Adverse outcomes in maternity care for women with a low risk profile in The Netherlands: a case series analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to perform a structural analysis of determinants of risk of critical incidents in care for women with a low risk profile at the start of pregnancy with a view on improving patient safety. METHODS: We included 71 critical incidents in primary midwifery care and subsequent hospital care in case of referral after 36 weeks of pregnancy that were related to substandard care and for that reason were reported to the Health Care Inspectorate in The Netherlands in 36 months (n = 357). We performed a case-by-case analysis, using a previously validated instrument which covered five broad domains: healthcare organization, communication between healthcare providers, patient risk factors, clinical management, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Determinants that were associated with risk concerned healthcare organization (n = 20 incidents), communication about treatment procedures (n = 39), referral processes (n = 19), risk assessment by telephone triage (n = 10), and clinical management in an out of hours setting (n = 19). The 71 critical incidents included three cases of maternal death, eight cases of severe maternal morbidity, 42 perinatal deaths and 12 critical incidents with severe morbidity for the child. Suboptimal prenatal risk assessment, a delay in availability of health care providers in urgent situations, miscommunication about treatment between care providers, and miscommunication with patients in situations with a language barrier were associated with safety risks. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic analysis of critical incidents improves insight in determinants of safety risk. The wide variety of determinants of risk of critical incidents implies that there is no single intervention to improve patient safety in the care for pregnant women with initially a low risk profile.

Finding the right indicators for assessing quality midwifery care.

OBJECTIVE: To identify a set of indicators for monitoring the quality of maternity care for low-risk women provided by primary care midwives and general practitioners (GPs) in the Netherlands. DESIGN: A Project Group (midwives, GPs, policymakers and researchers) defined a long list of potential indicators based on the literature, national guidelines and expert opinion. This list was assessed against the AIRE (Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation) instrument criteria, resulting in a short list of draft indicators. In a two-round Delphi survey, a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders reviewed the elaborated draft indicators, rating both the relationship between indicator and quality of care and the feasibility. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A multidisciplinary expert panel consisting of 28 midwives, 2 GPs, 3 obstetricians and 3 maternity assistants, randomly selected from different regions in the Netherlands. INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Set of quality indicators for midwifery care. RESULTS: The Project Group generated a list of 115 potential indicators which was reduced to 35 using the AIRE criteria. The 35 draft indicators were discussed by a Delphi panel. In total, 26 indicators were recommended by the participants as relevant indicators of midwifery care, representing several levels of measurement. Eight structure indicators, 12 process indicators and 6 outcome indicators were addressing the various phases of midwifery care. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a set of quality indicators concerning midwifery care provision in a low-risk population. Practicing maternity care providers adopted the large majority (83%) of the draft indicators proposed as a feasible set of indicators, describing the structure, process and outcome. The input from multidisciplinary experts in the process of identifying the right indicators showed to be essential in all phases of development.

Pregnancy and labour in the Dutch maternity care system: what is normal? The role division between midwives and obstetricians.

INTRODUCTION: In the Dutch maternity care system, the role division between independently practising midwives (who take care of normal pregnancy and childbirth) and obstetricians (who care for pathologic pregnancy and childbirth) has been established in the so-called "List of Obstetric Indications"(LOI). The LOI designates the most appropriate care provider for women with defined medical or obstetric conditions. METHODS: This descriptive study analysed the evolution of the concept of "normality" by comparing the development and the contents of the consecutive versions of the LOI from 1958 onwards. The results were related to data from available Dutch national databases concerning maternity care. RESULTS: The number of conditions defined in the successive lists increased from 39 in 1958 to 143 in 2003. In the course of time, the nature and the content of many indications changed, as did the assignment to the most appropriate care provider. The basic assumptions of the Dutch maternity care system remained stable: the conviction that pregnancy and childbirth fundamentally are physiologic processes, the strong position of the independently practising midwife, and the choice between home or hospital birth for low-risk women. Nevertheless, the odds of the obstetrician being involved in the birth process increased from 24.7% in 1964 to 59.4% in 2002, whereas the role of the primary care provider decreased correspondingly. DISCUSSION: Multidisciplinary research is urgently needed to better determine the risk status and the optimal type of care and care provider for each individual woman in her specific situation, taking into account the risk of both under- and over-treatment. Safely keeping women in primary care could be considered one of a midwife's interventions, just as a referral to secondary care may be. The art of midwifery and risk selection is to balance both interventions, in order to end up with the optimal result for mother and child.