Pregnant women's willingness to participate in a randomized trial comparing induction of labor at 39 weeks versus expectant management: A survey in the Netherlands

IntroductionA randomized controlled trial (RCT) in the United States, the ARRIVE trial, has indicated that induction of labor (IOL) in low-risk nulliparous women with a gestational age (GA) of 39 weeks compared to expectant management (EM) resulted in a significant lower rate of cesarean deliveries. The Dutch maternity care system is different compared to the United States with, among other factors, an overall significantly lower percentage of caesarean sections (CS). To investigate whether IOL has a favorable outcome in the Dutch maternity care system, a new trial is advised. In this questionnaire-based study we aim to evaluate whether Dutch low-risk pregnant women would be willing to participate in an RCT comparing IOL at 39 weeks to EM. Materials and methodsWe conducted an online survey in 2020 in the Netherlands. Respondent recruitment took place both in outpatient clinics at hospitals and midwife practices and via social media. Inclusion criteria were pregnant women with singleton gestation, GA ≤ 39 weeks, age 18 years or older and residency in the Netherlands. Exclusion criteria were multiple gestation, a history of a CS, planned IOL or CS in current pregnancy and GA > 39 weeks. A subgroup was formed of low risk (receiving primary care) nulliparous women with a gestational age between 34 and 39 weeks, comparable with the ARRIVE trial. ResultsThree hundred eighty respondents participated. Of all respondents (nulli- and multiparous), 47 (12.4%) would be willing to participate in the hypothetical RCT and 70 (18.4%) might be willing to participate. Amongst the 70 women in the subgroup 11 women (15.7%) would be willing to participate and 17 (24.3%) might be willing to participate. Discussion and conclusionCalculating sample size in a country with a low CS rate, in relation to 69.2% of women are not willing to participate in an RCT comparing IOL at 39 weeks with EM, would require >18.000 women to be counselled for participation. We believe such a study is a challenge in the Netherlands

Providing both autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT) may have a stronger impact on the outcome of autologous HSCT in adult patients than activity levels or implementation of JACIE at Belgian transplant centres.

While performance since the introduction of the JACIE quality management system has been shown to be improved for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT), impact on autologous-HSCT remains unclear in Europe. Our study on 2697 autologous-HSCT performed in adults in 17 Belgian centres (2007-2013) aims at comparing the adjusted 1 and 3-yr survival between the different centres & investigating the impact of 3 centre-related factors on performance (time between JACIE accreditation achievement by the centre and the considered transplant, centre activity volume and type of HSCT performed by centres: exclusively autologous vs both autologous & allogeneic). We showed a relatively homogeneous performance between Belgian centres before national completeness of JACIE implementation. The 3 centre-related factors had a significant impact on the 1-yr survival, while activity volume and type of HSCT impacted the 3-yr survival of autologous-HSCT patients in univariable analyses. Only activity volume (impact on 1-yr survival only) and type of HSCT (impact on 1 and 3-yr survivals) remained significant in multivariable analysis. This is explained by the strong relationship between these 3 variables. An extended transplantation experience, i.e., performing both auto & allo-HSCT, appears to be a newly informative quality indicator potentially conveying a multitude of underlying complex factors