BackgroundMaternity care is a high‐volume and high‐cost area of health care, which entails various types of service use throughout the course of the pregnancy. Thus, the aim of this study was to explore the most common reasons and related costs of health services used by women and babies from pregnancy to 12‐month postbirth.MethodsWe used linked administrative data from one state of Australia, which contained all births in Queensland between 01/07/2017 and 30/06/2018. Descriptive analyses were used to identify the 10 most frequent reasons and related costs for accessing inpatient, outpatient, emergency department, and Medicare services. These are reported separately for women and babies in different periods.ResultsWe included 58,394 births in our data set. The results have highlighted that there was relatively uniform use of inpatient, outpatient, and Medicare services by women and babies, with the 10 most common services accounting for more than half of the total services accessed. However, the emergency department service use was more diverse. Medicare services accounted for the greatest volume (79.21%) of service events but only 10.21% of the overall funding, compared with inpatient services, which accounted for less volume (3.62%) but the highest amount of overall funding (75.19%).ConclusionStudy findings provide empirical evidence about the full spectrum of services used by birthing families and their babies, and could assist health providers and managers to understand the services women and infants actually access during pregnancy, birth, and postbirth.
Background: There has been a trend toward birth at earlier gestational age and increased use of both induction of labour (IOL) and caesarean section (CS) for women with term pregnancies in many countries, particularly high-income countries. Unnecessary use of obstetric interventions during pregnancy and birth is associated with an increased risk of adverse health outcomes for women and babies, as well as adding financial costs to the health care systems. Existing evidence regarding the association between IOL at term and CS is mixed and conflicting, and little evidence has been known about the differential effect at each gestation between 37 – 41 weeks, separately among nulliparous and parous women. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore the association between IOL and primary CS for women with singleton term pregnancies, compared with expectant management (EM) of pregnancy. Methods: We performed an analysis of population-based retrospective cohort data on women who gave birth in one Australian state (Queensland), between 01/07/2012 and 30/06/2018. All no-labour births (i.e., prelabour CS), multiple births (e.g., twins or triplets), and women with a prior CS were excluded. Five sub-datasets were created based on the time of birth following IOL (37 - 37 ; 38 - 38 ; 39 - 39 ; 40 - 40 ; and 41 - 41 ). Unadjusted relative risk (RR) and adjusted relative risk (aRR) were calculated in each sub-dataset to explore the risk of primary CS following IOL, compared to EM. Analysis was stratified by parity (nulliparas versus paras). Sensitivity analyses were conducted by limiting to women with low-risk pregnancies. Results: The risk of primary CS following IOL was significantly higher for women with singleton pregnancies, compared with EM, before or after adjustment, at 38 - 38 (nulliparas: aRR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.10 - 1.18; paras: aRR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.25 - 1.46), at 39 - 39 (nulliparas: aRR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.14 - 1.22; paras: aRR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.24 - 1.49), at 40 - 40 (nulliparas: aRR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.21 - 1.29; paras: aRR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.26 - 1.56) and at 41 - 41 (nulliparas: aRR=1.42, 95% CI: 1.36 - 1.48; paras: aRR=1.61, 95% CI: 1.40 - 1.84). After adjusting for potential confounders, there was no significant difference in the risk of primary CS at 37 - 37 for nulliparas who had IOL and EM (aRR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.95 - 1.12). Results remain stable in the sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated that the risk of primary CS following IOL was higher at each weeks’ gestation between 38 - 38 – 41 - 41 for both nulliparas and paras with singleton pregnancies, compared with EM, and the risk increased with gestational age. This has important implications to support shared decision making between women and health professionals regarding best clinical management and optimal timing of birth.
BackgroundShort birth intervals and unintended pregnancy are associated with poorer maternal and infant outcomes. There is a risk of pregnancy during the immediate postpartum period unless contraception is initiated. This retrospective cohort study aimed to capture the current patterns of hormonal contraceptive provision within 12 months postpartum in a high-income country.MethodsWe used a linked administrative dataset comprising all women who gave birth in Queensland, Australia between 1 July 2012 and 30 June 2018 (n=339 265 pregnancies). We described our cohort by whether they were provided with government-subsidised hormonal contraception within 12 months postpartum. The associations between hormonal postpartum contraceptive provision and demographic and clinical characteristics were examined using univariate and multivariate logistic regression and presented in terms of crude and adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsA majority of women (60.2%) were not provided with government-subsidised hormonal postpartum contraception within 12 months postpartum. Women who were younger (<25 years), were overweight or obese, smoked, were born in Australia, were non-Indigenous, gave birth in a public hospital, or were in the lowest socioeconomic status group were more likely to be provided with postpartum contraception after adjusting for other covariates, compared with their counterparts.ConclusionsStrategies to increase the provision and uptake of contraception in the immediate postpartum period are needed to prevent short birth intervals and unintended pregnancy and ensure women’s fertility intentions are enacted. Ongoing research is needed to examine the factors influencing women’s access to contraceptive services and, further, the types of contraception provided.
Objective. Mental ill-health is a common occurrence globally and represents a significant burden of disease. In Australia, the development and improvement of programs that connect individuals earlier in their mental ill-health journey is a national health priority. However, there are current informational gaps on community-based initiatives and their associated mental health outcomes. This review aimed to systematically identify, assess, and analyse studies reporting on community-based outreach interventions for individuals experiencing mental ill-health. Method. A systematic review of the literature was conducted across 6 electronic databases and Google Scholar on 01 November 2021 and 12 June 2022. The National Health and Medical Research Council Evidence Hierarchy was used to assess study quality, and the PAGER framework was used to synthesise and analyse the results of included studies. Results. Eighty-three studies met the inclusion criteria; 51% (n = 42 studies) incorporated digital technology, and 49% (n = 41 studies) involved nonclinical light-touch interventions. Individuals with severe mental ill-health were likely to benefit from targeted interventions, and individuals with mild to moderate symptoms of mental ill-health were likely to benefit from interventions involving high levels of engagement from participants. Conclusion. Results from this review provide an understanding of patterns related to the effectiveness of community-based outreach interventions. Knowledge from this review will inform the implementation of targeted strategies to enhance the proactive provision of mental health services in the community. Standardised outcome measures are needed to strengthen the evidence base for community-based outreach interventions, by enabling researchers and service providers to explore which type of intervention and with what intensity is best suited for participants with varying levels of mental ill-health.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.