Evaluation of a regional midwifery caseload model of care integrated across five birthing sites in South Australia : Women's experiences and birth outcomes

Introduction: The ongoing closure of regional maternity services in Australia has significant consequences for women and communities. In South Australia, a regional midwifery model of care servicing five birthing sites was piloted with the aim of bringing sustainable birthing services to the area. An independent evaluation was undertaken. This paper reports on women’s experiences and birth outcomes. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness, acceptability, continuity of care and birth outcomes of women utilising the new midwifery model of care. Method: An anonymous questionnaire incorporating validated surveys and key questions from the Quality Maternal and Newborn Care (QMNC) Framework was used to assess care across the antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal period. Selected key labour and birth outcome indicators as reported by the sites to government perinatal data collections were included. Findings: The response rate was 52.6% (205/390). Women were overwhelmingly positive about the care they received during pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period. About half of women had caseload midwives as their main antenatal care provider; the other half experienced shared care with local general practitioners and caseload midwives. Most women (81.4%) had a known midwife at their birth. Women averaged 4 post-natal home visits with their midwife and 77.5% were breastfeeding at 6–8 weeks. Ninety-five percent of women would seek this model again and recommend it to a friend. Maternity indicators demonstrated a lower induction rate compared to state averages, a high primiparous normal birth rate (73.8%) and good clinical outcomes. Conclusion: This innovative model of care was embraced by women in regional SA and labour and birth outcomes were good as compared with state-wide indicators

A public e-survey to explore community understanding of the role of the midwife in Australia

Introduction:There is compelling evidence that when a woman sees the same midwife there are better outcomes. Yet in Australia, access to midwifery continuity of care remains limited. There are a number of reasons for this but one barrier appears to be a lack of public understanding regarding the role of the midwife. This study undertook an e-survey to explore Australian public perceptions of the role of the midwife.Methods:A public opinion sample e-survey, using an exploratory design, a Likert scale and open-ended questions, was distributed through social media over six weeks. The survey was open to Australian residents and was completed by 1657 participants. Of these, 96.9% identified as female and 82.1% of participants had children.Results:Nearly half of the participants believed that a woman must see a doctor during pregnancy and after birth, compared to 21.9% during birth. Many participants described midwives as caring and supportive but there was a lack of understanding about their level of skill and expertise. A dominant theme was the alignment of medical care with safety and the perception that medical practitioners reduce risk. These misperceptions may impact on women making an informed choice regarding midwifery model of care in Australia.Conclusions:There is an underlying public narrative whereby the public primarily associate midwives with birth and perceive them as assistants rather than lead care providers. The study findings informed a public awareness campaign in South Australia conducted to educate the public’s understanding of the role of the midwife

Evaluation of a regional midwifery caseload model of care integrated across five birthing sites in South Australia: Women’s experiences and birth outcomes

IntroductionThe ongoing closure of regional maternity services in Australia has significant consequences for women and communities. In South Australia, a regional midwifery model of care servicing five birthing sites was piloted with the aim of bringing sustainable birthing services to the area. An independent evaluation was undertaken. This paper reports on women’s experiences and birth outcomes.AimTo evaluate the effectiveness, acceptability, continuity of care and birth outcomes of women utilising the new midwifery model of care.MethodAn anonymous questionnaire incorporating validated surveys and key questions from the Quality Maternal and Newborn Care (QMNC) Framework was used to assess care across the antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal period. Selected key labour and birth outcome indicators as reported by the sites to government perinatal data collections were included.FindingsThe response rate was 52.6% (205/390). Women were overwhelmingly positive about the care they received during pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period. About half of women had caseload midwives as their main antenatal care provider; the other half experienced shared care with local general practitioners and caseload midwives. Most women (81.4%) had a known midwife at their birth. Women averaged 4 post-natal home visits with their midwife and 77.5% were breastfeeding at 6–8 weeks. Ninety-five percent of women would seek this model again and recommend it to a friend. Maternity indicators demonstrated a lower induction rate compared to state averages, a high primiparous normal birth rate (73.8%) and good clinical outcomes.ConclusionThis innovative model of care was embraced by women in regional SA and labour and birth outcomes were good as compared with state-wide indicators

‘There is no other option’: Exploring health care providers' experiences implementing regional multisite midwifery model of care in South Australia

IntroductionIn the past 30 years, 60% of South Australia’s rural maternity units have closed. Evidence demonstrates midwifery models of care offer regional Australia sustainable birthing services. Five birthing sites within the York and Northern Region of South Australia, designed in collaboration with key stakeholders, offered a new all-risk midwifery continuity of care model (MMoC). All pregnant women in the region were allocated to a known midwife once pregnancy was confirmed. In July 2019, the pilot program was implemented and an evaluation undertaken.ObjectiveThe study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, acceptability, and sustainability of the new midwifery model of care from the perspective of health care providers.DesignThe evaluation utilised a mixed methods design using focus groups and surveys to explore experiences of health care providers impacted by the implementation of the MMoC. This paper reports on midwives, doctors and nurses experiences at different time points, to gain insight into the model of care from the care providers impacted by the change to services.FindingsThe first round of focus groups included 14 midwives, 6 hospital nurses/midwives and 5 doctors with the overarching theme that the ‘MMoC was working well.’ The second round of focus groups were undertaken across the five sites with 10 midwives, 9 hospital nurses/midwives and 5 doctors. The overarching theme captured all participants commitment to the MMoC, with agreement that ‘there is no other option - it has to work’.DiscussionAll participants reported positive outcomes and a strong commitment to navigate the changes required to implement the new model of care. Collaboration and communication was expressed as key elements for success. Specific challenges and complexities were evident including a need to clarify expectations and the workload for midwives, and for nurses who were accustomed to having midwives 24 hours a day in hospitals.ConclusionThis innovative model responds to challenges in providing rural maternity care and offers a sustainable model for maternity services and workforce. There is an overwhelming commitment and consensus that there is ‘no other option–it has to work’

Measuring organizational readiness for implementing change (ORIC) in a new midwifery model of care in rural South Australia

BackgroundThe sustainability of Australian rural maternity services is under threat due to current workforce shortages. In July 2019, a new midwifery caseload model of care was implemented in rural South Australia to provide midwifery continuity of care and promote a sustainable workforce in the area. The model is unique as it brings together five birthing sites connecting midwives, doctors, nurses and community teams. A critical precursor to successful implementation requires those working in the model be ready to adopt to the change. We surveyed clinicians at the five sites transitioning to the new model of care in order to assess their organizational readiness to implement change.MethodsA descriptive study assessing readiness for change was measured using the Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change scale (ORIC). The 12 item Likert scale measures a participant’s commitment to change and change efficacy. All clinicians working within the model of care (midwives, nurses and doctors) were invited to complete an e-survey.ResultsOverall, 55% (56/102) of clinicians participating in the model responded. The mean ORIC score was 41.5 (range 12–60) suggesting collectively, midwives, nurses and doctors began the new model of care with a sense of readiness for change. Participants were most likely to agree on the change efficacy statements, “People who work here feel confident that the organization can get people invested in implementing this change and the change commitment statements “People who work here are determined to implement this change”, “People who work here want to implement this change”, and “People who work here are committed to implementing this change.ConclusionResults of the ORIC survey indicate that clinicians transitioning to the new model of care were willing to embrace change and commit to the new model. The process of organizational change in health care settings is challenging and a continuous process. If readiness for change is high, organizational members invest more in the change effort and exhibit greater persistence to overcome barriers and setbacks. This is the first reported use of the instrument amongst midwives and nurses in Australia and should be considered for use in other national and international clinical implementation studies

Women’s preferences for inpatient and outpatient priming for labour induction: a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND In many countries a high proportion of births begin as induced labours. Induction can be lengthy if cervical priming is required prior to induction. This usually occurs as an inpatient, however, an alternative is to allow women to go home after satisfactory fetal monitoring. The aim of this study was to assess the preferences of women for cervical priming for induction of labour in an outpatient or inpatient setting. METHOD A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted alongside a randomised trial of inpatient and outpatient cervical priming (the OPRA trial) in two maternity hospitals in South Australia. 362 participants were included, and women’s preferences for cervical priming for induction of labour were assessed. RESULTS Women were willing to accept an extra 1.4 trips to hospital (2.4 trips total) and a total travel time of 73.3 minutes to be able to return to their own home while waiting for the priming to work. For enhanced inpatient services, women were willing to accept a total travel time of 54.7 minutes to have a private room with private bathroom while waiting for the priming to work. The overall benefit score for outpatient priming was 3.63, 3.59 for enhanced inpatient care and 2.89 for basic inpatient care, suggesting slightly greater preferences for outpatient priming. Preferences for outpatient priming increased when women could return to their own home (compared to other offsite accommodation), and decreased with more trips to hospital and longer travel time. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that outpatient priming was slightly more preferred than either enhanced inpatient priming or basic care; these results should be confirmed in different clinical settings. There may be merit in providing women information about both options in the future, as preferences varied according to the characteristics of the services on offer and the sociodemographic background of the woman.Kirsten Howard, Karen Gerard, Pamela Adelson, Robert Bryce, Chris Wilkinson, and Deborah Turnbul