From little things, big things grow: a local approach to system-wide maternity services reform in the absence of definitive evidence.

Anne-Marie Boxall, Kathy Flitcroft
{"title":"From little things, big things grow: a local approach to system-wide maternity services reform in the absence of definitive evidence.","authors":"Anne-Marie Boxall,&nbsp;Kathy Flitcroft","doi":"10.1186/1743-8462-4-18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For nearly two decades calls have been made to expand the role of midwives within maternity services in Australia. Although some progress has been made, it has been slow and, at system-wide level, limited. There are many barriers that prevent the expansion of midwifery-led services in Australia including funding arrangements for midwifery care, a lack of political will and resistance from powerful medical interest groups. The ongoing debate that exists about the evidence for the safety of midwifery-led care, particularly for the intrapartum phase, is likely to be an important reason why policy-makers are reluctant to implement system-wide reforms of maternity services.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Those opposed to the expansion of midwifery-led care argue that these services are only appropriate for low-risk women. They claim the evidence in support of midwifery-led care has too many holes in it to guarantee that services are safe for higher risk women. Midwifery advocates, however, argue there is no evidence to support the claim that midwifery-led services lead to poorer outcomes in any risk group. Despite this, funding for midwifery-led care outside hospitals remains limited. This article contends that calls for the system-wide expansion of midwifery-led care (such as through funding independently practising midwives) based on the available evidence are unlikely to succeed. There are too many methodological challenges in this area to ever \"prove\" that midwifery-led services are safe - except for the lowest risk women - and when there is doubt, policy-makers are likely to err on the side of caution.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>In order to expand access to midwifery care, advocates should abandon the idea of system-wide reform for now. Instead, they should concentrate on implementing small-scale, locally based changes because it is at this grass roots level that health professionals can work together to resolve the major sticking points - accurately assessing risk, identifying when it changes and responding appropriately. While a lack of political will is a major obstacle to reform it is amenable to change. We argue that system-wide reform is most likely to occur when policy-makers can reference examples of successful locally-based midwifery-led programs across Australia.</p>","PeriodicalId":87170,"journal":{"name":"Australia and New Zealand health policy","volume":" ","pages":"18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1743-8462-4-18","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australia and New Zealand health policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-8462-4-18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Background: For nearly two decades calls have been made to expand the role of midwives within maternity services in Australia. Although some progress has been made, it has been slow and, at system-wide level, limited. There are many barriers that prevent the expansion of midwifery-led services in Australia including funding arrangements for midwifery care, a lack of political will and resistance from powerful medical interest groups. The ongoing debate that exists about the evidence for the safety of midwifery-led care, particularly for the intrapartum phase, is likely to be an important reason why policy-makers are reluctant to implement system-wide reforms of maternity services.

Discussion: Those opposed to the expansion of midwifery-led care argue that these services are only appropriate for low-risk women. They claim the evidence in support of midwifery-led care has too many holes in it to guarantee that services are safe for higher risk women. Midwifery advocates, however, argue there is no evidence to support the claim that midwifery-led services lead to poorer outcomes in any risk group. Despite this, funding for midwifery-led care outside hospitals remains limited. This article contends that calls for the system-wide expansion of midwifery-led care (such as through funding independently practising midwives) based on the available evidence are unlikely to succeed. There are too many methodological challenges in this area to ever "prove" that midwifery-led services are safe - except for the lowest risk women - and when there is doubt, policy-makers are likely to err on the side of caution.

Summary: In order to expand access to midwifery care, advocates should abandon the idea of system-wide reform for now. Instead, they should concentrate on implementing small-scale, locally based changes because it is at this grass roots level that health professionals can work together to resolve the major sticking points - accurately assessing risk, identifying when it changes and responding appropriately. While a lack of political will is a major obstacle to reform it is amenable to change. We argue that system-wide reform is most likely to occur when policy-makers can reference examples of successful locally-based midwifery-led programs across Australia.

小事成大事:在缺乏明确证据的情况下,从地方到全系统的产妇服务改革。
背景:近二十年来,一直呼吁扩大助产士在澳大利亚产科服务中的作用。虽然取得了一些进展,但进展缓慢,而且在全系统一级是有限的。在澳大利亚,有许多障碍阻碍了助产服务的扩展,包括助产护理的资金安排、缺乏政治意愿以及强大的医疗利益集团的抵制。关于助产士主导的护理的安全性的证据,特别是在分娩阶段,目前存在的争论可能是政策制定者不愿实施全系统产科服务改革的一个重要原因。讨论:那些反对扩大助产士主导的护理的人认为,这些服务只适合低风险妇女。他们声称,支持助产士主导的护理的证据存在太多漏洞,无法保证服务对高风险妇女的安全。然而,助产的支持者认为,没有证据支持助产主导的服务在任何风险群体中导致较差结果的说法。尽管如此,医院外由助产士主导的护理的资金仍然有限。这篇文章认为,基于现有证据,呼吁在全系统范围内扩大助产士主导的护理(例如通过资助独立执业的助产士)是不太可能成功的。在这一领域有太多方法上的挑战,以至于无法“证明”助产士主导的服务是安全的——除了风险最低的妇女之外——当存在疑问时,政策制定者可能会过于谨慎。摘要:为了扩大获得助产护理的机会,倡导者现在应该放弃全系统改革的想法。相反,他们应该集中精力实施小规模的、基于地方的变革,因为正是在基层,卫生专业人员才能共同努力解决主要的症结——准确评估风险,确定何时发生变化并作出适当的反应。虽然缺乏政治意愿是改革的主要障碍,但改革是可以接受的。我们认为,当政策制定者可以参考澳大利亚各地以本地助产士为主导的成功项目的例子时,全系统改革最有可能发生。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信