The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this information for consumers
Trial registered on ANZCTR

Registration number
Ethics application status
Date submitted
Date registered
Date last updated
Type of registration
Prospectively registered

Titles & IDs
Public title
The MOVE study: Improving maternal and child health nurse care for vulnerable mothers
Scientific title
Improving maternal and child health (MCH) nurse care through an enhanced model of MCH nurse care for mothers experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV), compared with standard MCH nurse care, in order to improve disclosure, referral to appropriate services, and increased satisfaction with MCH nursing care by MCH clients experiencing partner violence.
Secondary ID [1] 892 0
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Trial acronym
Linked study record

Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Intimate Partner Violence 4575 0
Condition category
Condition code
Public Health 4868 4868 0 0
Health service research
Other 237291 237291 0 0
Conditions of unknown or disputed aetiology (such as chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis)

Study type
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
In the first six months of the study, results of a systematic review of evidence informing current models of nurse family/intimate partner violence care will be integrated with action research by four nurses within their teams, with the goal of consensus (using AGREE Collaboration (2003) guidelines) of a new recommended model. Informed by Normalisation Process Theory to improve sustainability, this good practice model of screening and care (to be developed) will include training, clinical guidelines and recommended pathways, documentation and standards of care which will be advocated by the nurse scholars into their teams' practice. The intervention will be trialed for twelve months .The model of screening and care refers to family violence (FV) which includes intimate partner violence but is the term used by the Victorian government. Mandated screening questions also asked about the safety of children.
Intervention code [1] 4337 0
Early detection / Screening
Intervention code [2] 236721 0
Other interventions
Comparator / control treatment
Usual care, means that the four comparison nurse teams will screen to identify their clients experiencing family violence and refer to recommended family violence or other community services as necessary.
Control group

Primary outcome [1] 5721 0
Improved family violence (FV) disclosure/safety planning is measured firstly by routine data of nurse reported FV safety planning rates. These are computer data that MCH teams are required to report to government as our assumption was that safety planning would occur after disclosure. We would also examine reported disclosure by survey.
Timepoint [1] 5721 0
15 months after intervention (31st March 2010-April 1 2011) we collected the previous year's FV routine data for all eight teams. We also collected routine data for 24 months (April 2013) after intervention completion to see whether the FV screening and care intervention was sustainable without the involvement of research staff or a trial setting.
Primary outcome [2] 293314 0
FV screening rates measured by routine reported government data
Timepoint [2] 293314 0
15 months (three months after the end of the intervention period. Routine reported government FV data were also then re-examined at 24 months to check sustainability
Secondary outcome [1] 241654 0
Improved referral by MCH nurses of their clients experiencing family violence to appropriate services. This will be assessed by assessing differences in proportions of routinely reported referral rates by arm. As MCH nurses are required to report FV referral data to government, we collected these routine data from all 8 teams, as well as by questions about referral from a survey of women attending MCH centres who have given birth in the preceding twelve months.
Timepoint [1] 241654 0
We collected routine government reporting data at the end of the intervention (April 2011) and again in 2013 (for April 2011-2012 and April 2012-2013).

We sent a survey to over 10,000 women once after the end of the intervention 15 months after the commencement of the intervention.
Secondary outcome [2] 241655 0
Improved client satisfaction with MCH nurse care, which will be assessed by asking women clients in the surveys outlined above.
Timepoint [2] 241655 0
15 months (5000 surveys) and 21 months (second 5000) after commencement of the intervention

Key inclusion criteria
MCH nurse teams in the north west Melbourne suburbs
Minimum age
No limit
Maximum age
No limit
Can healthy volunteers participate?
Key exclusion criteria

Study design
Purpose of the study
Educational / counselling / training
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
MCH nurse teams previously enrolled in the MOtherS' Advocates In the Community (MOSAIC) trial were invited to participate further in the 'Improving MCH nurse care for Vulnerable mothers (MOVE) study. The eight MCH nurse team clusters had previously been randomised using sealed opaque envelopes selected from a container by an independent person. Nurse teams agreed to a reverse randomisation. That is, MCH nurse intervention teams in MOSAIC would become comparison teams in the MOVE study and vice versa.
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Stratified allocation. MCH nurse teams were randomised according to numbers of births in the LGA as outlined in MOSAIC. We have reversed the randomisation outcome for this study.
Masking / blinding
Blinded (masking used)
Who is / are masked / blinded?
The people receiving the treatment/s

The people analysing the results/data
Intervention assignment
Other design features
Teams have been allocated to either implement the new 'enhanced' model of care with comparison teams allocated to 'usual care' - that is, identification of clients as usual and referral to community based agencies if necessary.
Not Applicable
Type of endpoint(s)
Statistical methods / analysis
The target sample size for women clients attending MCH centres in the eight teams was the number seen in each arm over 12 months. This was estimated to be 22,000 in either arm.
Routine data for screening, safety planning and referrals made by MCH nurses targeted the whole population of women with babies=<12 months seeing MCH nurses in the intervention period.
For the postal survey of women clients in the 8 MCH teams, we calculated that for an 8-10% IPV prevalence rate in the previous 12 months we could detect a predicted increase of 15% average disclosure taking into account the numbers of births in participating councils, the likely response fraction (55-65%) and also adjusted for an intra-cluster correlation of 0.02. Analysis using
multivariable logistic regression adjusted for cluster

Recruitment status
Date of first participant enrolment
Date of last participant enrolment
Date of last data collection
Sample size
Accrual to date
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
Recruitment postcode(s) [1] 1585 0
Recruitment postcode(s) [2] 1582 0
Recruitment postcode(s) [3] 1589 0
Recruitment postcode(s) [4] 1584 0
Recruitment postcode(s) [5] 1586 0
Recruitment postcode(s) [6] 1587 0
Recruitment postcode(s) [7] 1588 0
Recruitment postcode(s) [8] 1583 0

Funding & Sponsors
Funding source category [1] 4761 0
Government body
Name [1] 4761 0
Australian Research Council
Address [1] 4761 0
GPO Box 2702
Canberra 2601
Country [1] 4761 0
Primary sponsor type
La Trobe University
Secondary sponsor category [1] 4299 0
Name [1] 4299 0
Department of Social Work, University of Melbourne
Address [1] 4299 0
Country [1] 4299 0
Other collaborator category [1] 634 0
Name [1] 634 0
Professor Angela Taft
Address [1] 634 0
Judith Lumley Centre
215 Franklin Street
Melbourne, VIC 3000
Country [1] 634 0
Other collaborator category [2] 635 0
Name [2] 635 0
Professor Rhonda Small
Address [2] 635 0
Judith Lumley Centre
215 Franklin Street
Melbourne, VIC 3000
Country [2] 635 0
Other collaborator category [3] 636 0
Name [3] 636 0
Professor Cathy Humphreys
Address [3] 636 0
Alfred Felton Chair in Child and Family Welfare Social Work
University of Melbourne
Melbourne Victoria 3010
Country [3] 636 0
Other collaborator category [4] 637 0
Name [4] 637 0
Professor Kelsey Hegarty
Address [4] 637 0
Department of General Practice
University of Melbourne
Country [4] 637 0

Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Ethics committee name [1] 6808 0
La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee
Ethics committee address [1] 6808 0
Ethics committee country [1] 6808 0
Date submitted for ethics approval [1] 6808 0
Approval date [1] 6808 0
Ethics approval number [1] 6808 0

Brief summary
MOVE aims to develop and evaluate an innovative model of care for MCH nurses to identify partner violence early and promote the safety of new mothers and their babies.
Trial website
Trial related presentations / publications
Public notes
Attachments [1] 200 200 0 0

Principal investigator
Name 29473 0
Prof Angela Taft
Address 29473 0
Judith Lumley Centre
215 Franklin St , Melbourne
VIC 3000
Country 29473 0
Phone 29473 0
61 3 9479 8809
Fax 29473 0
Email 29473 0
Contact person for public queries
Name 12720 0
Prof Angela taft
Address 12720 0
Judith Lumley Centre
215 Franklin St , Melbourne
VIC 3000
Country 12720 0
Phone 12720 0
61 3 9479 8809
Fax 12720 0
Email 12720 0
Contact person for scientific queries
Name 3648 0
Prof Dr Angela Taft
Address 3648 0
Judith Lumley Centre
215 Franklin St , Melbourne
VIC 3000
Country 3648 0
Phone 3648 0
61 3 9479 8809
Fax 3648 0
+61 3 8341 8555
Email 3648 0

No information has been provided regarding IPD availability
Summary results
Have study results been published in a peer-reviewed journal?
Other publications
Have study results been made publicly available in another format?
Results – basic reporting
Results – plain English summary