Improving maternal and neonatal outcomes for women with gestational diabetes through continuity of midwifery care: A cross-sectional study.

PROBLEM: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) is a complication of pregnancy which may exclude women from midwife-led models of care. BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of research evaluating the safety and feasibility of continuity of midwifery care (CoMC) for women with GDM. AIM: To investigate the impact of CoMC on maternal and neonatal outcomes, for otherwise low-risk women with GDM. METHODS: This exploratory cross-sectional study observed maternal and neonatal outcomes including onset of labour, augmentation, labour analgesia, mode of birth, perineal trauma, gestation at birth, shoulder dystocia, infant birth weight, neonatal feeding at discharge. FINDINGS: Participants were 287 otherwise low-risk pregnant women, who developed GDM, and either received CoMC (n=36) or standard hospital maternity care (non-CoMC) (n=251). Women with GDM who received CoMC were significantly more likely to experience an spontaneous onset of labour (OR 6.3; 95% CI 2.7-14.5; p<.001), labour without an epidural (OR 4.2; 95% CI 2.0 - 9.2,<0.001) and exclusively breastfeed (OR 4.3; 95% CI 1.26 - 14.32; p=0.02). DISCUSSION: Receiving CoMC may be a public health initiative which not only improves maternal and neonatal outcomes, but also long-term morbidity associated with GDM. CONCLUSION: Findings provide preliminary evidence suggesting CoMC improves maternal and neonatal outcomes and is likely a safe and viable option for otherwise low-risk women with GDM. Larger studies are recommended to confirm findings and explore the full impact of CoMC for women with GDM.

The financial impact of offering publicly funded homebirths: A population-based microsimulation in Queensland, Australia.

BACKGROUND: Despite strong evidence of benefits and increasing consumer demand for homebirth, Australia has failed to effectively upscale it. To promote the adoption and expansion of homebirth in the public health care system, policymakers require quantifiable results to evaluate its economic value. To date, there has been limited evaluation of the financial impact of birth settings for women at low risk of pregnancy complications. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the difference in inpatient costs around birth between offering homebirth in the public maternity system versus not offering public homebirth to selected women who meet low-risk pregnancy criteria. METHODS: We used a whole-of-population linked administrative dataset containing all women who gave birth in Queensland (one Australian State) between 01/07/2012 and 30/06/2018 where publicly funded homebirth is not currently offered. We created a static microsimulation model to compare the inpatient cost difference for mother and baby around birth based on the women who gave birth between 01/07/2017 and 30/06/2018 (n = 36,314). The model comprised of a base model - representing standard public hospital care, and a counterfactual model - representing a hypothetical scenario where 5 % of women who gave birth in public hospitals planned to give birth at home prior to the onset of labour (n = 1816). Costs were reported in 2021/22 AUD. RESULTS: In our hypothetical scenario, after considering the effect of assumptive place and mode of birth for these planned homebirths, the estimated State-level inpatient cost saving around birth (summed for mother and babies) per pregnancy were: AU$303.13 (to Queensland public hospitals) and AU$186.94 (to Queensland public hospital funders). This calculates to a total cost saving per annum of AU$11 million (to Queensland public hospitals) and AU$6.8 million (to Queensland public hospital funders). CONCLUSION: A considerable amount of inpatient health care costs around birth could be saved if 5 % of women booked at their local public hospitals, planned to give birth at home through a public-funded homebirth program. This finding supports the establishment and expansion of the homebirth option in the public health care system.

Cost-effectiveness of public caseload midwifery compared to standard care in an Australian setting: a pragmatic analysis to inform service delivery.

BACKGROUND: Decision-makers need quantifiable data on costs and outcomes to determine the optimal mix of antenatal models of care to offer. This study aimed to examine the cost utility of a publicly funded Midwifery Group Practice (MGP) caseload model of care compared to other models of care and demonstrate the feasibility of conducting such an analysis to inform service decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To provide a methodological framework to determine the value of public midwifery in different settings. METHODS: Incremental costs and incremental utility (health gains measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) of public MGP caseload were compared to other models of care currently offered at a large tertiary hospital in Australia. Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Short Form scores were converted into utility values by mapping to the EuroQol 5 dimensions and then converting to QALYs. Costs were assessed from a health system funder's point of view. RESULTS: There were 85 women in the public MGP caseload care group and 72 received other models of care. Unadjusted total mean cost for mothers' and babies' health service use from study entry to 12 months post-partum was $27 618 for MGP caseload care and $33 608 for other models of care. After adjusting for clinical and demographic differences between groups, total costs were 22% higher (cost ratio: 1.218, P = 0.04) for other models of maternity care. When considering costs to all funders, public MGP caseload care cost $5208 less than other models of care. There was no significant difference in QALY between the two groups (difference: 0.010, 95% CI: -0.038, 0.018). CONCLUSION: Public MGP caseload care costs 22% less than other models of care, after accounting for differences in baseline characteristics between groups. There were no significant differences in QALYs. Public MGP caseload care produced comparable health outcomes, with some indication that outcomes may be better for lower cost per woman.

Improving psychoeducation for women fearful of childbirth: Evaluation of a research translation project.

BACKGROUND: Psychoeducation counselling delivered by midwives has been demonstrated to reduce maternal fear and improve women's confidence for birth. Translating the evidence in practice presents challenges. A systematic approach to the implementation of evidence and evaluation of this process can improve knowledge translation. AIM: To implement and evaluate the translation of psychoeducation counselling on (1) midwives' knowledge, skills and confidence to provide the counselling; (2) perceived barriers and enablers to embedding the psychoeducation counselling in practice; and (3) pregnant women's levels of fear. METHODS: Using a mixed methods approach, data were collected using a pre (n=22) and post (n=21) training survey, recorded interviews (n=17), diaries (n=6), and retrospective audit of fear of birth scores. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, independent sample t-tests, and chi-square tests. Latent content analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data. RESULTS: Training in the counselling framework significantly improved midwives' knowledge, skills and confidence to counsel women on psychosocial issues and reduce fear scores for women reporting high childbirth fear. The main barriers to midwives introducing counselling into routine care related to the fragmentation of care delivery during pregnancy. Conversely continuity of care by a known midwife was considered an enabler. CONCLUSION: Psychoeducation provided by midwives is of benefit to women experiencing high levels of birth fear. While psychoeducation training was successful in enhancing midwives' knowledge, skills and confidence; embedding the counselling framework in everyday practice was challenging. Counselling is more easily implemented within midwifery caseload models which enable midwives to build relationships with women across their pregnancy.

Research priorities of midwives: a Delphi study.

The aim of this study was to identify the research priorities of midwives at Gold Coast Hospital (GCH), South East Queensland, Australia. It was also hoped that the study would help foster a culture of inquiry and reflection. Establishing and maintaining a research culture is essential to the provision of high quality maternity services. A two phase Delphi design was used. Fifty eight midwives participated in round one (50 per cent response rate) and 54 in round two (60 per cent response rate). Midwives identified post dates induction of labour and work place culture as areas of research interest.