Cargando…

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 hospi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tracy, Sally K, Welsh, Alec, Hall, Bev, Hartz, Donna, Lainchbury, Anne, Bisits, Andrew, White, Jan, Tracy, Mark B
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3903023/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24456576
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-14-46
_version_ 1782301060289789952
author Tracy, Sally K
Welsh, Alec
Hall, Bev
Hartz, Donna
Lainchbury, Anne
Bisits, Andrew
White, Jan
Tracy, Mark B
author_facet Tracy, Sally K
Welsh, Alec
Hall, Bev
Hartz, Donna
Lainchbury, Anne
Bisits, Andrew
White, Jan
Tracy, Mark B
author_sort Tracy, Sally K
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3903023
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39030232014-01-28 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 Tracy, Sally K Welsh, Alec Hall, Bev Hartz, Donna Lainchbury, Anne Bisits, Andrew White, Jan Tracy, Mark B BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research Article 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. BioMed Central 2014-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC3903023/ /pubmed/24456576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-14-46 Text en Copyright © 2014 Tracy et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Tracy, Sally K
Welsh, Alec
Hall, Bev
Hartz, Donna
Lainchbury, Anne
Bisits, Andrew
White, Jan
Tracy, Mark B
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
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort 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
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3903023/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24456576
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-14-46
work_keys_str_mv AT tracysallyk caseloadmidwiferycomparedtostandardorprivateobstetriccareforfirsttimemothersinapublicteachinghospitalinaustraliaacrosssectionalstudyofcostandbirthoutcomes
AT welshalec caseloadmidwiferycomparedtostandardorprivateobstetriccareforfirsttimemothersinapublicteachinghospitalinaustraliaacrosssectionalstudyofcostandbirthoutcomes
AT hallbev caseloadmidwiferycomparedtostandardorprivateobstetriccareforfirsttimemothersinapublicteachinghospitalinaustraliaacrosssectionalstudyofcostandbirthoutcomes
AT hartzdonna caseloadmidwiferycomparedtostandardorprivateobstetriccareforfirsttimemothersinapublicteachinghospitalinaustraliaacrosssectionalstudyofcostandbirthoutcomes
AT lainchburyanne caseloadmidwiferycomparedtostandardorprivateobstetriccareforfirsttimemothersinapublicteachinghospitalinaustraliaacrosssectionalstudyofcostandbirthoutcomes
AT bisitsandrew caseloadmidwiferycomparedtostandardorprivateobstetriccareforfirsttimemothersinapublicteachinghospitalinaustraliaacrosssectionalstudyofcostandbirthoutcomes
AT whitejan caseloadmidwiferycomparedtostandardorprivateobstetriccareforfirsttimemothersinapublicteachinghospitalinaustraliaacrosssectionalstudyofcostandbirthoutcomes
AT tracymarkb caseloadmidwiferycomparedtostandardorprivateobstetriccareforfirsttimemothersinapublicteachinghospitalinaustraliaacrosssectionalstudyofcostandbirthoutcomes