Cost-effectiveness of public caseload midwifery compared to standard care in an Australian setting: a pragmatic analysis to inform service delivery

被引:14
作者
Callander, Emily J. [1 ,2 ]
Slavin, Valerie [1 ,3 ,4 ]
Gamble, Jenny [1 ,3 ]
Creedy, Deera K. [1 ,3 ]
Brittain, Hazel [1 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Transforming Matern Care Collaborat, 68 Univ Dr, Meadowbrook, Qld 4131, Australia
[2] Monash Univ, Sch Publ Hlth & Prevent Med, 553 St Kilda Rd, Melbourne, Vic 3004, Australia
[3] Griffith Univ, Sch Nursing & Midwifery, 68 Univ Dr, Meadowbrook, Qld 4131, Australia
[4] Gold Coast Univ Hosp, Women Newborn & Childrens, 1 Hosp Blvd, Southport, Qld 4215, Australia
关键词
Midwifery Group Practice; caseload; cost-effectiveness; maternity models; incremental costs; incremental utility; maternal outcomes; quality-adjusted life years; MATERNITY CARE; CONTINUITY; WOMEN; RISK;
D O I
10.1093/intqhc/mzab084
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Decision-makers need quantifiable data on costs and outcomes to determine the optimal mix of antenatal models of care to offer. This study aimed to examine the cost utility of a publicly funded Midwifery Group Practice (MGP) caseload model of care compared to other models of care and demonstrate the feasibility of conducting such an analysis to inform service decision-making. Objective: To provide a methodological framework to determine the value of public midwifery in different settings. Methods: Incremental costs and incremental utility (health gains measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) of public MGP caseload were compared to other models of care currently offered at a large tertiary hospital in Australia. Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Short Form scores were converted into utility values by mapping to the EuroQol 5 dimensions and then converting to QALYs. Costs were assessed from a health system funder's point of view. Results: There were 85 women in the public MGP caseload care group and 72 received other models of care. Unadjusted total mean cost for mothers' and babies' health service use from study entry to 12 months post-partum was $27 618 for MGP caseload care and $33 608 for other models of care. After adjusting for clinical and demographic differences between groups, total costs were 22% higher (cost ratio: 1.218, P = 0.04) for other models of maternity care. When considering costs to all funders, public MGP caseload care cost $5208 less than other models of care. There was no significant difference in QALY between the two groups (difference: 0.010, 95% CI: -0.038, 0.018). Conclusion: Public MGP caseload care costs 22% less than other models of care, after accounting for differences in baseline characteristics between groups. There were no significant differences in QALYs. Public MGP caseload care produced comparable health outcomes, with some indication that outcomes may be better for lower cost per woman.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]   Financing Maternity and Early Childhood Healthcare in The Australian Healthcare System: Costs to Funders in Private and Public Hospitals Over the First 1000 Days [J].
Callander, Emily ;
Shand, Antonia ;
Ellwood, David ;
Fox, Haylee ;
Nassar, Natasha .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY AND MANAGEMENT, 2021, 10 (09) :554-563
[2]   Changes in out-of-pocket charges associated with obstetric care provided under Medicare in Australia [J].
Callander, Emily ;
Fox, Haylee .
AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2018, 58 (03) :362-365
[3]   Out-of-pocket expenditure on health care by Australian mothers: Lessons for maternal universal health coverage from a long-established system [J].
Callander, Emily J. ;
Topp, Stephanie ;
Fox, Haylee ;
Corscadden, Lisa .
BIRTH-ISSUES IN PERINATAL CARE, 2020, 47 (01) :49-56
[4]   Cost of maternity care to public hospitals: a first 1000-days perspective from Queensland [J].
Callander, Emily J. ;
Fenwick, Jennifer ;
Donnellan-Fernandez, Roslyn ;
Toohill, Jocelyn ;
Creedy, Debra K. ;
Gamble, Jenny ;
Fox, Haylee ;
Ellwood, David .
AUSTRALIAN HEALTH REVIEW, 2019, 43 (05) :556-564
[5]   Caseload midwifery in Australia: What access do women have? [J].
Dawson, Kate ;
Newton, Michelle ;
Forster, Della ;
McLachlan, Helen .
WOMEN AND BIRTH, 2015, 28 (01) :S12-S12
[6]   The development of a classification system for maternity models of care [J].
Donnolley, Natasha ;
Butler-Henderson, Kerryn ;
Chapman, Michael ;
Sullivan, Elizabeth .
HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2016, 45 (02) :64-70
[7]   A cost-consequences analysis of a Midwifery Group Practice for Aboriginal mothers and infants in the Top End of the Northern Territory, Australia [J].
Gao, Yu ;
Gold, Lisa ;
Josif, Cath ;
Bar-Zeev, Sarah ;
Steenkamp, Malinda ;
Barclay, Lesley ;
Zhao, Yuejen ;
Tracy, Sally ;
Kildea, Sue .
MIDWIFERY, 2014, 30 (04) :447-455
[8]   Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items [J].
Hays, Ron D. ;
Bjorner, Jakob B. ;
Revicki, Dennis A. ;
Spritzer, Karen L. ;
Cella, David .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2009, 18 (07) :873-880
[9]  
Homer C S, 2001, Aust Health Rev, V24, P85
[10]   Models of maternity care: evidence for midwifery continuity of care [J].
Homer, Caroline S. E. .
MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 2016, 205 (08) :370-374