[Best possible start for child and parent]. / Kansrijke start voor kind en ouder.

The health of women during the periconception period and pregnancy is important for a healthy start of the child. All care providers can make a major contribution to this. In this learning article we provide answers to a number of questions that have been collected from the professional field about preconception care and care for vulnerable pregnant women. Our aim is to inform general practitioners and specialists who assist women with a (possible) desire to have children about proactive care in pregnancy, childbirth and child care. Included are concrete actions of the general practitioner when healthy women wish to become pregnant, which medical history and other characteristics of a pregnant woman negatively affects the health of her (unborn) child, and which signals in a first pregnancy predispose for problems after and in a subsequent pregnancy and what role can the GP play in this. Furthermore, we discuss signs of vulnerability in the consulting room, how transmural risk selection can be applied and we provide an overview of interventions applicable in primary care or where to refer to.

Comparison of the CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 questionnaires to appreciate the patient-reported level of shared decision-making.

OBJECTIVE: To compare CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 questionnaires when appreciating patient-perceived level of shared decision-making (SDM) in doctor-patient consultations. METHODS: Data were harvested from five separate studies on SDM, conducted in three university and one large community hospital in the Netherlands, using Dutch versions of both questionnaires. CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 scores were expressed as percentages. Correlation was assessed using Spearman's Rho coefficient. Bland&Altman analysis was used to assess the degree of agreement. Top scores were calculated to assess possible ceiling effects. RESULTS: The five studies included 442 patients. Median CollaboRATE scores (88.9%, IQR 81.5-100%) were significantly higher (p < 0.001) than SDM-Q-9 scores (80.0%, IQR 64.4-100%). Correlation was moderate (Rho=0.53, p < 0.001). A systematic, 12.5-point higher score was found across the range of scores when using CollaboRATE. Top scores for CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 were present in 37.5% and 17% of questionnaires, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 questionnaires showed a high level of patient-perceived SDM. However, CollaboRATE only moderately correlated with SDM-Q-9 and had a stronger ceiling effect. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: When choosing a SDM-measurement tool, its benefits and limitations should be weighed. These metrics should be combined with objective scores of SDM, as these may differ from the patients' subjective interpretation.