Evaluating the development, woman-centricity and psychometric properties of maternity patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs): A systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Woman-centred care is the right of every woman receiving maternity care, irrespective of where care is being received and who is providing care. This protocol describes a planned systematic review that will identify, describe and critically appraise the psychometric properties of maternity patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). The woman-centricity of PROM and PREM development and content validation (ie, the extent to which women were involved in these processes) will also be assessed. This information will be used to develop a maternity PROMs and PREMs database to support service and system performance measurement, and value-based maternity care initiatives. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will be guided by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guideline for systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments. Studies identified via MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO and EMBASE describing the development, content validation and/or psychometric evaluation of PROMs and PREMs specifically designed for maternity populations throughout pregnancy, childbirth and postnatal periods will be considered if published from 2010 onward, in English, and available in full text. The COSMIN risk of bias checklist will be used to evaluate the quality of studies reporting on the development, content validation and/or psychometric evaluation of PROMs and PREMs. COSMIN criteria for good content validity will be used to assess the woman-centricity of PROM and PREM development and content validation studies. COSMIN standards of good psychometric properties will be used to evaluate the validity and reliability of the identified instruments. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical permission for this research is not required. The findings of this research will be submitted for publication in an international, peer-reviewed journal. Abstracts for national and international conference presentations will also be submitted. The proposed maternity PROMs and PREMs database will be freely accessible online, and developed with consumer input to ensure its usefulness to a range of maternity care stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021288854.

Quantifying the differences in birth outcomes and out-of-pocket costs between Australian Defence Force servicewomen and civilian women: A data linkage study.

OBJECTIVES: Servicewomen in Defence Forces the world over are constrained in their health service use by defence healthcare policy. These policies govern a woman's ability to choose who she receives maternity care from and where. The aim of this study was to compare Australian Defence Force (ADF) servicewomen and children's birth outcomes, health service use, and out-of-pocket costs to those of civilian women and children. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data for women giving birth between 1 July 2012 and 30 June 2018 in Queensland, Australia (n = 365,138 births). Women serving in the ADF at the time of birth were identified as having their care funded by the Department of Defence (n = 395 births). Propensity score matching was used to identify a mixed public/private civilian sample of women to allow for comparison with servicewomen, controlling for baseline characteristics. Sensitivity analysis was also conducted using a sample of civilian women accessing only private maternity care. FINDINGS: Nearly all servicewomen gave birth in the private setting (97.22%). They had significantly greater odds of having a caesarean section (OR 1.71, 95%CI 1.29-2.30) and epidural (OR 1.56, 95%CI 1.11-2.20), and significantly lower odds of having a non-instrumental vaginal birth (OR 0.57, 95%CI 0.43-0.75) compared to women in the matched public/private civilian sample. Compared to civilian children, children born to servicewomen had significantly higher out-of-pocket costs at birth ($275.93 ± 355.82), in the first ($214.98 ± 403.45) and second ($127.75 ± 391.13) years of life, and overall up to two years of age ($618.66 ± 779.67) despite similar health service use. CONCLUSIONS: ADF servicewomen have higher rates of obstetric intervention at birth and also pay significantly higher out-of-pocket costs for their children's health service utilisation up to 2-years of age. Given the high rates of obstetric intervention, greater exploration of servicewomen's maternity care experiences and preferences is warranted, as this may necessitate further reform to ADF maternity healthcare policy.