Framework for developing a national surgical, obstetric and anaesthesia plan.

Background: Emergency and essential surgical, obstetric and anaesthesia (SOA) care are now recognized components of universal health coverage, necessary for a functional health system. To improve surgical care at a national level, strategic planning addressing the six domains of a surgical system is needed. This paper details a process for development of a national surgical, obstetric and anaesthesia plan (NSOAP) based on the experiences of frontline providers, Ministry of Health officials, WHO leaders, and consultants. Methods: Development of a NSOAP involves eight key steps: Ministry support and ownership; situation analysis and baseline assessments; stakeholder engagement and priority setting; drafting and validation; monitoring and evaluation; costing; governance; and implementation. Drafting a NSOAP involves defining the current gaps in care, synthesizing and prioritizing solutions, and providing an implementation and monitoring plan with a projected cost for the six domains of a surgical system: infrastructure, service delivery, workforce, information management, finance and governance. Results: To date, four countries have completed NSOAPs and 23 more have committed to development. Lessons learned from these previous NSOAP processes are described in detail. Conclusion: There is global movement to address the burden of surgical disease, improving quality and access to SOA care. The development of a strategic plan to address gaps across the SOA system systematically is a critical first step to ensuring countrywide scale-up of surgical system-strengthening activities.

Antecedentes: En la actualidad, se reconoce que la atención quirúrgica, obstétrica y anestésica urgente y esencial (surgical, obstetric, and anaesthesia, SOA) es uno de los componentes de la cobertura sanitaria universal y un elemento necesario para el funcionamiento de un sistema de salud. Para mejorar la atención quirúrgica a nivel nacional, se necesita una planificación estratégica que aborde los seis dominios de un sistema quirúrgico. En este artículo, se detalla el proceso para el desarrollo de un plan nacional de cirugía, obstetricia y anestesia (national surgical, obstetric, and anaesthesia plan, NSOAP) basado en las experiencias de los principales proveedores, los funcionarios del Ministerio de Salud, los líderes de la Organización Mundial de la Salud y consultores. Métodos: El desarrollo de un NSOAP incluye ocho pasos clave: (1) apoyo y dependencia del ministerio, (2) análisis de la situación y evaluaciones de referencia, (3) compromiso de los agentes implicados y establecimiento de prioridades, (4) redacción y validación, (5) seguimiento y evaluación, (6) análisis de costes, (7) gobernanza y (8) implementación. Redactar un NSOAP implica definir los déficits actuales en la atención, sintetizar y priorizar soluciones, y proporcionar un plan de implementación y seguimiento con unos costes proyectados para los seis dominios de un sistema quirúrgico: infraestructura, prestación de servicios, personal, gestión de la información, finanzas y gobernanza. Resultados: Hasta la fecha, cuatro países han completado un NSOAP y 23 más se han comprometido con su desarrollo. Las lecciones aprendidas de estos procesos previos de NSOAP se describen con detalle. Conclusiones: Existe un movimiento global para abordar la carga de las enfermedades que precisan cirugía, mejorar la calidad y el acceso a la atención SOA. El desarrollo de un plan estratégico para la aproximación sistemáticamente los déficits en todo el sistema SOA es un primer paso crítico para garantizar la ampliación a nivel nacional de las actividades de fortalecimiento del sistema quirúrgico.

A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Two Alternative Models of Maternity Care in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: The Irish government has committed to expand midwifery-led care alongside consultant-led care nationally, although very little is known about the potential net benefits of this reconfiguration. OBJECTIVES: To formally compare the costs and benefits of the major models of care in Ireland, with a view to informing priority setting using the contingent valuation technique and cost-benefit analysis. METHODS: A marginal payment scale willingness-to-pay question was adopted from an ex ante perspective. 450 pregnant women were invited to participate in the study. Cost estimates were collected primarily, describing the average cost of a package of care. Net benefit estimates were calculated over a 1-year cycle using a third-party payer perspective. RESULTS: To avoid midwifery-led care, women were willing to pay €821.13 (95% CI 761.66-1150.41); to avoid consultant-led care, women were willing to pay €795.06 (95% CI 695.51-921.15). The average cost of a package of consultant- and midwifery-led care was €1,762.12 (95% CI 1496.73-2027.51) and €1018.47 (95% CI 916.61-1120.33), respectively. Midwifery-led care ranked as the best use of resources, generating a net benefit of €1491.22 (95% CI 989.35-1991.93), compared with €123.23 (95% CI -376.58 to 621.42) for consultant-led care. CONCLUSIONS: While both models of care are cost-beneficial, the decision to provide both alternatives may be constrained by resource issues. If only one alternative can be implemented then midwifery-led care should be undertaken for low-risk women, leaving consultant-led care for high-risk women. However, pursuing one alternative contradicts a key objective of government policy, which seeks to improve maternal choice. Ideally, multiple alternatives should be pursued.

Opinions of maternity care professionals and other stakeholders about integration of maternity care: a qualitative study in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to give insight into the opinions of maternity care professionals and other stakeholders on the integration of midwife-led care and obstetrician-led care and on the facilitating and inhibiting factors for integrating maternity care. METHODS: Qualitative study using interviews and focus groups from November 2012 to February 2013 in the Netherlands. Seventeen purposively selected stakeholder representatives participated in individual semi-structured interviews and 21 in focus groups. One face-to-face focus group included a combined group of midwives, obstetricians and a paediatrician involved in maternity care. Two online focus groups included a group of primary care midwives and a group of clinical midwives respectively. Thematic analysis was performed using Atlas.ti. Two researchers independently coded the interview and focus group transcripts by means of a mind map and themes and relations between them were described. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified with regard to integrating maternity care: client-centred care, continuity of care and task shifting between professionals. Opinions differed regarding the optimal maternity care organisation model. Participants considered the current payment structure an inhibiting factor, whereas a new modified payment structure based on the actual amount of work performed was seen as a facilitating factor. Both midwives and obstetricians indicated that they were afraid to loose autonomy. CONCLUSIONS: An integrated maternity care system may improve client-centred care, provide continuity of care for women during labour and birth and include a shift of responsibilities between health care providers. However, differences of opinion among professionals and other stakeholders with regard to the optimal maternity care organisation model may complicate the implementation of integrated care. Important factors for a successful implementation of integrated maternity care are an appropriate payment structure and maintenance of the autonomy of professionals.

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.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Low-Risk Deliveries: A Comparison of Midwives, Family Physicians and Obstetricians.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of in-hospital obstetrical care by obstetricians (OBs), family physicians (FPs) and midwives (MWs) for delivery of low-risk obstetrical patients. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis from the Ministry of Health perspective using a retrospective cohort study. The time horizon was from hospital admission of a low-risk pregnant patient to the discharge of the mother and infant. Costing data included human resource, intervention and hospital case-mix costs. Interventions measured were induction or augmentation of labour with oxytocin, epidural use, forceps or vacuum delivery and caesarean section. The outcome measured was avoidance of transfer to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Model results were tested using various types of sensitivity analyses. FINDINGS: The mean maternal age by provider groups was 29.7 for OBs, 29.8 for FPs and 31.2 for MWs - a statistically higher mean for the MW group. The MW deliveries had lower costs and better outcomes than FPs and OBs. FPs also dominated OB.s The differences in cost per delivery were small, but slightly lower in MW ($5,102) and FP ($5,116) than in OB ($5,188). Avoidance of transfer to an NICU was highest for MW at 94.0% (95% CI: 91.0-97.0), compared with 90.2% for FP (95% CI: 88.2-92.2) and 89.6% for OB (95% CI: 88.6-90.6). The cost-effectiveness of the MW group is diminished by increases in compensation, and the cost-effectiveness of the FP group is sensitive to changes in intervention rates and costs. CONCLUSIONS: The MW strategy was the most cost-effective in this hospital setting. Given data limitations to further examine patient characteristics between groups, the overall conservative findings of this study support investments and better integration for MWs in the current system.

Quality care during labour and birth: a multi-country analysis of health system bottlenecks and potential solutions.

BACKGROUND: Good outcomes during pregnancy and childbirth are related to availability, utilisation and effective implementation of essential interventions for labour and childbirth. The majority of the estimated 289,000 maternal deaths, 2.8 million neonatal deaths and 2.6 million stillbirths every year could be prevented by improving access to and scaling up quality care during labour and birth. METHODS: The bottleneck analysis tool was applied in 12 countries in Africa and Asia as part of the Every Newborn Action Plan process. Country workshops engaged technical experts to complete the survey tool, which is designed to synthesise and grade health system "bottlenecks", factors that hinder the scale up, of maternal-newborn intervention packages. We used quantitative and qualitative methods to analyse the bottleneck data, combined with literature review, to present priority bottlenecks and actions relevant to different health system building blocks for skilled birth attendance and basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric care. RESULTS: Across 12 countries the most critical bottlenecks identified by workshop participants for skilled birth attendance were health financing (10 out of 12 countries) and health workforce (9 out of 12 countries). Health service delivery bottlenecks were found to be the most critical for both basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric care (9 out of 12 countries); health financing was identified as having critical bottlenecks for comprehensive emergency obstetric care (9 out of 12 countries). Solutions to address health financing bottlenecks included strengthening national financing mechanisms and removing financial barriers to care seeking. For addressing health workforce bottlenecks, improved human resource planning is needed, including task shifting and improving training quality. For health service delivery, proposed solutions included improving quality of care and establishing public private partnerships. CONCLUSIONS: Progress towards the 2030 targets for ending preventable maternal and newborn deaths is dependent on improving quality of care during birth and the immediate postnatal period. Strengthening national health systems to improve maternal and newborn health, as a cornerstone of universal health coverage, will only be possible by addressing specific health system bottlenecks during labour and birth, including those within health workforce, health financing and health service delivery.

Measuring the cost-effectiveness of midwife-led versus physician-led intrapartum teams in developing countries.

International agencies have advocated scaling-up of midwifery resources as an important method for improving maternal health and reducing maternal mortality rates (MMR). The cost-effectiveness of midwife-led versus physician-led intrapartum care is an important consideration in the human resource planning required to reduce MMR. Studies suggest that midwife-led teams can achieve comparable effectiveness and outcomes using less medically intensive care compared with physician-led teams. In the absence of adequate medical cost data, decision makers should consider the substantially lower average costs for three main drivers: salaries, benefits and incentives (≥two-times lower); preservice training (three-times lower) and attrition (two-times lower) necessary to deliver intrapartum care at the level of midwife competencies. This suggests that scale-up of midwifery resources is a less expensive and more cost-effective way to reduce MMRs and could potentially increase access to skilled intrapartum care.

The impact and cost of scaling up midwifery and obstetrics in 58 low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: To guide achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, we used the Lives Saved Tool to provide a novel simulation of potential maternal, fetal, and newborn lives and costs saved by scaling up midwifery and obstetrics services, including family planning, in 58 low- and middle-income countries. Typical midwifery and obstetrics interventions were scaled to either 60% of the national population (modest coverage) or 99% (universal coverage). FINDINGS: Under even a modest scale-up, midwifery services including family planning reduce maternal, fetal, and neonatal deaths by 34%. Increasing midwifery alone or integrated with obstetrics is more cost-effective than scaling up obstetrics alone; when family planning was included, the midwifery model was almost twice as cost-effective as the obstetrics model, at $2,200 versus $4,200 per death averted. The most effective strategy was the most comprehensive: increasing midwives, obstetricians, and family planning could prevent 69% of total deaths under universal scale-up, yielding a cost per death prevented of just $2,100. Within this analysis, the interventions which midwifery and obstetrics are poised to deliver most effectively are different, with midwifery benefits delivered across the continuum of pre-pregnancy, prenatal, labor and delivery, and postpartum-postnatal care, and obstetrics benefits focused mostly on delivery. Including family planning within each scope of practice reduced the number of likely births, and thus deaths, and increased the cost-effectiveness of the entire package (e.g., a 52% reduction in deaths with midwifery and obstetrics increased to 69% when family planning was added; cost decreased from $4,000 to $2,100 per death averted). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that scaling up midwifery and obstetrics could bring many countries closer to achieving mortality reductions. Midwives alone can achieve remarkable mortality reductions, particularly when they also perform family planning services--the greatest return on investment occurs with the scale-up of midwives and obstetricians together.

Caseload midwifery compared to standard or private obstetric care for first time mothers in a public teaching hospital in Australia: a cross sectional study of cost and birth outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In many countries midwives act as the main providers of care for women throughout pregnancy, labour and birth. In our large public teaching hospital in Australia we restructured the way midwifery care is offered and introduced caseload midwifery for one third of women booked at the hospital. We then compared the costs and birth outcomes associated with caseload midwifery compared to the two existing models of care, standard hospital care and private obstetric care. METHODS: We undertook a cross sectional study examining the risk profile, birth outcomes and cost of care for women booked into one of the three available models of care in a tertiary teaching hospital in Australia between July 1st 2009 December 31st 2010. To control for differences in population or case mix we described the outcomes for a cohort of low risk first time mothers known as the 'standard primipara'. RESULTS: Amongst the 1,379 women defined as 'standard primipara' there were significant differences in birth outcome. These first time 'low risk' mothers who received caseload care were more likely to have a spontaneous onset of labour and an unassisted vaginal birth 58.5% in MGP compared to 48.2% for Standard hospital care and 30.8% with Private obstetric care (p < 0.001). They were also significantly less likely to have an elective caesarean section 1.6% with MGP versus 5.3% with Standard care and 17.2% with private obstetric care (p < 0.001). From the public hospital perspective, over one financial year the average cost of care for the standard primipara in MGP was $3903.78 per woman. This was $1375.45 less per woman than those receiving Private obstetric care and $1590.91 less than Standard hospital care per woman (p < 0.001). Similar differences in cost were found in favour of MGP for all women in the study who received caseload care. CONCLUSIONS: Cost reduction appears to be achieved through reorganising the way care is delivered in the public hospital system with the introduction of Midwifery Group Practice or caseload care. The study also highlights the unexplained clinical variation that exists between the three models of care in Australia.

"Tossing out the baby with the bath water": New Zealand general practitioners on maternity care.

A rapid decline in the number of general practitioners practicing obstetrics followed legislative changes in New Zealand during the early 1990s that changed the maternity care landscape. The resulting repositioning of maternity care professions has seen medical dominance give way to midwifery dominance in the maternity marketplace. Drawing on our research, we suggest that current and former general practitioner obstetricians harbor grievances relating to (1) the loss of obstetrics from the 'cradle to grave' philosophy of general practice, and (2) policies encouraging competition between maternity care providers. We argue that these perspectives represent truth games that are generated by the disciplinary blocks of the maternity care professions, and reveal the moral nature of the political economy of maternity care.

Midwives and obstetrician-gynecologists collaborating for Native American women's health.

Certified Nurse-Midwives (CNMs) and Obstetrician-Gynecologists (OBGs) have a long history of successful collaborative practice serving Native American women from the 1960s. CNMs provide holistic, patient-centered care focusing on normal pregnancy and childbirth. OBGs support CNMs with consultation services focusing on complications during pregnancy and specialty gynecology care. Collaborative care in Indian Health Service and Tribal sites optimizes maternity care in a supportive environment, achieving excellent outcomes including low rates of cesarean deliveries and high rates of successful vaginal birth after cesarean.

Use of biomedical obstetric care in rural Tanzania: the role of social and material inequalities.

Despite over 20 years of efforts to improve maternal health, complications of pregnancy and childbirth continue to threaten women's lives in many countries of sub-Saharan Africa. To reduce maternal mortality levels and achieve Millennium Development Goal Five, institutions working for safe motherhood are committed to making biomedical obstetric care more available to women during childbirth. However, implementation of this strategy is not reaching women at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum for reasons that are not well understood. Using data from fieldwork conducted between September 2007 and June 2008, this study examines women's use of biomedical obstetric care in two rural districts of south-central Tanzania where this care was being supplied. Specifically, it seeks to explain how social and material inequalities affect decisions and behaviors related to childbirth. In addressing this aim we employed a mixed-methods study design. Effects of sociodemographic characteristics on obstetric care use were examined with logistic regression analysis (n = 1150), while perspectives and experiences of childbearing women were explored with participant observation and in-depth interviews (n = 48). The results from quantitative and qualitative study components were interpreted in light of each other. Statistically significant social and material factors related to use of care included ethnicity, education, parity, and household assets. Qualitative themes involved physical, economic, and social access to health facilities as well as issues of risk perception and self-identity. The overall findings suggest that use of obstetric care is influenced by a complex interplay of factors closely tied to relative status in family and community. As individual agents differentially positioned by multiple markers of power, women pragmatically negotiate amidst a wide array of deterrents and motivators to secure the best care they can. In order to improve use of biomedical obstetric care, interventions aimed at increasing availability of these services should focus on improving access for women who are disadvantaged.

Return on investment for essential obstetric care training in Ghana: do trained public sector midwives deliver postabortion care?

INTRODUCTION: In Ghana, the provision of postabortion care (PAC) by trained midwives is critical to the efficient and cost-effective reduction of unsafe abortion morbidity and mortality. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of provider data from a representative sample of Ghanaian health facilities in order to consider the determinants of PAC provision among both physicians and midwives. RESULTS: In the previous 5 years, more than 58% of providers had participated in at least one type of essential obstetric training. Overall, 28% of clinicians were offering PAC services (80% of physicians as compared to 20% of midwives). Bivariately, the provision of PAC services was associated with in-service training. After adjusting for select provider and facility characteristics, PAC/MVA training, working in a facility with the National Reproductive Health Standards and Policy available, and not working in a publicly run facility were associated with midwives offering PAC services. DISCUSSION: Although the provision of PAC by midwives is an efficient and cost-effective strategy for reducing maternal morbidity and mortality, clinical training of midwives leads to a lower yield of PAC providers when compared to physicians. Policy and practice should continue to support PAC expansion by trained midwives in the public sector and by understanding the barriers to provision of services by midwives working in public facilities.

Change in Oregon maternity care workforce after malpractice premium subsidy implementation.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To determine the proportion of maternity care providers who continue to deliver babies in Oregon; (2) to determine the important factors relating to the decision to discontinue maternity care services; and (3) to examine how the rural liability subsidy is affecting rural maternity care providers' ability to provide maternity care services. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed all obstetrical care providers in Oregon in 2002 and 2006. Survey data, supplemented with state administrative data, were analyzed for changes in provision of maternity care, reasons for stopping maternity care, and effect of the malpractice premium subsidy on practice. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Only 36.6% of responding clinicians qualified to deliver babies were actually providing maternity care in Oregon in 2006, significantly lower than the proportion (47.8%) found in 2002. Cost of malpractice premiums remains the most frequently cited reason for stopping maternity care, followed by lifestyle issues. Receipt of the malpractice subsidy was not associated with continuing any maternity services. CONCLUSIONS: Oregon continues to lose maternity care providers. A state program subsidizing the liability premiums of rural maternity care providers does not appear effective at keeping rural providers delivering babies. Other policies to encourage continuation of maternity care need to be considered.

Randomised trial of educational visits to enhance use of systematic reviews in 25 obstetric units.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an educational visit to help obstetricians and midwives select and use evidence from a Cochrane database containing 600 systematic reviews. DESIGN: Randomised single blind controlled trial with obstetric units allocated to an educational visit or control group. SETTING: 25 of the 26 district general obstetric units in two former NHS regions. SUBJECTS: The senior obstetrician and midwife from each intervention unit participated in educational visits. Clinical practices of all staff were assessed in 4508 pregnancies. INTERVENTION: Single informal educational visit by a respected obstetrician including discussion of evidence based obstetrics, guidance on implementation, and donation of Cochrane database and other materials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of perineal suturing with polyglycolic acid, ventouse delivery, prophylactic antibiotics in caesarean section, and steroids in preterm delivery, before and 9 months after visits, and concordance of guidelines with review evidence for same marker practices before and after visits. RESULTS: Rates varied greatly, but the overall baseline mean of 43% (986/2312) increased to 54% (1189/2196) 9 months later. Rates of ventouse delivery increased significantly in intervention units but not in control units; there was no difference between the two types of units in uptake of other practices. Pooling rates from all 25 units, use of antibiotics in caesarean section and use of polyglycolic acid sutures increased significantly over the period, but use of steroids in preterm delivery was unchanged. Labour ward guidelines seldom agreed with evidence at baseline; this hardly improved after visits. Educational visits cost pound860 each (at 1995 prices). CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable uptake of evidence into practice in both control and intervention units between 1994 and 1995. Our educational visits added little to this, despite the informal setting, targeting of senior staff from two disciplines, and donation of educational materials. Further work is needed to define cost effective methods to enhance the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and to clarify leadership and roles of senior obstetric staff in implementing the evidence.