Beyond COVID-19: Reported clinical practices in maternity care in Victoria during the COVID-19 pandemic and implications for the future - A statewide review.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Della A Forster, Rebecca Hyde, Robyn Matthews, Charlie A Benzie
{"title":"Beyond COVID-19: Reported clinical practices in maternity care in Victoria during the COVID-19 pandemic and implications for the future - A statewide review.","authors":"Della A Forster, Rebecca Hyde, Robyn Matthews, Charlie A Benzie","doi":"10.1111/ajo.13904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In Australia, during the COVID-19 pandemic many routine pregnancy visits were replaced by telehealth, along with changes to routine screening and visitor policies. Many providers plan to continue these changes.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>Describe changes to maternity care provision across the state of Victoria during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A population-based cross-sectional design was used. Managers of maternity services (public and private) were invited to complete a questionnaire by telephone or online exploring changes to care delivery, telehealth practices, perceived impact of changes and future telehealth implementation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty per cent of maternity service managers (34/68; 27 public, six private) responded (March-April 2021). Around 50% of all pregnancy visits became telehealth, with multiple combinations of face-to-face and telehealth visits; 92% conducted the first (booking) appointment via telehealth. No specific gestational visit was conducted face-to-face by all services. Visits most likely to be face-to-face were at 39 and 40 weeks gestation (65%). For telehealth appointments, there was an ad hoc approach to routine screening, eg, measuring blood pressure (11% did not advise at all), fetal growth (26%-no specific strategy) and fetal heart rate (15%-no specific strategy). Over half (52%) would consider maintaining telehealth post-pandemic.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Even in a single state, there was great variation in what constitutes telehealth, when pregnant women should have face-to-face visits, and what routine screening in pregnancy should be maintained. This is concerning given over half the services are planning to continue telehealth post-pandemic, despite the lack of evidence of safety, efficacy and input from women and clinicians.</p>","PeriodicalId":55429,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13904","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In Australia, during the COVID-19 pandemic many routine pregnancy visits were replaced by telehealth, along with changes to routine screening and visitor policies. Many providers plan to continue these changes.

Aims: Describe changes to maternity care provision across the state of Victoria during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Materials and methods: A population-based cross-sectional design was used. Managers of maternity services (public and private) were invited to complete a questionnaire by telephone or online exploring changes to care delivery, telehealth practices, perceived impact of changes and future telehealth implementation.

Results: Fifty per cent of maternity service managers (34/68; 27 public, six private) responded (March-April 2021). Around 50% of all pregnancy visits became telehealth, with multiple combinations of face-to-face and telehealth visits; 92% conducted the first (booking) appointment via telehealth. No specific gestational visit was conducted face-to-face by all services. Visits most likely to be face-to-face were at 39 and 40 weeks gestation (65%). For telehealth appointments, there was an ad hoc approach to routine screening, eg, measuring blood pressure (11% did not advise at all), fetal growth (26%-no specific strategy) and fetal heart rate (15%-no specific strategy). Over half (52%) would consider maintaining telehealth post-pandemic.

Conclusions: Even in a single state, there was great variation in what constitutes telehealth, when pregnant women should have face-to-face visits, and what routine screening in pregnancy should be maintained. This is concerning given over half the services are planning to continue telehealth post-pandemic, despite the lack of evidence of safety, efficacy and input from women and clinicians.

超越COVID-19: COVID-19大流行期间维多利亚州产科护理的临床实践报告及其对未来的影响-全州审查。
背景:在澳大利亚,在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,许多常规妊娠就诊被远程医疗取代,常规筛查和访客政策也发生了变化。许多供应商计划继续这些变化。目的:描述在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间维多利亚州产妇保健服务的变化。材料和方法:采用基于人群的横断面设计。邀请产科服务(公共和私营)的管理人员通过电话或在线填写一份调查问卷,探讨护理服务的变化、远程保健做法、变化的感知影响和未来远程保健的实施情况。结果:50%的产妇服务管理人员(34/68;27个公共部门,6个私人部门)回应了(2021年3月至4月)。约50%的妊娠就诊是远程保健,包括面对面和远程保健就诊的多种组合;92%的人通过远程医疗进行了第一次预约。所有服务机构都没有进行面对面的具体妊娠访问。在怀孕39周和40周时(65%),面谈的可能性最大。对于远程保健预约,有一种特殊的常规筛查方法,例如测量血压(11%的人根本没有建议),胎儿生长(26%的人没有具体策略)和胎儿心率(15%的人没有具体策略)。超过一半(52%)的人会考虑在大流行后维持远程医疗。结论:即使在一个州,在什么构成远程保健、孕妇何时应进行面对面访问以及应保持哪些孕期常规筛查方面存在很大差异。这令人担忧,因为半数以上的服务机构计划在大流行后继续开展远程保健,尽管缺乏安全性、有效性的证据,也缺乏妇女和临床医生的投入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
165
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ANZJOG) is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the RANZCOG Research foundation. ANZJOG aims to provide a medium for the publication of original contributions to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of obstetrics and gynaecology and related disciplines. Articles are peer reviewed by clinicians or researchers expert in the field of the submitted work. From time to time the journal will also publish printed abstracts from the RANZCOG Annual Scientific Meeting and meetings of relevant special interest groups, where the accepted abstracts have undergone the journals peer review acceptance process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信