The relation between sleep quality during pregnancy and health-related quality of life-a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The majority of expectant mothers report sleep alterations during pregnancy and almost 40% report poor sleep quality. There is growing evidence that sleep quality (SQ) during pregnancy influences maternal health. This review focuses on how SQ during pregnancy relates to maternal health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The review also aims to identify whether this relation varies between pregnancy trimesters, and for different subdomains of HRQoL. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines and registered on Prospero in August 2021 with ID no: CRD42021264707. Pubmed, Psychinfo, Embase, Cochrane, and trial registries were searched up to June 2021. Studies with any design that investigated the relation between SQ and quality of life/HRQoL in pregnant women, published in English, and peer-reviewed, were included. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, and extracted data from the included papers. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirteen papers were identified in the initial search, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria. Data included 7330 participants from six different countries. The studies had longitudinal (n = 1) or cross-sectional designs (n = 9). In nine studies SQ was reported subjectively by self-report questionnaires. Actigraphic data was available from two studies. HRQoL was assessed by validated questionnaires in all studies. Due to high levels of clinical and methodological heterogeneity in included studies, a narrative synthesis was employed. Nine studies found that poor sleep quality was related to a lower overall HRQoL during pregnancy. Effect sizes were low to medium. This relation was reported most during the third trimester. Especially sleep disturbances and subjective low SQ seemed to be related consistently to lower HRQoL. Furthermore, an indication was found that SQ might have a relation with the mental and physical domain of HRQoL. The social and environmental domain may also be associated with overall SQ. CONCLUSION: Despite the scarcity of studies available, this systematic review found evidence that low SQ is related to low HRQoL during pregnancy. An indication was found that the relationship between SQ and HRQoL during the second trimester might be less prominent.

Detailed registration of care in midwifery practices in the Netherlands: an opportunity for research within a healthy pregnant population.

BACKGROUND: Research in maternity care is often conducted in mixed low and high-risk or solely high-risk populations. This limits generalizability to the low-risk population of pregnant women receiving care from Dutch midwives. To address this limitation, 24 midwifery practices in the Netherlands bring together routinely collected data from medical records of pregnant women and their offspring in the VeCaS database. This database offers possibilities for research of physiological pregnancy and childbirth. This study explores if the pregnant women in VeCaS are a representative sample for the national population of women who receive primary midwife-led care in the Netherlands. METHODS: In VeCaS we selected a low risk population in midwife-led care who gave birth in 2015. We compared population characteristics and birth outcomes in this study cohort with a similarly defined national cohort, using Chi Square and two side t-test statistics. Additionally, we describe some birth outcomes and lifestyle factors. RESULTS: Midwifery practices contributing to VeCaS are spread over the Netherlands, although the western region is underrepresented. For population characteristics, the VeCaS cohort is similar to the national cohort in maternal age (mean 30.4 years) and parity (nulliparous women: 47.1% versus 45.9%). Less often, women in the VeCaS cohort have a non-Dutch background (15.7% vs 24.4%), a higher SES (9.9% vs 23.7%) and live in an urbanised surrounding (4.9% vs 24.8%). Birth outcomes were similar to the national cohort, most women gave birth at term (94.9% vs 94.5% between 37 + 0-41+ 6 weeks), started labour spontaneously (74.5% vs 75.5%) and had a spontaneous vaginal birth (77.4% vs 77.6%), 16.9% had a home birth. Furthermore, 61.1% had a normal pre-pregnancy BMI, and 81.0% did not smoke in pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: The VeCaS database contains data of a population that is mostly comparable to the national population in primary midwife-led care in the Netherlands. Therefore, the VeCaS database is suitable for research in a healthy pregnant population and is valuable to improve knowledge of the physiological course of pregnancy and birth. Representativeness of maternal characteristics may be improved by including midwifery practices from the urbanised western region in the Netherlands.

Regional variations in childbirth interventions in the Netherlands: a nationwide explorative study.

BACKGROUND: Although interventions in childbirth are important in order to prevent neonatal and maternal morbidity and mortality, non-indicated use may cause avoidable harm. Regional variations in intervention rates, which cannot be explained by maternal characteristics, may indicate over- and underuse. The aim of this study is to explore regional variations in childbirth interventions in the Netherlands and their associations with interventions and adverse outcomes, controlled for maternal characteristics. METHODS: Childbirth intervention rates were compared between twelve Dutch regions, using data from the national perinatal birth register for 2010-2013. All single childbirths from 37 weeks' gestation onwards were included. Primary outcomes were induction and augmentation of labour, pain medication, instrumental birth, caesarean section (prelabour, intrapartum) and paediatric involvement. Secondary outcomes were adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to adjust for maternal characteristics. Associations were expressed in Spearman's rank correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Most variation was found for type of pain medication and paediatric involvement. Epidural analgesia rates varied from between 12 and 38% (nulliparous) and from between 5 and 14% (multiparous women). These rates were negatively correlated with rates of other pharmacological pain relief, which varied from between 15 and 43% (nulliparous) and from between 10 and 27% (multiparous). Rates of paediatric involvement varied from between 37 and 60% (nulliparous) and from between 26 and 43% (multiparous). For instrumental vaginal births, rates varied from between 16 and 19% (nulliparous) and from between 3 and 4% (multiparous). For intrapartum caesarean section, the variation was 13-15% and 5-6%, respectively. A positive correlation was found between intervention rates in midwife-led and obstetrician-led care at the onset of labour within the same region. Adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes were not lower in regions with higher intervention rates. Higher augmentation of labour rates correlated with higher rates of severe postpartum haemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: Most variation was found for type of pain medication and paediatric involvement, and least for instrumental vaginal births and intrapartum caesarean sections. Care providers and policy makers should critically audit remarkable variations, since these may be unwarranted. Limited variation for some interventions may indicate consensus for their use. Further research should focus on variations in evidence-based interventions and indications for the use of interventions in childbirth.

The impact of obesity on outcomes of midwife-led pregnancy and childbirth in a primary care population: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of obesity on the likelihood of remaining in midwife-led care throughout pregnancy and childbirth. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from a prospective cohort study. SETTING: Dutch midwife-led practices. POPULATION: A cohort of 1369 women eligible for midwife-led care after their first antenatal visit. METHODS: First-trimester body mass index (BMI) was calculated as weight measured at booking divided by height squared. Obstetric data were retrieved from medical records. Multiple logistic regressions were performed to examine the effects of BMI classification on midwife-led pregnancies and childbirths. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentages of women remaining in midwife-led care throughout pregnancy and throughout childbirth. RESULTS: Of women in obesity classes II and III, 55% remained in midwife-led care throughout pregnancy and 30% remained in midwife-led care throughout birth. Compared with women of normal weight, women in obesity classes II and III had fewer midwife-led pregnancies (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21-0.69), and women who were overweight or in obesity class I had fewer midwife-led childbirths (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.90; OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.29-0.84, respectively). Compared with women of normal weight, women who were obese had higher referral rates for hypertensive disorders (4 versus 14%), prolonged labour (4.6 versus 10.4%), and intrapartum pain relief (4 versus 10.4%). The women who were eligible for midwife-led birth and who were overweight or obese, had no more urgent referrals than women of normal weight. Women who were obese and who completed a midwife-led birth had no more adverse outcomes than women of normal weight, with the exception of higher rates of large for gestational age (LGA) babies (>97.7 centile; 12.1%, versus 1.9% in normal weight and versus 3.3% in overweight women). CONCLUSIONS: Although fewer women who were obese remain in midwife-led care during pregnancy and childbirth, there was no increased risk of unfavourable birth outcomes for women who were obese and eligible for a midwife-led birth when compared with women of normal weight. This indicates that when primary care midwives use a risk assessment tool throughout pregnancy and childbirth they are able to safely assign women who are obese to either midwife-led or obstetrician-led care.

Antenatal interventions to reduce maternal distress: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Maternal distress can have adverse health outcomes for mothers and their children. Antenatal interventions may reduce maternal distress. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of antenatal interventions for the reduction of maternal distress during pregnancy and for up to 1 year postpartum. SEARCH STRATEGY: EBSCO, Medline, PubMed, Cochrane, secondary references of Cochrane reviews and review articles, and experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in which the association between an antenatal intervention and the reduction of maternal distress was reported. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently abstracted data from each trial. A random-effects meta-analysis assessed the reduction of maternal distress associated with antenatal preventive and treatment interventions, compared with routine antenatal care or another intervention. MAIN RESULTS: Ten trials with 3167 participants met the inclusion criteria, and nine trials (n = 3063) provided data for the meta-analysis of six preventive interventions and three treatment interventions. The preventive interventions indicated no beneficial reduction of maternal distress (six trials; n = 2793; standardised mean difference, SMD -0.06; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI -0.14-0.01). The treatment interventions indicated a significant effect for the reduction of maternal distress (three trials; n = 270; SMD -0.29; 95% CI -0.54 to -0.04). A sample of women, selected retrospectively, who were more vulnerable for developing maternal distress showed a significant reduction of maternal distress after the interventions (three trials; n = 1410; SMD -0.25; 95% CI -0.37 to -0.14). AUTHOR'S CONCLUSIONS: Preventive antenatal interventions for maternal distress show no effect. Antenatal interventions for women who have maternal distress or are at risk for developing maternal distress are associated with a small reduction in maternal distress.

Involving women in personalised decision-making on mode of delivery after caesarean section: the development and pilot testing of a patient decision aid.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a patient decision aid (PtDA) for mode of delivery after caesarean section that integrates personalised prediction of vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) with the elicitation of patient preferences and evidence-based information. DESIGN: A PtDA was developed and pilot tested using the International Patients Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) criteria. SETTING: Obstetric health care in the Netherlands. POPULATION: A multidisciplinary steering group, an expert panel, and 25 future users of the PtDA, i.e. women with a previous caesarean section. METHODS: The development consisted of a construction phase (definition of scope and purpose, and selection of content, framework, and format) and a pilot testing phase by interview. The process was supervised by a multidisciplinary steering group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Usability, clarity, and relevance. RESULTS: The construction phase resulted in a booklet including unbiased balanced information on mode of birth after caesarean section, a preference elicitation exercise, and tailored risk information, including a prediction model for successful VBAC. During pilot testing, visualisation of risks and clarity formed the main basis for revisions. Pilot testing showed the availability of tailored structured information to be the main factor involving women in decision-making. The PtDA meets 39 out of 50 IPDAS criteria (78%): 23 out of 23 criteria for content (100%) and 16 out of 20 criteria for the development process (80%). Criteria for effectiveness (n = 7) were not evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: An evidence-based PtDA was developed, with the probability of successful VBAC and the availability of structured information as key items. It is likely that the PtDA enhances the quality of decision-making on mode of birth after caesarean section.

Why women do not accept randomisation for place of birth: feasibility of a RCT in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate why low-risk nulliparae were not willing to participate in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of place of birth. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: The Netherlands. POPULATION: All low-risk nulliparous women starting their pregnancy under midwife. METHODS: A questionnaire for 107 nulliparae who were willing to participate in a cohort study on place of birth, but at an earlier stage in their pregnancy declined to participate in a RCT of place of birth. This questionnaire included 12 items on a 4-point Likert scale but was not subjected to formal validation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Reasons why nulliparae did not accept randomisation of place of birth. RESULTS: The most important reason why women refused participation in the trial was that they had already chosen their place of birth before they were asked to participate at 12 weeks of pregnancy. From their answers, it became clear that pregnant women strongly value their autonomy of choice. The decision not to participate in the trial was not influenced by the information given by the midwife and the additional written information. CONCLUSIONS: Factors that prevent randomisation for place of birth are difficult to influence. There is a need to explore why there is such certainty of view among women having their first child. Until we have an understanding of why women select information to make these choices and why women are reluctant to participate in trials that challenge choice, it may well be impossible to mount a trial of place of birth.