Search

Background: To improve their quality, healthcare systems are increasingly focused on value delivered to patients. For perinatal care, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) proposed a patient-centred outcome set with both clinical and patient-reported measures for pregnancy and childbirth (PCB set). This study aimed to identify factors that affect the implementation of the PCB set at the pre-implementation stage, using the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR)., Methods: In this qualitative study, we conducted semi-structured interviews amongst a purposive sample of key stakeholders within an obstetric care network (OCN): 1) patients, 2) perinatal care professionals involved in the full cycle of perinatal care, and 3) policy makers, including hospital managers, administrative staff and health care insurers. While the CFIR guided data capture and structuring, thematic analysis revealed overarching themes that best reflected the barriers and facilitators from different stakeholder perspectives. Within these overarching themes, the CFIR constructs were maintained., Results: Interviews were conducted with 6 patients, 16 professionals and 5 policy makers. Thematic analysis supported by the CFIR framework identified four main themes: the instrument and its implementation process, use in individual patient care, use in quality improvement, and the context of the OCN. Important barriers included professional workload, data reliability, and interprofessional and interorganizational collaboration. Potential facilitators were the PCB set's direct value in individual care, interprofessional feedback and education, and aligning with existing systems. Prominent variations between stakeholder groups included the expected patient burden, the level of use, transparency of outcomes and the degree of integrated care., Conclusions: This study clarified critical factors that affect successful implementation of the PCB set in perinatal care. Practice recommendations, suggested at multiple levels, can enable structural patient-centred care improvement and may unite stakeholders towards integrated birth care.

Background and Aims: Patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROM and PREM) can facilitate shared decision making and hold potential to improve healthcare quality. However, their adoption in perinatal care is still limited. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) developed a Pregnancy and Childbirth (PCB) outcome set, including PROM and PREM questionnaires. We studied the feasibility to use these PROMs/PREMs in Dutch perinatal care, addressing both women's and professionals' perspective., Methods: Patients and professionals in primary and hospital care participated. Women under care at one of five timepoints for PROM/PREM collection of the PCB set (2 during pregnancy, 3 postpartum) were e-mailed a questionnaire and discussed their answers with their obstetric professional the next regular visit. Compliance was recorded. After discussing the PROMs/PREMs, usability and experience were assessed with separate surveys amongst women and professionals., Results: Of 26 women approached, 21 completed and discussed their PROM/PREM questionnaire. Mean questionnaire completion rate was 97%. Average reported time completing the questionnaires was 10 minutes; most women (90%) stated this was acceptable. Women preferred completing questionnaires digitally and discuss their answers with an obstetric professional rather than other care professionals, also 6 months postpartum. Over half of women agreed PROMs/PREMs supported shared decision making (58%), ability to raise issues (60%), and patient-clinician relationship (52%). Six professionals participated: two obstetricians, two clinical midwives, and two community midwives. Most professionals experienced sufficient time to discuss the responses, except at 6 months postpartum. They knew what items to discuss but did not always feel responsible to act upon them. Professionals agreed PROMs/PREMs supported symptom detection and personalized care., Conclusions: Patients and obstetric professionals consider the PCB set a feasible instrument for PROM/PREM assessment, with good compliance, acceptability and usability. Important determinants of successful implementation are a well-equipped ICT-tool, agreements regarding professionals' responsibilities and how outcomes are discussed or acted upon., Competing Interests: Arie Franx was part of the ICHOM PCB outcome set Working Group. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© 2020 The Authors. Health Science Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objective: To explore the prenatal trajectory and the experiences of mothers of a child with Down syndrome (DS) at the time of receiving information or test results when participating in a nationwide prenatal screening program., Methods: An online questionnaire study was completed by mothers of children with DS born between January 1, 2010 and February 28, 2016 (n = 212). Data were collected between February 15 and 28, 2016., Results: Most of the live born children with DS were diagnosed postnatally. The majority of their mothers had explicitly chosen not to have prenatal DS screening. Of the 39 mothers prenatally informed their child might have DS, only 49% were completely or mostly satisfied about the information provided by their clinical providers at that time. About 16% of women (of the 38 that answered this question) recall some perceived emphasis on the option of terminating pregnancy as the first choice. Mothers who had received a postnatal diagnosis rated the experience as more positive than their counterparts who received prenatal diagnoses., Conclusion: With recent developments in screening, more parents are expected to receive a DS diagnosis before birth. Meeting the parents' individual counseling needs at the time of prenatal diagnosis requires careful exploration of their personal values and preferences., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: To improve early risk-identification in pregnancy, research on prediction models for common pregnancy complications is ongoing. Therefore, it was the aim of this study to explore pregnant women's perceptions, preferences and needs regarding prediction models for first trimester screening for common pregnancy complications, such as preeclampsia, to support future implementation., Method: Ten focus groups (of which five with primiparous and five with multiparous women) were conducted (n = 45). Six focus groups were conducted in urban regions and four in rural regions. All focus group discussions were audio taped and NVIVO was used in order to facilitate the thematic analysis conducted by the researchers., Results: Women in this study had a positive attitude towards first trimester screening for preeclampsia using prediction models. Reassurance when determined as low-risk was a major need for using the test. Self-monitoring, early recognition and intensive monitoring were considered benefits of using prediction models in case of a high-risk. Women acknowledged that high-risk determination could cause (unnecessary) anxiety, but it was expected that personal and professional interventions would level out this anxiety., Conclusion: Women in this study had positive attitudes towards preeclampsia screening. Self-monitoring, together with increased alertness of healthcare professionals, would enable them to take active actions to improve pregnancy outcomes. This attitude enhances the opportunities for prevention, early recognition and treatment of preeclampsia and probably other adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Background: Uptake rates for Down syndrome screening in the Netherlands are low compared to other European countries. To investigate the low uptake, we explored women's reasons for participation and possible influences of national healthcare system characteristics. Dutch prenatal care is characterised by an approach aimed at a low degree of medicalisation, with pregnant women initially considered to be at low risk. Prenatal screening for Down syndrome is offered to all women, with a 'right not to know' for women who do not want to be informed on this screening. At the time this study was performed, the test was not reimbursed for women aged 35 and younger., Methods: We conducted a qualitative study to explore reasons for participation and possible influences of healthcare system characteristics. Data were collected via ten semi-structured focus groups with women declining or accepting the offer of Down syndrome screening (n = 46). All focus groups were audio- and videotaped, transcribed verbatim, coded and content analysed., Results: Women declining Down syndrome screening did not consider Down syndrome a condition severe enough to justify termination of pregnancy. Young women declining felt supported in their decision by perceived confirmation of their obstetric caregiver and reassured by system characteristics (costs and age restriction). Women accepting Down syndrome screening mainly wanted to be reassured or be prepared to care for a child with Down syndrome. By weighing up the pros and cons of testing, obstetric caregivers supported young women who accepted in the decision-making process. This was helpful, although some felt the need to defend their decision to accept the test offer due to their young age. For some young women accepting testing, costs were considered a disincentive to participate., Conclusions: Presentation of prenatal screening affects how the offer is attended to, perceived and utilised. By offering screening with age restriction and additional costs, declining is considered the preferred choice, which might account for low Dutch uptake rates. Autonomous and informed decision-making in Down syndrome screening should be based on the personal interest in knowing the individual risk of having a child with Down syndrome and system characteristics should not influence participation.

Objective: Our objective is to study the association between potentially influential determinants and first-trimester combined test (FCT) uptake rates in the central region of the Netherlands., Methods: Data were extracted from the national prenatal screening database Peridos and the Netherlands Perinatal Registry and compared at the level of the health care provider. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analysis was used to determine the effect of determinants (maternal age, parity, socio-economic status (SES), mode of conception, ethnicity and urbanisation) on uptake., Results: Prenatal screening data were available for 24 657 women and overall uptake rate was 25.7%. The strongest association with FCT uptake was found for advanced maternal age (β 2.2; 95% CI [1.7, 2.8]). Grand multiparity had a significantly negative association with FCT uptake (β -4.3; 95% CI [-5.9, -2.7]). Positive associations were found for very high urbanisation (β 0.3; 95% CI [0.1, 0.4]) and high SES (β 0.2; 95% CI [0.0, 0.3])., Conclusion: Advanced maternal age is strongly associated with participation in prenatal testing. The role of age related risk perception should be incorporated in future policy making to support women in informed and autonomous decision making. The negative association of grand multiparity and FCT might be religion based but requires further research. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: The offer of prenatal Down's syndrome screening is part of routine antenatal care in most of Europe; however screening uptake varies significantly across countries. Although a decision to accept or reject screening is a personal choice, it is unlikely that the widely differing uptake rates across countries can be explained by variation in individual values alone.The aim of this study was to compare Down's syndrome screening policies and programmes in the Netherlands, where uptake is relatively low (<30%) with England and Denmark where uptake is higher (74 and > 90% respectively), in an attempt to explain the observed variation in national uptake rates., Methods: We used a mixed methods approach with an embedded design: a) documentary analysis and b) expert stakeholder analysis. National central statistical offices and legal documents were studied first to gain insight in demographic characteristics, cultural background, organization and structure of healthcare followed by documentary analysis of primary and secondary sources on relevant documents on DSS policies and programme. To enhance interpretation of these findings we performed in-depth interviews with relevant expert stakeholders., Results: There were many similarities in the demographics, healthcare systems, government abortion legislation and Down's syndrome screening policy across the studied countries. However, the additional cost for Down's syndrome screening over and above standard antenatal care in the Netherlands and an emphasis on the 'right not to know' about screening in this country were identified as potential explanations for the 'low' uptake rates of Down's syndrome screening in the Netherlands. The social context and positive framing of the offer at the service delivery level may play a role in the relatively high uptake rates in Denmark., Conclusions: This paper makes an important contribution to understanding how macro-level demographic, social and healthcare delivery factors may have an impact on national uptake rates for Down's syndrome screening. It has suggested a number of policy level and system characteristics that may go some way to explaining the relatively low uptake rates of Down's syndrome screening in the Netherlands when compared to England and Denmark.

Objective: Uptake rates for Down syndrome screening (DSS) in the Netherlands are low compared with those in Northern European countries (27% versus 61% in the United Kingdom and 90% in Denmark). These differences are unexpected, especially since the countries have similar cultural and social values., Method: To analyse factors that underlie differences in uptake we reviewed current literature on individual characteristics and healthcare system factors, which determine potential influential factors on utilization of DSS., Results: Arguments "Against abortion" and "Down syndrome (DS) not severe enough condition to terminate pregnancy" correlated with declining DSS, whereas "Perceived guidance of healthcare professional," "Perceived negative attitude of society towards DS" and "Preparation/Early termination" correlated with accepting DSS. However, the majority of determinants were used both in favour of accepting or declining DSS., Conclusions: Decision making regarding DSS seems a process with influences on different levels and subtle interactions rather than a dichotomous process. Utilization may also be influenced by the implicit way it is being offered, as an extra option or as part of routine care and how this offer is perceived by the social environment. Finally, national healthcare system characteristics, although underrepresented in the examined studies, may also influence participation in DSS.