The influence of preferred place of birth on the course of pregnancy and labor among healthy nulliparous women: a prospective cohort study

__Abstract__ BACKGROUND: Most studies on birth settings investigate the association between planned place of birth at the start of labor and birth outcomes and intervention rates. To optimize maternity care it also is important to pay attention to the entire process of pregnancy and childbirth. This study explores the association between the initial preferred place of birth and model of care, and the course of pregnancy and labor in low-risk nulliparous women in the Netherlands. METHODS: As part of a Dutch prospective cohort study (2007-2011), we compared medical indications during pregnancy and birth outcomes of 576 women who initially preferred a home birth (n = 226), a midwife-led hospital birth (n = 168) or an obstetrician-led hospital birth (n = 182). Data were obtained by a questionnaire before 20 weeks of gestation and by medical records. Analyses were performed according to the initial preferred place of birth. RESULTS: Low-risk nulliparous women who preferred a home birth with midwife-led care were less likely to be diagnosed with a medical indication during pregnancy compared to women who preferred a birth with obstetrician-led care (OR 0.41 95% CI 0.25-0.66). Preferring a birth with midwife-led care - both at home and in hospital - was associated with lower odds of induced labor (OR 0.51 95% CI 0.28-0.95 respectively OR 0.42 95% CI 0.21-0.85) and epidural analgesia (OR 0.32 95% CI 0.18-0.56 respectively OR 0.34 95% CI 0.19-0.62) compared to preferring a birth with obstetrician-led care. In addition, women who preferred a home birth were less likely to experience augmentation of labor (OR 0.54 95% CI 0.32-0.93) and narcotic analgesia (OR 0.41 95% CI 0.21-0.79) compared to women who preferred a birth with obstetrician-led care. We observed no significant association between preferred place of birth and mode of birth. CONCLUSIONS: Nulliparous women who initially preferred a home birth were less likely to be diagnosed with a medical indication during pregnancy. Women who initially preferred a birth with midwife-led care - both at home and in hospital - experienced lower rates of interventions during labor. Although some differences can be attributed to the model of care, we suggest that characteristics and attitudes of women themselves also play an important role

Development and measurement of guidelines-based quality indicators of caesarean section care in the Netherlands: A RAND-modified delphi procedure and retrospective medical chart review

Background There is an ongoing discussion on the rising CS rate worldwide. Suboptimal guideline adherence may be an important contributor to this rise. Before improvement of care can be established, optimal CS care in different settings has to be defined. This study aimed to develop and measure quality indicators to determine guideline adherence and identify target groups for improvement of care with direct effect on caesarean section (CS) rates. Method Eighteen obstetricians and midwives participated in an expert panel for systematic CS quality indicator development according to the RAND-modified Delphi method. A multi-center study was performed and medical charts of 1024 women with a CS and a stratified and weighted randomly selected group of 1036 women with a vaginal delivery were analysed. Quality indicator frequency and adherence were scored in 2060 women with a CS or vaginal delivery. Results The expert panel developed 16 indicators on planned CS and 11 indicators on unplanned CS. Indicator adherence was calculated, defined as the number of women in a specific obstetrical situation in which care was performed as recommended in both planned and unplanned CS settings. The most frequently occurring obstetrical situations with low indicator adherence were: 1) suspected fetal distress (frequency 17%, adh

Decrease in foetal and neonatal mortality in the Netherlands; comparison with other Euro-Peristat countries in 2004, 2010 and 2015

OBJECTIVE: To compare changes in foetal, neonatal and perinatal mortality in the Netherlands in 2015, relative to 2004 and 2010, with changes in other European countries and regions. DESIGN: Descriptive population-wide study. METHOD: Data from 32 European countries and regions within the Euro-Peristat registration area were analysed. These countries and regions were grouped into: the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Western Europe and Eastern Europe. International differences in registration and policies were taken into account by using rates from 28 weeks gestation for foetal mortality and for 24 weeks gestation and beyond for neonatal mortality. Ranking was based on individual countries and regions. RESULTS: Foetal mortality decreased by 24% in the Netherlands, from 2.9 per 1,000 births in 2010 to 2.2 per 1,000 births in 2015; neonatal mortality decreased by 9%, from 2.2 to 2.0 per 1,000 live births. Perinatal mortality (the sum of foetal mortality and neonatal mortality) decreased by 18% from 5.1 to 4.2 per 1,000 births. The Netherlands moved from the 18th place in the European ranking in 2004 to the 10th place in 2015. CONCLUSION: Foetal, neonatal and perinatal mortality in the Netherlands decreased in 2015 when compared with 2004 and 2010. The country's position in the European ranking also improved. Explanations for this decrease are related to changes in the areas of organisation of care, population and risk factors. When mortality rates in other European countries and regions - particularly Scandinavia - are considered there is room for further improvement