Primary Maternity Units in rural and remote Australia

Results of a national survey

Sue Kruske, Sue Kildea, Bec Jenkinson, Jennifer Pilcher, Sarah Robin, Margaret Rolfe, Jude Kornelsen, Lesley Barclay

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

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, 56 km or 49 minutes 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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-9
Number of pages9
JournalMidwifery
Volume40
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Midwifery
Pregnancy Outcome
Nursing
Referral and Consultation
Cross-Sectional Studies
Surveys and Questionnaires
Parturition

Cite this

Kruske, S., Kildea, S., Jenkinson, B., Pilcher, J., Robin, S., Rolfe, M., ... Barclay, L. (2016). Primary Maternity Units in rural and remote Australia: Results of a national survey. Midwifery, 40, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2016.05.004
Kruske, Sue ; Kildea, Sue ; Jenkinson, Bec ; Pilcher, Jennifer ; Robin, Sarah ; Rolfe, Margaret ; Kornelsen, Jude ; Barclay, Lesley. / Primary Maternity Units in rural and remote Australia : Results of a national survey. In: Midwifery. 2016 ; Vol. 40. pp. 1-9.
@article{d1c61821a9af4eb58df9849d89aafdeb,
title = "Primary Maternity Units in rural and remote Australia: Results of a national survey",
abstract = "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, 56 km or 49 minutes 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.",
keywords = "Maternity hospitals, Midwifery models of care, Primary Maternity Units, Rural health services",
author = "Sue Kruske and Sue Kildea and Bec Jenkinson and Jennifer Pilcher and Sarah Robin and Margaret Rolfe and Jude Kornelsen and Lesley Barclay",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.midw.2016.05.004",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "1--9",
journal = "Midwifery",
issn = "0266-6138",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

}

Kruske, S, Kildea, S, Jenkinson, B, Pilcher, J, Robin, S, Rolfe, M, Kornelsen, J & Barclay, L 2016, 'Primary Maternity Units in rural and remote Australia: Results of a national survey', Midwifery, vol. 40, pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2016.05.004

Primary Maternity Units in rural and remote Australia : Results of a national survey. / Kruske, Sue; Kildea, Sue; Jenkinson, Bec; Pilcher, Jennifer; Robin, Sarah; Rolfe, Margaret; Kornelsen, Jude; Barclay, Lesley.

In: Midwifery, Vol. 40, 01.09.2016, p. 1-9.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Primary Maternity Units in rural and remote Australia

T2 - Results of a national survey

AU - Kruske, Sue

AU - Kildea, Sue

AU - Jenkinson, Bec

AU - Pilcher, Jennifer

AU - Robin, Sarah

AU - Rolfe, Margaret

AU - Kornelsen, Jude

AU - Barclay, Lesley

PY - 2016/9/1

Y1 - 2016/9/1

N2 - 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, 56 km or 49 minutes 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.

AB - 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, 56 km or 49 minutes 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.

KW - Maternity hospitals

KW - Midwifery models of care

KW - Primary Maternity Units

KW - Rural health services

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84971386473&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.midw.2016.05.004

DO - 10.1016/j.midw.2016.05.004

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 1

EP - 9

JO - Midwifery

JF - Midwifery

SN - 0266-6138

ER -