Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoea, and Trichomonas vaginalis infections among pregnant women and male partners in Dutch midwifery practices: prevalence, risk factors, and perinatal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal screening for HIV, syphilis and HBV has been successfully implemented in The Netherlands, but data on other STI among pregnant women or male partners are limited. Our objectives: (i) to assess the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and Trichomonas vaginalis (TV) among pregnant women and male partners, (ii) to identify risk factors for these STI during pregnancy, and (iii) to identify adverse perinatal outcomes (APO) associated with STI. METHODS: Cross-sectional study. Pregnant women aged ≤ 30 years (n = 548) and male partners (n = 425) were included at 30 midwifery practices during 2012-2016. Participants provided a self-collected vaginal swab (women) or urine sample (men) and completed a questionnaire. Perinatal data were derived from pregnancy cards. APO was defined as premature rupture of membranes, preterm delivery, low birthweight, stillbirth, neonatal conjunctival and respiratory infections. Data were analysed by logistic regression. RESULTS: STI were present in 2.4% of pregnant women (CT 1.8%, NG 0.4%, TV 0.4%), and in 2.2% of male partners (CT 2.2%, NG 0.2%, TV 0%). Of young women (≤ 20 years), 12.5% had a CT infection. Prevalent STI during pregnancy was associated with female young age (≤ 20 years vs ≥ 21 years) (adjusted OR 6.52, CI 95%: 1.11-38.33), male non-Western vs Western background (aOR 9.34, CI 2.34-37.21), and female with ≥ 2 sex partners < 12 months vs 0-1 (aOR 9.88, CI 2.08-46.91). APO was not associated with STI, but was associated with female low education (aOR 3.36, CI 1.12-10.09), complications with previous newborn (aOR 10.49, CI 3.21-34.25 vs no complications) and short duration (0-4 years) of relationship (aOR 2.75, CI 1.41-5.39 vs ≥ 5 years). Small-for-gestational-age was not associated with STI, but was associated with female low education (aOR 7.81, 2.01-30.27), female non-Western background (aOR 4.41, 1.74-11.17), and both parents smoking during pregnancy (aOR 2.94, 1.01-8.84 vs both non-smoking). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of STI was low among pregnant women and male partners in midwifery practices, except for CT among young women. The study could not confirm previously observed associations between STI and APO, which is probably due to low prevalence of STI, small study sample, and presumed treatment for STI.

Antenatal screening for HIV, syphilis and HBV has been successfully implemented in The Netherlands, but data on other STI among pregnant women or male partners are limited. Our objectives were: (i) to assess the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and Trichomonas vaginalis (TV) among pregnant women and male partners, (ii) to identify risk factors for these STI during pregnancy, and (iii) to identify adverse perinatal outcomes (APO) associated with STI.Pregnant women aged ≤ 30 years and male partners were included at 30 midwifery practices. Women provided a vaginal swab, partners a urine sample; both completed a questionnaire. Perinatal data were derived from midwives.STI were present in 2.4% of pregnant women (CT 1.8%, NG 0.4%, TV 0.4%), and in 2.2% of male partners (CT 2.2%, NG 0.2%, TV 0%). Of women ≤ 20 years, 12.5% had a CT infection. Prevalent STI during pregnancy was associated with female young age, male non-Western background, and female with ≥ 2 sex partners < 12 months. APO was not associated with STI, but was associated with female low education, complications with previous newborn, and short duration of the relationship. Small-for-gestational-age was not associated with STI, but was associated with female low education, female non-Western background, and both parents smoking during pregnancy.Prevalence of STI was low among pregnant women and male partners in midwifery practices, except for CT among young women. The study could not confirm previously observed associations between STI and APO. Probably due to low prevalence of STI, small study sample, and presumed treatment for STI.

Women's characteristics and care outcomes of caseload midwifery care in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The maternity care system in the Netherlands is well known for its support of community-based midwifery. However, regular midwifery practices typically do not offer caseload midwifery care - one-to-one continuity of care throughout pregnancy and birth. Because we know very little about the outcomes for women receiving caseload care in the Netherlands, we compared caseload care with regular midwife-led care, looking at maternal and perinatal outcomes, including antenatal and intrapartum referrals to secondary (i.e., obstetrician-led) care. METHODS: We selected 657 women in caseload care and 1954 matched controls (women in regular midwife-led care) from all women registered in the Dutch Perinatal Registry (Perined) who gave birth in 2015. To be eligible for selection the women had to be in midwife-led antenatal care beyond 28 gestational weeks. Each woman in caseload care was matched with three women in regular midwife-led care, using parity, maternal age, background (Dutch or non-Dutch) and region. These two cohorts were compared for referral rates, mode of birth, and other maternal and perinatal outcomes. RESULTS: In caseload midwifery care, 46.9% of women were referred to obstetrician-led care (24.2% antenatally and 22.8% in the intrapartum period). In the matched cohort, 65.7% were referred (37.4% antenatally and 28.3% in the intrapartum period). In caseload care, 84.0% experienced a spontaneous vaginal birth versus 77.0% in regular midwife-led care. These patterns were observed for both nulliparous and multiparous women. Women in caseload care had fewer inductions of labour (13.2% vs 21.0%), more homebirths (39.4% vs 16.1%) and less perineal damage (intact perineum: 41.3% vs 28.2%). The incidence of perinatal mortality and a low Apgar score was low in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found that when compared to regular midwife-led care, caseload midwifery care in the Netherlands is associated with a lower referral rate to obstetrician-led care - both antenatally and in the intrapartum period - and a higher spontaneous vaginal birth rate, with similar perinatal safety. The challenge is to include this model as part of the current effort to improve the quality of Dutch maternity care, making caseload care available and affordable for more women.

Risk indicators for referral during labor from community midwife to gynecologist: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk indicators for referral during labor from community midwife to a gynecologist in a prospective cohort of women with a singleton term pregnancy, starting labor with a community midwife between 2000 and 2007, registered in the Dutch national perinatal registry. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Referral from community midwife to a gynecologist during labor, because of fetal distress, failure to progress in second stage of labor, meconium stained amniotic fluid, failure to progress in first stage of labor, wish for pain relief, a combination of other less urgent reasons or no referral (reference). RESULTS: A total of 241 595 (32%) were referred from community midwife to a gynecologist during labor, because of fetal distress (FD;5%), failure to progress in second stage of labor (FTP2;14%), meconium stained amniotic fluid (MSAF;24%), failure to progress in first stage of labor (FTP1;17%), wish for pain relief (WFPR;7%) or a combination of other less urgent reasons, for example, malpresentation (e.g. breech) or other nonspecified problems (OTHER;33%). The strongest overall risk indicators were gestational age (lower risk of referral because of FD, FTP2, MSAF, FTP1 and WFPR and a higher risk of referral because of OTHER at a gestational age between 37(+0) and 37(+)(6) weeks, and higher risks of referral for all reasons at a gestational age ≥41(+)(0) when compared to a gestational age between 38 (+)(0) and 40 (+)(6) weeks and no referral), the intended place of delivery (higher risk of all types of referral compared to no referral when the intended place of delivery was either at a midwife-led birth center or a hospital instead of at home) and birth history (higher risk of all types of referral compared to no referral when women had a history of instrumental vaginal delivery or when they were nulliparous instead of being multiparous without a history of an instrument vaginal delivery). Risk indicators associated with specific reasons of referral were maternal age, ethnicity, degree of urbanization, social economic status, neonatal gender and birth weight. CONCLUSIONS: Among low-risk pregnant women, a referral during labor is associated with readily available risk indicators. These risk indicators may be used to increase referral risk awareness and to counsel women for the intended place to start labor.

Change in primary midwife-led care in the Netherlands in 2000­2008: A descriptive study of caesarean sections and other interventions among 807,437 low-risk births.

OBJECTIVE: to study whether an increase in intrapartum referrals in primary midwife-led care births in the Netherlands is accompanied by an increase in caesarean sections. DESIGN: nationwide descriptive study. SETTING: The Netherlands Perinatal Registry. PARTICIPANTS: 807,437 births of nine year cohorts of women with low risk pregnancies in primary midwife-led care at the onset of labour between 2000 and 2008. MEASUREMENTS: primary outcome is the caesarean section rate. Vaginal instrumental childbirth, augmentation with oxytocin, and pharmacological pain relief are secondary outcomes. Trends in outcomes are described. We used logistic regression to explore whether changes in the planned place of birth and other maternal characteristics were associated with the caesarean section rate. FINDINGS: the caesarean section rate increased from 6.2 to 8.3 per cent for nulliparous and from 0.8 to 1.1 per cent for multiparous women. After controlling for maternal characteristics the year by year increase in the caesarean section rate was still significant for nulliparous women (adj OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.02­1.03). The vaginal instrumental birth declined from 18.2 to 17.4 per cent for nulliparous women (multiparous women: 1.7­1.5 per cent). Augmentation of labour and/or pharmacological pain relief increased from 23.1 to 38.1 per cent for nulliparous women and from 5.4 to 9.6 per cent for multiparous women. CONCLUSION: the rise in augmentation of labour, pharmacological pain relief and electronic fetal monitoring in the period 2000­2008 among women in primary midwife-led care was accompanied by an increase in caesarean section rate for nulliparous women. The vaginal instrumental deliveries declined for both nulliparous and multiparous women. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: primary care midwives should evaluate whether they can strengthen the opportunities for nulliparous women to achieve a physiological birth, without augmentation or pharmacological pain relief. If such interventions are considered necessary to achieve a spontaneous vaginal birth, the current disadvantage of discontinuity of care should be reduced. In a more integrated care system, women could receive continuous care and support from their own primary care midwife, as long as only supportive interventions are needed.

Variation in referrals to secondary obstetrician-led care among primary midwifery care practices in the Netherlands: a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this study was to describe the variation in intrapartum referral rates in midwifery practices in the Netherlands. Secondly, we wanted to explore the association between the practice referral rate and a woman's chance of an instrumental birth (caesarean section or vaginal instrumental birth). METHODS: We performed an observational study, using the Dutch national perinatal database. Low risk births in all primary care midwifery practices over the period 2008-2010 were selected. Intrapartum referral rates were calculated. The referral rate among nulliparous women was used to divide the practices in three tertile groups. In a multilevel logistic regression analysis the association between the referral rate and the chance of an instrumental birth was examined. RESULTS: The intrapartum referral rate varied from 9.7 to 63.7 percent (mean 37.8; SD 7.0), and for nulliparous women from 13.8 to 78.1 percent (mean 56.8; SD 8.4). The variation occurred predominantly in non-urgent referrals in the first stage of labour. In the practices in the lowest tertile group more nulliparous women had a spontaneous vaginal birth compared to the middle and highest tertile group (T1: 77.3%, T2:73.5%, T3: 72.0%). For multiparous women the spontaneous vaginal birth rate was 97%. Compared to the lowest tertile group the odds ratios for nulliparous women for an instrumental birth were 1.22 (CI 1.16-1.31) and 1.33 (CI 1.25-1.41) in the middle and high tertile groups. This association was no longer significant after controlling for obstetric interventions (pain relief or augmentation). CONCLUSIONS: The wide variation between referral rates may not be explained by medical factors or client characteristics alone. A high intrapartum referral rate in a midwifery practice is associated with an increased chance of an instrumental birth for nulliparous women, which is mediated by the increased use of obstetric interventions. Midwives should critically evaluate their referral behaviour. A high referral rate may indicate that more interventions are applied than necessary. This may lead to a lower chance of a spontaneous vaginal birth and a higher risk on a PPH. However, a low referral rate should not be achieved at the cost of perinatal safety.

Persisting rise in referrals during labor in primary midwife-led care in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: There are concerns about the Dutch maternity care system, characterized by a strict role division between primary and secondary care. The objective of this study was to describe trends in referrals and in perinatal outcomes among labors that started in primary midwife-led care. METHODS: We performed a descriptive study of all 789,795 labors that started in primary midwife-led care during 2000 to 2008 in The Netherlands. Referrals to obstetrician-led care or pediatrician were classified as urgent or nonurgent. Perinatal safety was described by perinatal mortality (intrapartum or neonatal 0-7 days), admission to neonatal intensive care unit 0-7 days, and Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes. RESULTS: The proportion of referrals during labor or after birth declined from 52.6 to 42.6 percent for nulliparous women and from 83.2 to 76.7 percent for multiparous women. Especially nonurgent referrals during the first stage increased, for nulliparous women from 28.7 to 40.7 percent and for multiparous women from 10.5 to 16.5 percent. Referrals were less frequent in planned home births. Perinatal mortality was 0.9 per thousand births for nulliparous women, and 0.6 per thousand for multiparous women. A low Apgar score was registered in 8.6 per thousand births for nulliparous women, and 4.1 per thousand for multiparous women. CONCLUSIONS: There was a considerable rise in nonurgent referrals to obstetrician-led care in primary midwife-led care during labor. Perinatal safety did not improve significantly over time. The persisting rise in referrals challenges the sustainability of the current strict role division between primary and secondary maternity care in The Netherlands.

The role of hospital midwives in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Most midwives in the Netherlands work in primary care where they are the lead professionals providing care to women with 'normal' or uncomplicated pregnancies, while some midwives work in hospitals ("clinical midwives"). The actual involvement of midwives in maternity care in hospitals is unknown, because in all statistics births in secondary care are registered as births assisted by gynaecologists. The aim of this study is to gain insight in the involvement of midwives with births in secondary care, under supervision of a gynaecologist. This is done using data from the PRN (The Netherlands Perinatal Registry), a voluntary registration of births in the Netherlands. The PRN covers 97% to 99% of all births taking place under responsibility of a gynaecologist. METHODS: All births registered in secondary care in the period 1998-2007 (1,102,676, on average 61% of all births) were selected. We analyzed trends in socio-demographic, obstetric and organisational characteristics, associated with the involvement of midwives, using frequency tables and uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses. As main outcome measure the percentage of births in secondary care with a midwife 'catching' the baby was used. RESULTS: The proportion of births attended by a midwife in secondary care increased from 8.3% in 1998 to 26.06% in 2007, the largest increase involving spontaneous births of a second or later child, on weekdays during day shifts (8.00-20.00 hr) from younger mothers with a gestational age (almost) at term. After 2002, parallel to the growing numbers of midwives working in hospitals, the percentage of instrumental births decreased. CONCLUSIONS: In 2007 more midwives are assisting with more births in secondary care than in 1998. Hospital-based midwives are primarily involved with uncomplicated births of women with relatively low risk demographical and obstetrical characteristics. However, they are still only involved with half of the less complicated births, indicating that there may be room for more midwives in hospitals to care for women with relatively uncomplicated births. Whether an association exists between the growing involvement of midwives and the decreasing percentage of instrumental births needs further investigation.

Perinatal mortality and severe morbidity in low and high risk term pregnancies in the Netherlands: prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare incidences of perinatal mortality and severe perinatal morbidity between low risk term pregnancies supervised in primary care by a midwife and high risk pregnancies supervised in secondary care by an obstetrician. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using aggregated data from a national perinatal register. SETTING: Catchment area of the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of the University Medical Center in Utrecht, a region in the centre of the Netherlands covering 13% of the Dutch population. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women at 37 weeks' gestation or later with a singleton or twin pregnancy without congenital malformations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perinatal death (antepartum, intrapartum, and neonatal) or admission to a level 3 NICU. RESULTS: During the study period 37 735 normally formed infants were delivered at 37 weeks' gestation or later. Sixty antepartum stillbirths (1.59 (95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.99) per 1000 babies delivered), 22 intrapartum stillbirths (0.58 (0.34 to 0.83) per 1000 babies delivered), and 210 NICU admissions (5.58 (4.83 to 6.33) per 1000 live births) occurred, of which 17 neonates died (0.45 (0.24 to 0.67) per 1000 live births). The overall perinatal death rate was 2.62 (2.11 to 3.14) per 1000 babies delivered and was significantly higher for nulliparous women compared with multiparous women (relative risk 1.65, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 2.45). Infants of pregnant women at low risk whose labour started in primary care under the supervision of a midwife had a significant higher risk of delivery related perinatal death than did infants of pregnant women at high risk whose labour started in secondary care under the supervision of an obstetrician (relative risk 2.33, 1.12 to 4.83). NICU admission rates did not differ between pregnancies supervised by a midwife and those supervised by an obstetrician. Infants of women who were referred by a midwife to an obstetrician during labour had a 3.66 times higher risk of delivery related perinatal death than did infants of women who started labour supervised by an obstetrician (relative risk 3.66, 1.58 to 8.46) and a 2.5-fold higher risk of NICU admission (2.51, 1.87 to 3.37). CONCLUSIONS: Infants of pregnant women at low risk whose labour started in primary care under the supervision of a midwife in the Netherlands had a higher risk of delivery related perinatal death and the same risk of admission to the NICU compared with infants of pregnant women at high risk whose labour started in secondary care under the supervision of an obstetrician. An important limitation of the study is that aggregated data of a large birth registry database were used and adjustment for confounders and clustering was not possible. However, the findings are unexpected and the obstetric care system of the Netherlands needs further evaluation.