Implementation of an obstetric triage decision aid into a maternity assessment unit and emergency department

BackgroundThe obstetric triage decision aid (OTDA) consists of 10 common pregnancy complaints with key signs and symptoms generating a triage score based on targeted questioning responses. It was developed to provide a standardised approach for obstetric triage conducted by midwives and emergency nurses as neither professional group are expert in the triage of pregnant and postpartum women.AimTo evaluate implementation of the OTDA into an emergency department (ED) and maternity assessment unit (MAU).MethodsThe OTDA was introduced to the ED and MAU of a hospital in Australia. A range of implementation strategies were utilised and assessed by pre and post staff survey, and a three-month post-audit of unscheduled maternity presentations. The primary outcome was adoption rate of the OTDA. Secondary outcomes were staff confidence and waiting times. Analyses were undertaken using SPSS (v24). Paired analysis was conducted on staff surveys.ResultsThere were a total of 2829 unscheduled presentations: ED (n = 708) and MAU (n = 2121), 88.1% were triaged using the OTDA, used more in the MAU than the ED (93.2% vs 72.7%; p < .001). In the MAU, women seen within 15 min of arrival improved significantly from 42.0% to 78.0%. There was improvement in the self-rated confidence (p = .002) and competence (p = .004) by nurses and midwives to conduct obstetric triage.ConclusionThe introduction of the OTDA required different approaches to change practice. There were improvements in staff self-rated confidence and competence, a reduction in clinical risk associated with under-triage in the ED and improved prioritisation of care in the MAU.     

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

ObjectivesServicewomen 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.MethodsRetrospective 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.FindingsNearly 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.ConclusionsADF 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.