. METHODS: Data were collected from services users and service providers via focus groups. Thematic analysis was used to develop initial findings that were then mapped back to the QMNC Framework. FINDINGS: Good quality care was facilitated by Fostering connection, Providing flexibility for women and midwives and Having a sense of choice and control. Barriers to the provision of quality care were: Contested care and Needing more preparation for unexpected outcomes. DISCUSSION: Midwifery-led continuity of carer models shift the power dynamic from a hierarchical one, to one of equality between women and midwives facilitating informed decision making. There are ongoing issues with collaboration between general practice, obstetrics and midwifery. Organisations have a responsibility to address the challenges of contested care and to prepare women for all possible outcomes to ensure women experience the best quality care as described in the framework. CONCLUSION: The QMNC Framework is a useful tool for exploring the facilitators and barriers to the widespread provision of midwifery-led continuity of care.

From hospital to home: Australian midwives' experiences of transitioning into publicly-funded homebirth programs.

BACKGROUND: Over the past two decades, 14 publicly-funded homebirth models have been established in Australian hospitals. Midwives working in these hospitals now have the opportunity to provide homebirth care, despite many having never been exposed to homebirth before. The transition to providing homebirth care can be daunting for midwives who are accustomed to practising in the hospital environment. AIM: To explore midwives' experiences of transitioning from providing hospital to homebirth care in Australian public health systems. METHODS: A descriptive, exploratory study was undertaken. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with 13 midwives and midwifery managers who had recent experience transitioning into and working in publicly-funded homebirth programs. Thematic analysis was conducted on interview transcripts. FINDINGS: Six themes were identified. These were: skilling up for homebirth; feeling apprehensive; seeing birth in a new light; managing a shift in practice; homebirth-the same but different; and the importance of mentoring and support. DISCUSSION: Midwives providing homebirth work differently to those working in hospital settings. More experienced homebirth midwives may provide high quality care in a relaxed environment (compared to a hospital setting). Midwives acceptance of homebirth is influenced by their previous exposure to homebirth. CONCLUSION: The transition from hospital to homebirth care required midwives to work to the full scope of their practice. When well supported by colleagues and managers, midwives transitioning into publicly-funded homebirth programs can have a positive experience that allows for a greater understanding of and appreciation for normal birth.

Publicly funded homebirth in Australia: a review of maternal and neonatal outcomes over 6 years.

OBJECTIVE: To report maternal and neonatal outcomes for Australian women planning a publicly funded homebirth from 2005 to 2010. DESIGN, SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Retrospective analysis of data on women who planned a homebirth and on their babies. Data for 2005-2010 (or from the commencement of a program to 2010) were requested from the 12 publicly funded homebirth programs in place at the time. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Maternal outcomes (mortality; place and mode of birth; perineal trauma; type of management of the third stage of labour; postpartum haemorrhage; transfer to hospital); and neonatal outcomes (early mortality; Apgar score at 5 minutes; birthweight; breastfeeding initially and at 6 weeks; significant morbidity; transfer to hospital; admission to a special care nursery). RESULTS: Nine publicly funded homebirth programs in Australia provided data accounting for 97% of births in these programs during the period studied. Of the 1807 women who intended to give birth at home at the onset of labour, 1521 (84%) did so. 315 (17%) were transferred to hospital during labour or within one week of giving birth. The rate of stillbirth and early neonatal death was 3.3 per 1000 births; when deaths because of expected fetal anomalies were excluded it was 1.7 per 1000 births. The rate of normal vaginal birth was 90%. CONCLUSION: This study provides the first national evaluation of a significant proportion of women choosing publicly funded homebirth in Australia; however, the sample size does not have sufficient power to draw a conclusion about safety. More research is warranted into the safety of alternative places of birth within Australia.