Regional practice variation in induction of labor in the Netherlands: Does it matter? A multilevel analysis of the association between induction rates and perinatal and maternal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Practice variation in healthcare is a complex issue. We focused on practice variation in induction of labor between maternity care networks in the Netherlands. These collaborations of hospitals and midwifery practices are jointly responsible for providing high-quality maternity care. We explored the association between induction rates and maternal and perinatal outcomes. METHODS: In a retrospective population-based cohort study, we included records of 184,422 women who had a singleton, vertex birth of their first child after a gestation of at least 37 weeks in the years 2016-2018. We calculated induction rates for each maternity care network. We divided networks in induction rate categories: lowest (Q1), moderate (Q2-3) and highest quartile (Q4). We explored the association of these categories with unplanned caesarean sections, unfavorable maternal outcomes and adverse perinatal outcomes using descriptive statistics and multilevel logistic regression analysis corrected for population characteristics. FINDINGS: The induction rate ranged from 14.3% to 41.1% (mean 24.4%, SD 5.3). Women in Q1 had fewer unplanned caesarean sections (Q1: 10.2%, Q2-3: 12.1%; Q4: 12.8%), less unfavorable maternal outcomes (Q1: 33.8%; Q2-3: 35.7%; Q4: 36.3%) and less adverse perinatal outcomes (Q1: 1.0%; Q2-3: 1.1%; Q4: 1.3%). The multilevel analysis showed a lower unplanned caesarean section rate in Q1 in comparison with reference category Q2-3 (OR 0.83; p = .009). The unplanned caesarean section rate in Q4 was similar to the reference category. No significant associations with unfavorable maternal or adverse perinatal outcomes were observed. CONCLUSION: Practice variation in labor induction is high in Dutch maternity care networks, with limited association with maternal outcomes and no association with perinatal outcomes. Networks with low induction rates had lower unplanned caesarean section rates compared to networks with moderate rates. Further in-depth research is necessary to understand the mechanisms that contribute to practice variation and the observed association with unplanned caesarean sections.

Knowledge and skills used for clinical decision-making on childbirth interventions: A qualitative study among midwives in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: Appropriate use of interventions in maternity care is a worldwide issue. Midwifery-led models of care are associated with more efficient use of resources, fewer medical interventions, and improved outcomes. However, the use of interventions varies considerably between midwives. The aim of this study was to explore how knowledge and skills influence clinical decision-making of midwives on the appropriate use of childbirth interventions. METHODS: A qualitative study using in-depth interviews with 20 primary care midwives was performed in June 2019. Participants' clinical experience varied in the use of interventions. The interviews combined a narrative approach with a semi-structured question route. Data were analyzed using deductive content analysis. RESULTS: 'Knowledge', 'Critical thinking skills', and 'Communication skills' influenced midwives' clinical decision-making towards childbirth interventions. Midwives obtained their knowledge through the formal education program and extended their knowledge by reflecting on experiences and evidence. Midwives with a low use of interventions seem to have a higher level of reflective skills, including reflection-in-action. These midwives used a more balanced communication style with instrumental and affective communication skills in interaction with women, and have more skills to engage in discussions during collaboration with other professionals, and thus personalizing their care. CONCLUSIONS: Midwives with a low use of interventions seemed to have the knowledge and skills of a reflective practitioner, leading to more personalized care compared to standardized care as defined in protocols. Learning through reflectivity, critical thinking skills, and instrumental and affective communication skills, need to be stimulated and trained to pursue appropriate, personalized use of interventions.

Birth place preferences and women's expectations and experiences regarding duration and pain of labor.

INTRODUCTION: We know a great deal about how childbirth is affected by setting; we know less about how the experience of birth is shaped by the attitudes women bring with them to the birthing room. In order to better understand how women frame childbirth, we examined the relationship between birth place preference and expectations and experiences regarding duration of labor and labor pain in healthy nulliparous women. METHODS: A prospective cohort study (2007-2011) of 454 women who preferred a home birth (n = 179), a midwife-led hospital birth (n = 133) or an obstetrician-led hospital birth (n = 142) in the Netherlands. Data were collected using three questionnaires (before 20 weeks gestation, 32 weeks gestation and 6 weeks postpartum) and medical records. Analyses were performed according to the initial preferred place of birth. RESULTS: Women who preferred a home birth were significantly less likely to be worried about the duration of labor (OR 0.5, 95%CI 0.2-0.9) and were less likely to expect difficulties with coping with pain (OR 0.4, 95%CI 0.2-0.8) compared with women who preferred an obstetrician-led birth. We found no significant differences in postpartum accounts of duration of labor. When compared to women who preferred an obstetrician-led birth, women who preferred a home birth were significantly less likely to experience labor pain as unpleasant (OR 0.3, 95%CI 0.1-0.7). Women who preferred a midwife-led birth - either home or hospital - were more likely to report that it was not possible to make their own choices regarding pain relief compared to women who preferred obstetrician-led care (OR 4.3, 95%CI 1.9-9.8 resp. 3.4, 95%CI 1.5-7.7). Compared to women who preferred a midwife-led hospital birth, women who preferred a home birth had an increased likelihood of being dissatisfied about the management of pain relief (OR 2.5, 95%CI 1.1-6.0). DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest a more natural orientation toward birth with the acceptance of labor pain as part of giving birth in women with a preference for a home birth. Knowledge about women's expectations and experiences will help caregivers to prepare women for childbirth and will equip them to advise women on birth settings that fit their cognitive frame.

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

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.

Eliciting preferences for key attributes of intrapartum care in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: As part of the move toward "patient-centered care," women's preferences with regard to maternity services have become increasingly important to policy makers. To realize optimal patient-centered care, knowledge of patients' preferences is essential. The aim of our study was to assess the strength and relative importance of women's preferences for different aspects of intrapartum care in The Netherlands, where women have easy access to both home and hospital birth. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was conducted at 16 weeks of gestation as part of a Dutch multicenter, prospective cohort study from 2007 to 2011 of low-risk, nulliparous women. Responses were analyzed per intended place of birth group: midwifery-led home (n = 191) and hospital birth (n = 152) and obstetric-led hospital birth (n = 188). RESULTS: We analyzed 562 questionnaires. Women in all groups preferred the possibility of influencing decision making and pain-relief treatment during birth and no co-payment for childbirth. Women with an intended home birth preferred a home-like birth setting with the assistance of a midwife and transport during birth in case of complications. Type of birth setting and transport during birth were not considered important to women with an intended midwifery- or obstetric-led hospital birth. CONCLUSION: Policies aimed at the improvement of maternity care must take into account women's preferences for the possibility of pain-relief treatment and the fact that all women desire a high level of involvement in decision making. Furthermore, efforts to change maternity care systems must consider how to counter the culturally embedded nature of women's preferences.

Preferred place of birth: characteristics and motives of low-risk nulliparous women in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: to explores preferences, characteristics and motives regarding place of birth of low-risk nulliparous women in the Netherlands. DESIGN: a prospective cohort study of low-risk nulliparous women and their partners starting their pregnancy in midwifery-led care or in obstetric-led care. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire, including questions on demographic, psychosocial and pregnancy factors and statements about motives with regard to place of birth. Depression, worry and self-esteem were explored using the Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS), the Cambridge Worry Scale (CWS) and the Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale (RSE). SETTING: participants were recruited in 100 independent midwifery practices and 14 hospitals from 2007 to 2011. PARTICIPANTS: 550 low-risk nulliparous women; 231 women preferred a home birth, 170 women a hospital birth in midwifery-led care and 149 women a birth in obstetric-led care. FINDINGS: Significant differences in characteristics were found in the group who preferred a birth in obstetric-led care compared to the two groups who preferred midwifery-led care. Those women were older (F (2,551)=16.14, p<0.001), had a higher family income (χ(2) (6)=18.87, p=0.004), were more frequently pregnant after assisted reproduction (χ(2)(2)=35.90, p<0.001) and had a higher rate of previous miscarriage (χ(2)(2)=25.96, p<0.001). They also differed significantly on a few emotional aspects: more women in obstetric-led care had symptoms of a major depressive disorder (χ(2)(2)=6.54, p=0.038) and were worried about health issues (F (2,410)=8.90, p<0.001). Women's choice for a home birth is driven by a desire for greater personal autonomy, whereas women's choice for a hospital birth is driven by a desire to feel safe and control risks. KEY CONCLUSIONS: the characteristics of women who prefer a hospital birth are different than the characteristics of women who prefer a home birth. It appears that for women preferring a hospital birth, the assumed safety of the hospital is more important than type of care provider. This brings up the question whether women are fully aware of the possibilities of maternity care services. Women might need concrete information about the availability and the characteristics of the services within the maternity care system and the risks and benefits associated with either setting, in order to make an informed choice where to give birth.