Dutch Perinatal System: performance and innovative strategies

The organization of the Dutch perinatal care system is unique since, in contrast to most other high-income countries, certified community midwives play an independent role in the care for pregnant women. Community midwives care for pregnant women with an assumed or estimated low-risk for medical complications starting from the early prenatal until the postpartum period. If during pregnancy no risks are detected, women have the option of delivering at home, at a birthing centre or in a hospital, in all cases under the supervision of their community midwife. Should complications (threaten to) occur, community midwives refer women under their supervision to secondary care by obstetricians in a hospital setting. If necessary, secondary caregivers then refer women who are severely ill and/or have threatened pregnancies to tertiary perinatal care, which is located in academic hospitals and in non-academic hospitals with obstetric high care and neonatal intensive care units. Approximately one out five women directly starts antenatal care at a secondary or tertiary hospital due to their initial high-risk status. The functioning of this unique system depends on the mutual cooperation of the health care professionals involved, the availability of (different) facilities, the absence of financial barriers, and adequate information to the patients

Planned home compared with planned hospital births: Mode of delivery and Perinatal mortality rates, an observational study

Background: To compare the mode of delivery between planned home versus planned hospital births and to determine if differences in intervention rates could be interpreted a

Validity of a questionnaire measuring the world health organization concept of health system responsiveness with respect to perinatal services in the Dutch obstetric care system

Background: The concept of responsiveness, introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO), addresses non-clinical aspects of health service quality that are relevant regardless of provider, country, health system or health condition. Responsiveness refers to "aspects related to the way individuals are treated and the environment in which they are treated" during health system interactions. This paper assesses the psychometric properties of a newly developed responsiveness questionnaire dedicated to evaluating maternal experiences of perinatal care services, called the Responsiveness in Perinatal and Obstetric Health Care Questionnaire (ReproQ), using the eight-domain WHO concept. Methods: The ReproQ was developed between October 2009 and February 2010 by adapting the WHO Responsiveness Questionnaire items to the perinatal care context. The psychometric properties of feasibility, construct validity, and discriminative validity were empirically assessed in a sample of Dutch women two weeks post partum. Results: A total of 171 women consented to participation. Feasibility: the interviews lasted between 20 and 40 minutes and the overall missing rate was 8%. Construct validity: mean Cronbach's alphas for the antenatal, birth and postpartum phase were: 0.73 (range 0.57-0.82), 0.84 (range 0.66-0.92), and 0.87 (range 0.62-0.95) respectively. The item-own scale correlations within all phases were considerably higher than most of the item-other scale correlations. Within the antenatal care, birth care and post partum phases, the eight factors explained 69%, 69%, and 76% of variance respectively. Discriminative validity: overall responsiveness mean sum scores were higher for women whose children were not admitted. This confirmed the hypothesis that dissatisfaction with health outcomes is transferred to their judgement on responsiveness of the perinatal services. Conclusions: The ReproQ interview-based questionnaire demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties to describe the quality of perinatal care in the Netherlands, with the potential to discriminate between different levels of quality of care. In view of the relatively small sample, further testing and research is recommended

Quality of perinatal care services from the user's perspective: A Dutch study applies the World Health Organization's responsiveness concept

Background: The concept of responsiveness was introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) to address non-clinical aspects of service quality in an internationally comparable way. Responsiveness is defined as aspects of the way individuals are treated and the environment in which they are treated during health system interactions. The aim of this study is to assess responsiveness outcomes, their importance and factors influencing responsiveness outcomes during the antenatal and delivery phases of perinatal care. Method: The Responsiveness in Perinatal and Obstetric Health Care Questionnaire was developed in 2009/10 based on the eight-domain WHO concept and the World Health Survey questionnaire. After ethical approval, a total of 171 women, who were 2 weeks postpartum, were recruited from three primary care midwifery practices in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, using face-to-face interviews. We dichotomized the original five ordinal response categories for responsiveness attainment as 'poor' and good responsiveness and analyzed the ranking of the domain performance and importance according to frequency scores. We used a series of independent variables related to health services and users' personal background characteristics in multiple logistic regression analyses to explain responsiveness. Results: Poor responsiveness outcomes ranged from 5.9% to 31.7% for

Planned home compared with planned hospital births: Mode of delivery and Perinatal mortality rates, an observational study

Background: To compare the mode of delivery between planned home versus planned hospital births and to determine if differences in intervention rates could be interpreted as over- or undertreatment. Methods: Intervention and perinatal mortality rates were obtained for 679,952 low-risk women from the Dutch Perinatal Registry (2000-2007). Intervention wa

Different settings of place of midwife-led birth : evaluation of a midwife-led birth centre

Objectives: The claimed advantages of home deliveries, including fewer medical interventions, are potentially counter balanced by the small additional risk on perinatal adverse outcome compared to hospital deliveries in low risk women. Homelike birth centres have been proposed a new setting for low risk women combining the advantages of home and hospital, resulting in lower intervention rates with equal safety. This paper addresses whether the introduction of a midwife-led birth centre adjacent to the hospital combines the advantages of home and hospital deliveries. Additionally, we investigate whether the introduction of a midwife-led birth centre leads to a different risk selection of women planning their delivery either at home, at the hospital or at the birth centre. Methods: Anonymized data, between January 2007 and June 2012, was collected from the four participating midwife practices. Women (n = 5558) were categorized according to intended place of birth. Women’s characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were compared between the period before and after its introduction using Chi square and Fisher’s Exact tests. Direct and indirect standardized rates were calculated for different outcomes [(1) intrapartum and neonatal mortality

Different settings of place of midwife-led birth : evaluation of a midwife-led birth centre

Objectives: The claimed advantages of home deliveries, including fewer medical interventions, are potentially counter balanced by the small additional risk on perinatal adverse outcome compared to hospital deliveries in low risk women. Homelike birth centres have been proposed a new setting for low risk women combining the advantages of home and hospital, resulting in lower intervention rates with equal safety. This paper addresses whether the introduction of a midwife-led birth centre adjacent to the hospital combines the advantages of home and hospital deliveries. Additionally, we investigate whether the introduction of a midwife-led birth centre leads to a different risk selection of women planning their delivery either at home, at the hospital or at the birth centre. Methods: Anonymized data, between January 2007 and June 2012, was collected from the four participating midwife practices. Women (n = 5558) were categorized according to intended place of birth. Women’s characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were compared between the period before and after its introduction using Chi square and Fisher’s Exact tests. Direct and indirect standardized rates were calculated for different outcomes [(1) intrapartum and neonatal mortality

Quality of perinatal care services from the user's perspective : a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization's responsiveness concept

Background The concept of responsiveness was introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) to address non-clinical aspects of service quality in an internationally comparable way. Responsiveness is defined as aspects of the way individuals are treated and the environment in which they are treated during health system interactions. The aim of this study is to assess responsiveness outcomes, their importance and factors influencing responsiveness outcomes during the antenatal and delivery phases of perinatal care. Method The Responsiveness in Perinatal and Obstetric Health Care Questionnaire was developed in 2009/10 based on the eight-domain WHO concept and the World Health Survey questionnaire. After ethical approval, a total of 171 women, who were 2 weeks postpartum, were recruited from three primary care midwifery practices in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, using face-to-face interviews. We dichotomized the original five ordinal response categories for responsiveness attainment as ‘poor’ and good responsiveness and analyzed the ranking of the domain performance and importance according to frequency scores. We used a series of independent variables related to health services and users’ personal background characteristics in multiple logistic regression analyses to explain responsiveness. Results Poor responsiveness outcomes ranged from 5.9% to 31.7% for the antenatal phase and from 9.7% to 27.1% for the delivery phase. Overall for both phases, ‘respect for persons’ (Autonomy, Dignity, Communication and Confidentiality) domains performed better and were judged to be more important than ‘client orientation’ domains (Choice and Continuity, Prompt Attention, Quality of Basic Amenities, Social Consideration). On the whole, responsiveness was explained more by health-care and health related issues than personal characteristics. Conclusion To improve responsiveness outcomes caregivers should focus on domains in the category ‘client orientation’

Quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization’s responsiveness concept

Abstract Background The concept of responsiveness was introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) to address non-clinical aspects of service quality in an internationally comparable way. Responsiveness is defined as aspects of the way individuals are treated and the environment in which they are treated during health system interactions. The aim of this study is to assess responsiveness outcomes, their importance and factors influencing responsiveness outcomes during the antenatal and delivery phases of perinatal care. Method The Responsiveness in Perinatal and Obstetric Health Care Questionnaire was developed in 2009/10 based on the eight-domain WHO concept and the World Health Survey questionnaire. After ethical approval, a total of 171 women, who were 2 weeks postpartum, were recruited from three primary care midwifery practices in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, using face-to-face interviews. We dichotomized the original five ordinal response categories for responsiveness attainment as ‘poor’ and good responsiveness and analyzed the ranking of the domain performance and importance according to frequency scores. We used a series of independent variables related to health services and users’ personal background characteristics in multiple logistic regression analyses to explain responsiveness. Results Poor responsiveness outcomes ranged from 5.9% to 31.7% for the antenatal phase and from 9.7% to 27.1% for the delivery phase. Overall for both phases, ‘respect for persons’ (Autonomy, Dignity, Communication and Confidentiality) domains performed better and were judged to be more important than ‘client orientation’ domains (Choice and Continuity, Prompt Attention, Quality of Basic Amenities, Social Consideration). On the whole, responsiveness was explained more by health-care and health related issues than personal characteristics. Conclusion To improve responsiveness outcomes caregivers should focus on domains in the category ‘client orientation’