Academie Verloskunde Amsterdam Groningen

ObjectiveInvestigate the acute impact of COVID-19 mitigation measures implemented in March 2020 on a comprehensive range of perinatal outcomes. Study designNational registry-based quasi-experimental study. MethodsWe obtained data from the Dutch Perinatal Registry (2010–2020) which was linked to multiple population registries containing sociodemographic variables. A difference-in-discontinuity approach was used to examine the impact of COVID-19 mitigation measures on various perinatal outcomes. We investigated preterm birth incidence across onset types, alongside other perinatal outcomes including low birth weight, small-for-gestational-age, NICU admission, low-APGAR-score, perinatal mortality, neonatal death, and stillbirths. ResultsThe analysis of the national-level dataset revealed a consistent pattern of reduced preterm births after the enactment of COVID-19 mitigation measures on March 9, 2020 (OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.68–0.96). A drop in spontaneous preterm births post-implementation was observed (OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.62–0.98), whereas no change was observed for iatrogenic births. Regarding stillbirths (OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.46–1.95) our analysis did not find compelling evidence of substantial changes. For the remaining outcomes, no discernible shifts were observed. ConclusionsOur findings confirm the reduction in preterm births following COVID-19 mitigation measures in the Netherlands. No discernible changes were observed for other outcomes, including stillbirths. Our results challenge previous concerns of a potential increase in stillbirths contributing to the drop in preterm births, suggesting alternative mechanisms.

Studies indicate unwarranted variation in a wide range of neonatal care practices, contributing to preventable morbidity and mortality. Unwarranted variation is the result of complex interactions and multiple determinants. One of the determinants contributing to unwarranted variation in care may be variation in local hospital protocols. The purpose of this study was to examine variation in the content of obstetric and neonatal protocols for six common indications for neonatal referral to the pediatrician: large for gestational age/macrosomia, small for gestational age/fetal growth restriction, meconium-stained amniotic fluid, vacuum extraction, forceps extraction, and cesarean birth. We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional study examining protocols for neonatal referral to the pediatrician in the obstetric and neonatal departments of all Dutch hospitals. Variation in protocols was analyzed between regions, between neonatal and obstetrics departments located in the same hospital, and within neonatal and obstetrics departments. There was considerable variation in protocols between regions, between neonatal and obstetrics departments, and within neonatal and obstetrics departments. The results of this study showed considerable variation in recommendations for type of referral, admission, screening/diagnostic tests, treatment, and discharge. Furthermore, results generally showed lower referral thresholds in neonatal departments compared with obstetric departments, and higher referral thresholds in the eastern region of the Netherlands. We also found variation in local hospital protocols, which could not be explained by population characteristics but which may be explained by varying recommendations in existing national and international guidelines and/or lack of adherence to these guidelines. To reduce unwarranted variation in local protocols, evidence-based, multidisciplinary guidelines should be developed in the Netherlands. Further research addressing knowledge gaps is needed to inform these guidelines. Attention should be paid to the implementation of evidence, and only where evidence is lacking or inconclusive should agreements be based on multidisciplinary consensus. Where protocols deviate from evidence-based guidelines because of specific local circumstances, clearer, more transparent justifications should be made. Uniformity in guidance will offer clear standards for care evaluation and provide opportunities to reduce inappropriate care.

BackgroundThe Mothers Autonomy in Decision Making Scale (MADM) assesses women’s autonomy and role in decision making. The Mothers on Respect Index (MORi) asseses women’s experiences of respect when interacting with their healthcare providers. The Childbirth Experience Questionnaire 2.0 assesses the overall experience of childbirth (CEQ2.0). There are no validated Dutch measures of the quality of women’s experiences in the intrapartum period. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of these measures in their Dutch translations.MethodsThe available Dutch versions of the MADM and MORi were adapted to assess experiences in the intrapartum period. The CEQ2.0 was translated by using forward-backward procedures. The three measures were included in an online survey including items on individual characteristics (i.e. maternal, birth, birth interventions). Reliability was assessed by calculating Cronbach’s alphas. Mann-Whitney, Kruskal Wallis or Student T-tests were applied where appropriate, to assess discrimination between women who differed on individual characteristics (known group validity). We hypothesized that women who experienced pregnancy complications and birth interventions would have statistically lower scores on the MADM, MORi and CEQ2.0, compared with women who had healthy pregnancies and physiological births. Convergent validity was assessed using Spearman Rank correlations between the MADM, MORi and/or CEQ2.0. We hypothesized moderate to strong correlations between these measures. Women’s uptake of and feedback on the measures were tracked to assess acceptability and clarity.ResultsIn total 621 women were included in the cross sectional study. The calculated Cronbach’s alphas for the MADM, MORi and CEQ, were ≥ 0.77. Knowngroup validity was confirmed through significant differences on all relevant individual characteristics, except for vaginal laceration repair. Spearman Rank correlations ranged from 0.46-0.80. In total 98% of the included women out of the eligible population completed the MADM and MORi for each healthcare professional they encountered during childbirth. The proportions of MADM and MORi-items which were difficult to complete ranged from 0.0-10.8%, 0.6-2.7%, respectively.ConclusionsThe results of our study showed that the Dutch version of the MADM, MORi and CEQ2.0 in Dutch are valid instruments that can be used to assess women’s experiences in the intrapartum period.

“Never waste a crisis”. A commentary on the COVID-19 pandemic as a driver for innovation in maternity careLauri M.M. van den Berg1, Gill Thomson2, Ank de Jonge1, Marie-Clare Balaam2, Gill Moncrieff 2, Anastasia Topalidou2 and Soo Downe2 - on behalf of the ASPIRE COVID-19 team (details below)

BackgroundTo identify facilitators and barriers that residents, medical and nursing students perceive in their Interprofessional Education (IPE) in a clinical setting with other healthcare students.MethodsA systematic review was carried out to identify the perceptions of medical students, residents and nursing students regarding IPE in a clinical setting. PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC and PsycInfo were searched, using keywords and MeSH terms from each database’s inception published prior to June 2014. Interprofessional education involving nursing and medical students and/or residents in IPE were selected by the first author. Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion or exclusion and extracted the data.ResultsSixty-five eligible papers (27 quantitative, 16 qualitative and 22 mixed methods) were identified and synthesized using narrative synthesis. Perceptions and attitudes of residents and students could be categorized into ‘Readiness for IPE’, ‘Barriers to IPE’ and ‘Facilitators of IPE’. Within each category they work at three levels: individual, process/curricular and cultural/organizational. Readiness for IPE at individual level is higher in females, irrespective of prior healthcare experience. At process level readiness for IPE fluctuates during medical school, at cultural level collaboration is jeopardized when groups interact poorly. Examples of IPE-barriers are at individual level feeling intimidated by doctors, at process level lack of formal assessment and at cultural level exclusion of medical students from interaction by nurses. Examples of IPE-facilitators are at individual level affective crises and patient care crises situations that create feelings of urgency, at process level small group learning activities in an authentic context and at cultural level getting acquainted informally.These results are related to a model for learning and teaching, to illustrate the implications for the design of IPE.ConclusionsMost of the uncovered barriers are at the cultural level and most of the facilitators are at the process level. Factors at the individual level need more research.

Zwangerschapshypertensie: hypertensie in de tweede helft van de zwangerschap bij een vrouw die voorheen een normale bloeddruk had

In the Dutch maternity care system women at low risk of complications in pregnancy and birth are distinguished from women at an increased risk. Primary care midwives are responsible for the care in the low-risk group, whereas obstetricians are responsible for care when the risk is increased. Most professionals and stakeholders agree that more continuity of care is warranted but there is no consensus on the ideal organization of care. A midwife-led continuity model of care has been shown to offer several health benefits compared with other models, such as 'shared care'. We argue that this model would be appropriate for the Netherlands. Midwives should provide care where possible and obstetricians where necessary in order to use the expertise of both professions most effectively. This requires an extension of the scope of practice for primary care midwives. This model requires good cooperation between midwives and obstetricians.