Induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks: A systematic review and an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The risk of perinatal death and severe neonatal morbidity increases gradually after 41 weeks of pregnancy. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have assessed if induction of labour (IOL) in uncomplicated pregnancies at 41 weeks will improve perinatal outcomes. We performed an individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) on this subject. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched PubMed, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (Embase), The Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and PsycINFO on February 21, 2020 for RCTs comparing IOL at 41 weeks with expectant management until 42 weeks in women with uncomplicated pregnancies. Individual participant data (IPD) were sought from eligible RCTs. Primary outcome was a composite of severe adverse perinatal outcomes: mortality and severe neonatal morbidity. Additional outcomes included neonatal admission, mode of delivery, perineal lacerations, and postpartum haemorrhage. Prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted for parity (nulliparous/multiparous), maternal age (<35/≥35 years), and body mass index (BMI) (<30/≥30). Aggregate data meta-analysis (MA) was performed to include data from RCTs for which IPD was not available. From 89 full-text articles, we identified three eligible RCTs (n = 5,161), and two contributed with IPD (n = 4,561). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups regarding age, parity, BMI, and higher level of education. IOL resulted overall in a decrease of severe adverse perinatal outcome (0.4% [10/2,281] versus 1.0% [23/2,280]; relative risk [RR] 0.43 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21 to 0.91], p-value 0.027, risk difference [RD] -57/10,000 [95% CI -106/10,000 to -8/10,000], I2 0%). The number needed to treat (NNT) was 175 (95% CI 94 to 1,267). Perinatal deaths occurred in one (<0.1%) versus eight (0.4%) pregnancies (Peto odds ratio [OR] 0.21 [95% CI 0.06 to 0.78], p-value 0.019, RD -31/10,000, [95% CI -56/10,000 to -5/10,000], I2 0%, NNT 326, [95% CI 177 to 2,014]) and admission to a neonatal care unit ≥4 days occurred in 1.1% (24/2,280) versus 1.9% (46/2,273), (RR 0.52 [95% CI 0.32 to 0.85], p-value 0.009, RD -97/10,000 [95% CI -169/10,000 to -26/10,000], I2 0%, NNT 103 [95% CI 59 to 385]). There was no difference in the rate of cesarean delivery (10.5% versus 10.7%; RR 0.98, [95% CI 0.83 to 1.16], p-value 0.81) nor in other important perinatal, delivery, and maternal outcomes. MA on aggregate data showed similar results. Prespecified subgroup analyses for the primary outcome showed a significant difference in the treatment effect (p = 0.01 for interaction) for parity, but not for maternal age or BMI. The risk of severe adverse perinatal outcome was decreased for nulliparous women in the IOL group (0.3% [4/1,219] versus 1.6% [20/1,264]; RR 0.20 [95% CI 0.07 to 0.60], p-value 0.004, RD -127/10,000, [95% CI -204/10,000 to -50/10,000], I2 0%, NNT 79 [95% CI 49 to 201]) but not for multiparous women (0.6% [6/1,219] versus 0.3% [3/1,264]; RR 1.59 [95% CI 0.15 to 17.30], p-value 0.35, RD 27/10,000, [95% CI -29/10,000 to 84/10,000], I2 55%). A limitation of this IPD-MA was the risk of overestimation of the effect on perinatal mortality due to early stopping of the largest included trial for safety reasons after the advice of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Furthermore, only two RCTs were eligible for the IPD-MA; thus, the possibility to assess severe adverse neonatal outcomes with few events was limited. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that, overall, IOL at 41 weeks improved perinatal outcome compared with expectant management until 42 weeks without increasing the cesarean delivery rate. This benefit is shown only in nulliparous women, whereas for multiparous women, the incidence of mortality and morbidity was too low to demonstrate any effect. The magnitude of risk reduction of perinatal mortality remains uncertain. Women with pregnancies approaching 41 weeks should be informed on the risk differences according to parity so that they are able to make an informed choice for IOL at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks. Study Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020163174.

Risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes of late- and postterm pregnancies in advanced maternal age: A national cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: There is an increase in women delivering ≥35 years of age. We analyzed the association between advanced maternal age and pregnancy outcomes in late- and postterm pregnancies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A national cohort study was performed on obstetrical low-risk women using data from the Netherlands Perinatal Registry from 1999 to 2010. We included women ≥18 years of age with a singleton pregnancy at term. Women with a pregnancy complicated by congenital anomalies, hypertensive disorders or diabetes mellitus were excluded. Composite adverse perinatal outcome was defined as stillbirth, neonatal death, meconium aspiration syndrome, 5-minute Apgar score <7, neonatal intensive care unit admittance and sepsis. Composite adverse maternal outcome was defined as maternal death, placental abruption and postpartum hemorrhage of >1000 mL. RESULTS: We stratified the women into three age groups: 18-34 (n = 1 321 366 [reference]); 35-39 (n = 286 717) and ≥40 (n = 40 909). Composite adverse perinatal outcome occurred in 1.6% in women aged 18-34, 1.7% in women aged 35-39 (relative risk [RR] 1.06, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.03-1.08) and 2.2% in women aged ≥40 (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.29-1.47), with 5-minute Apgar score <7 as the factor contributing most to the outcome. Composite adverse maternal outcome occurred in 4.6% in women aged 18-34, 5.0% in women aged 35-39 (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.06-1.10) and 5.2% in women aged ≥40 (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.09-1.19), with postpartum hemorrhage >1000 mL as the factor contributing most to the outcome. In all age categories, the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes was higher for nulliparous than for multiparous women. The risk of adverse outcomes increased in both nulliparous and parous women with advancing gestational age. When adjusted for parity, onset of labor and gestational age, advanced maternal age is associated with an increase in both composite adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of adverse pregnancy outcome increases with advancing maternal age. Women aged ≥40 have an increased risk of adverse perinatal and maternal outcome when pregnancy goes beyond 41 weeks.

Management of late-term pregnancy in midwifery- and obstetrician-led care.

Management of late-term pregnancy in midwifery- and obstetrician-led care. BACKGROUND: Since there is no consensus regarding the optimal management in late-term pregnancies (≥41.0 weeks), we explored the variety of management strategies in late-term pregnancy in the Netherlands to identify the magnitude of this variety and the attitude towards late-term pregnancy. METHODS: Two nationwide surveys amongst all midwifery practices (midwifery-led care) and all hospitals with an obstetric unit (obstetrician-led care) were performed with questions on timing, frequency and content of consultations/surveillance in late-term pregnancy and on timing of induction. Propositions about late-term pregnancy were assessed using Likert scale questions. RESULTS: The response rate was 40% (203/511) in midwifery-led care and 92% (80/87) in obstetrician-led care. All obstetric units made regional protocols with their collaborating midwifery practices about management in late-term pregnancy. Most midwifery-led care practices (93%) refer low-risk women at least once for consultation in obstetrician-led care in late-term pregnancy. The content of consultations varies among hospitals. Membrane sweeping is performed more in midwifery-led care compared to obstetrician-led care (90% vs 31%, p < 0.001). Consultation at 41 weeks should be standard care according to 47% of midwifery-led care practices and 83% of obstetrician-led care units (p < 0.001). Induction of labour at 41.0 weeks is offered less often to women in midwifery-led care in comparison to obstetrician-led care (3% vs 21%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial practice variation exists within and between midwifery-and obstetrician-led care in the Netherlands regarding timing, frequency and content of antenatal monitoring in late-term pregnancy and timing of labour induction. An evidence based interdisciplinary guideline will contribute to a higher level of uniformity in the management in late- term pregnancies.

Perinatal death beyond 41 weeks pregnancy: an evaluation of causes and substandard care factors as identified in perinatal audit in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Late- and postterm pregnancy are associated with adverse perinatal outcomes, like perinatal death. We evaluated causes of death and substandard care factors (SSFs) in term and postterm perinatal death. METHODS: We used data from the Perinatal Audit Registry of the Netherlands (PARS). Women with a term perinatal death registered in PARS were stratified by gestational age into early-/full-term (37.0-40.6) and late-/postterm (≥41.0 weeks) death. Cause of death and SSFs ≥41 weeks were scored and classified by the local perinatal audit teams. RESULTS: During 2010-2012, 947/479,097 (0.21%) term deaths occurred, from which 707 cases (75%) were registered and could be used for analyses. Five hundred ninety-eight early-/full-term and 109 late-/postterm audited deaths were registered in the PARS database. Of all audited cases of perinatal death in the PARS database, 55.2% in the early-/fullterm group occurred antepartum compared to 42.2% in the late-/postterm group, while intrapartum death occurred in 7.2% in the early-/full-term group compared to 19.3% in the late-/postterm group in the audited cases from the PARS database. According to the local perinatal audit, the most relevant causes of perinatal death ≥41 weeks were antepartum asphyxia (7.3%), intrapartum asphyxia (9.2%), neonatal asphyxia (10.1%) and placental insufficiency (10.1%). In the group with perinatal death ≥41 weeks there was ≥1SSF identified in 68.8%. The most frequent SSFs concerned inadequate cardiotocography (CTG) evaluation and/or classification (10.1%), incomplete registration or documentation in medical files (4.6%) or inadequate action on decreased foetal movements (4.6%). CONCLUSIONS: In the Netherlands Perinatal Audit Registry, stillbirth occurred relatively less often antepartum and more often intrapartum in pregnancies ≥41 weeks compared to pregnancies at 37.0-40.6 weeks in the audited cases from the PARS database. Foetal, intrapartum and neonatal asphyxia were identified more frequently as cause of death in pregnancies ≥41 weeks. The most identified SSFs related to death in pregnancies ≥41 weeks concerned inadequate CTG monitoring (evaluation, classification, registration or documentation) and inadequate action on decreased foetal movements.

When the Hospital Is No Longer an Option: A Multiple Case Study of Defining Moments for Women Choosing Home Birth in High-Risk Pregnancies in The Netherlands.

Some women in a high-risk pregnancy go against medical advice and choose to birth at home with a "holistic" midwife. In this exploratory multiple case study, grounded theory and triangulation were employed to examine 10 cases. The women, their partners, and (regular and holistic) health care professionals were interviewed in an attempt to determine whether there was a pattern to their experiences. Two propositions emerged. The dominant one was a trajectory of trauma, self-education, concern about paternalism, and conflict leading to a negative choice for holistic care. The rival proposition was a path of trust and positive choice for holistic care without conflict. We discuss these two propositions and make suggestions for professionals for building a trusting relationship using continuity of care, true shared decision making, and an alternative risk discourse to achieve the goal of making women perceive the hospital as safe again.

Women's motivations for choosing a high risk birth setting against medical advice in the Netherlands: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Home births in high risk pregnancies and unassisted childbirth seem to be increasing in the Netherlands. Until now there were no qualitative data on women's motivations for these choices in the Dutch maternity care system where integrated midwifery care and home birth are regular options in low risk pregnancies. We aimed to examine women's motivations for birthing outside the system in order to provide medical professionals with insight and recommendations regarding their interactions with women who have birth wishes that go against medical advice. METHODS: An exploratory qualitative research design with a constructivist approach and a grounded theory method were used. In-depth interviews were performed with 28 women on their motivations for going against medical advice in choosing a high risk childbirth setting. Open, axial and selective coding of the interview data was done in order to generate themes. A focus group was held for a member check of the findings. RESULTS: Four main themes were found: 1) Discrepancy in the definition of superior knowledge, 2) Need for autonomy and trust in the birth process, 3) Conflict during negotiation of the birth plan, and 4) Search for different care. One overarching theme emerged that covered all other themes: Fear. This theme refers both to the participants' fear (of interventions and negative consequences of their choices) and to the providers' fear (of a bad outcome). Where for some women it was a positive choice, for the majority of women in this study the choice for a home birth in a high risk pregnancy or an unassisted childbirth was a negative one. Negative choices were due to previous or current negative experiences with maternity care and/or conflict surrounding the birth plan. CONCLUSIONS: The main goal of working with women whose birthing choices do not align with medical advice should not be to coerce them into the framework of protocols and guidelines but to prevent negative choices. Recommendations for maternity caregivers can be summarized as: 1) Rethink risk discourse, 2) Respect a woman's trust in the birth process and her autonomous choice, 3) Have a flexible approach to negotiating the birth plan using the model of shared decision making, 4) Be aware of alternative delivery care providers and other sources of information used by women, and 5) Provide maternity care without spreading or using fear.

Calculating Preference Weights for the Labor and Delivery Index: A Discrete Choice Experiment on Women's Birth Experiences.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to calculate preference weights for the Labor and Delivery Index (LADY-X) to make it suitable as a utility measure for perinatal care studies. METHODS: In an online discrete choice experiment, 18 pairs of hypothetical scenarios were presented to respondents, from which they had to choose a preferred option. The scenarios describe the birth experience in terms of the seven LADY-X attributes. A D-efficient discrete choice experiment design with priors based on a small sample (N = 110) was applied. Two samples were gathered, women who had recently given birth and subjects from the general population. Both samples were analyzed separately using a panel mixed logit (MMNL) model. Using the panel mixed multinomial logit (MMNL) model results and accounting for preference heterogeneity, we calculated the average preference weights for LADY-X attribute levels. These were transformed to represent a utility score between 0 and 1, with 0 representing the worst and 1 representing the best birth experience. RESULTS: In total, 1097 women who had recently given birth and 367 subjects from the general population participated. Greater value was placed on differences between bottom and middle attribute levels than on differences between middle and top levels. The attributes that resulted in larger utility increases than the other attributes were "feeling of safety" in the sample of women who had recently given birth and "feeling of safety" and "availability of professionals" in the general population sample. CONCLUSIONS: By using the derived preference weights, LADY-X has the potential to be used as a utility measure for perinatal (cost-) effectiveness studies.

The capacity of mid-pregnancy cervical length to predict preterm birth in low-risk women: a national cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the predictive capacity of mid-trimester cervical length (CL) measurement for spontaneous and iatrogenic preterm birth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a prospective observational cohort study in nulliparous women and low-risk multiparous women with a singleton pregnancy between 16(+0) and 21(+6) weeks of gestation. We assessed the prognostic capacity of transvaginally measured mid-trimester CL for spontaneous and iatrogenic preterm birth (<37 weeks) using likelihood ratios (LR) and receiver-operating-characteristic analysis. We calculated numbers needed to screen to prevent one preterm birth assuming different treatment effects. Main outcome measures were preterm birth <32, <34 and <37 weeks. RESULTS: We studied 11,943 women, of whom 666 (5.6%) delivered preterm: 464 (3.9%) spontaneous and 202 (1.7%) iatrogenic. Mean CL was 44.1 mm (SD 7.8 mm). In nulliparous women, the LRs for spontaneous preterm birth varied between 27 (95% CI 7.7-95) for a CL ≤ 20 mm, and 2.0 (95% CI 1.6-2.5) for a CL between 30 and 35 mm. For low-risk multiparous women, these LRs were 37 (95% CI 7.5-182) and 1.5 (95% CI 0.97-2.2), respectively. Using a cut-off for CL ≤ 30 mm, 28 (6.0%) of 464 women with spontaneous preterm birth were identified. The number needed to screen to prevent one case of preterm birth was 618 in nulliparous women and 1417 for low-risk multiparous women (40% treatment effect, cut-off 30 mm). CONCLUSION: In women at low risk of preterm birth, CL predicts spontaneous preterm birth. However, its isolated use as a screening tool has limited value due to low sensitivity.

Preventing Preterm Birth with Progesterone in Women with a Short Cervical Length from a Low-Risk Population: A Multicenter Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of vaginal progesterone in reducing adverse neonatal outcome due to preterm birth (PTB) in low-risk pregnant women with a short cervical length (CL). STUDY DESIGN: Women with a singleton pregnancy without a history of PTB underwent CL measurement at 18 to 22 weeks. Women with a CL ≤ 30 mm received vaginal progesterone or placebo. Primary outcome was adverse neonatal outcome, defined as a composite of respiratory distress syndrome, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, intracerebral hemorrhage > grade II, necrotizing enterocolitis > stage 1, proven sepsis, or death before discharge. Secondary outcomes included time to delivery, PTB before 32, 34, and 37 weeks of gestation. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2013, 20,234 women were screened. A CL of 30 mm or less was seen in 375 women (1.8%). In 151 women, a CL ≤ 30 mm was confirmed with a second measurement and 80 of these women agreed to participate in the trial. We randomly allocated 41 women to progesterone and 39 to placebo. Adverse neonatal outcomes occurred in two (5.0%) women in the progesterone and in four (11%) women in the control group (relative risk [RR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09-2.4). The use of progesterone resulted in a nonsignificant reduction of PTB < 32 weeks (2.0 vs. 8.0%; RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.04-3.0) and < 34 weeks (7.0 vs. 10%; RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.18-3.1) but not on PTB < 37 weeks (15 vs. 13%; RR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.39-3.5). CONCLUSION: In women with a short cervix, who are otherwise low risk, we could not show a significant benefit of progesterone in reducing adverse neonatal outcome and PTB.

Effects of induction of labour versus expectant management in women with impending post-term pregnancies: the 41 week - 42 week dilemma.

BACKGROUND: Post-term pregnancy, a pregnancy exceeding 294 days or 42 completed weeks, is associated with increased perinatal morbidity and mortality and is considered a high-risk condition which requires specialist surveillance and induction of labour. However, there is uncertainty on the policy concerning the timing of induction for post-term pregnancy or impending post-term pregnancy, leading to practice variation between caregivers. Previous studies on induction at or beyond 41 weeks versus expectant management showed different results on perinatal outcome though conclusions in meta-analyses show a preference for induction at 41 weeks. However, interpretation of the results is hampered by the limited sample size of most trials and the heterogeneity in design. Most control groups had a policy of awaiting spontaneous onset of labour that went far beyond 42 weeks, which does not reflect usual care in The Netherlands where induction of labour at 42 weeks is the regular policy. Thus leaving the question unanswered if induction at 41 weeks results in better perinatal outcomes than expectant management until 42 weeks. METHODS/DESIGN: In this study we compare a policy of labour induction at 41 + 0/+1 weeks with a policy of expectant management until 42 weeks in obstetrical low risk women without contra-indications for expectant management until 42 weeks and a singleton pregnancy in cephalic position. We will perform a multicenter randomised controlled clinical trial. Our primary outcome will be a composite outcome of perinatal mortality and neonatal morbidity. Secondary outcomes will be maternal outcomes as mode of delivery (operative vaginal delivery and Caesarean section), need for analgesia and postpartum haemorrhage (≥1000 ml). Maternal preferences, satisfaction, wellbeing, pain and anxiety will be assessed alongside the trial. DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence for the management of pregnant women reaching a gestational age of 41 weeks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register (Nederlands Trial Register): NTR3431. Registered: 14 May 2012.

Ethnic disparities in perinatal mortality at 40 and 41 weeks of gestation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether maternal ethnicity affects perinatal mortality by week of gestation from 39 weeks onwards. STUDY DESIGN: In this cohort study, we used data from the nationwide Netherlands Perinatal Registry from 1999 until 2008. All singleton infants born between 39+0 and 42+6 weeks of gestation without congenital anomalies were included. We used crude and multivariate logistic regression analyses with white Europeans as the reference to calculate the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of South Asian, African and Mediterranean women. The main outcome measure was perinatal mortality (antepartum and intrapartum/neonatal mortality within 7 days after birth). RESULTS: We studied 1,092,255 singleton deliveries. Perinatal mortality occurred in 2315 infants (2.1‰). There was interaction between gestational age and ethnicity (P<0.0001). In week 40 (40+0-40+6) South Asian (aOR 1.9; 95% CI 1.1-3.4) and Mediterranean (aOR 1.3; 95% CI 1.04-1.7) women had an increased risk of perinatal mortality. The perinatal mortality risk became greater in week 41 for South Asian (aOR 4.5 95% CI 2.8-7.2), African (aOR 2.2; 95%CI 1.4-3.4) and Mediterranean (aOR 2.2; 95% CI 1.8-2.9) women, especially among small for gestational age infants. CONCLUSION: With increasing gestational age beyond 39 weeks, perinatal mortality risk increases more strongly among South Asian, African and Mediterranean women compared to European whites.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of induction of labour at 41 weeks and expectant management until 42 weeks in low risk women (INDEX trial).

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of elective induction of labour (IOL) at 41 weeks and expectant management (EM) until 42 weeks. Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis from a healthcare perspective alongside a randomised controlled trial (INDEX). Setting: 123 primary care midwifery practices and 45 obstetric departments of hospitals in the Netherlands. Population: We studied 1801 low-risk women with late-term pregnancy, randomised to IOL at 41 weeks (N = 900) or EM until 42 weeks (N = 901). Methods: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was expressed as the ratio of the difference in costs and the difference in main perinatal outcomes. A Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curve (CEAC) was constructed to assess whether induction is cost-effective for a range of monetary values as thresholds. We performed subgroup analysis for parity. Main outcome measures: Direct medical costs, composite adverse perinatal outcome (CAPO) (perinatal mortality, NICU admission, Apgar 5 min < 7, plexus brachialis injury and/or meconium aspiration syndrome) and composite severe adverse perinatal outcome (SAPO) (including Apgar 5 min < 4 instead of < 7). Results: The average costs were €3858 in the induction group and €3723 in the expectant group (mean difference €135; 95 % CI -235 to 493). The ICERs of IOL compared to EM to prevent one additional CAPO and SAPO was €9436 and €14,994, respectively. The CEAC showed a 80 % chance of IOL being cost-effective with a willingness-to-pay of €22,000 for prevention of one CAPO and €50,000 for one SAPO. Subgroup analysis showed a willingness-to-pay to prevent one CAPO for nulliparous of €47,000 and for multiparous €190,000. To prevent one SAPO the willingness-to-pay is €62,000 for nulliparous and €970,000 for multiparous women. Conclusions: Induction at 41 weeks has an 80 % chance of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of €22,000 for prevention of one CAPO and €50,000 for prevention of one SAPO. Subgroup analysis suggests that induction could be cost-effective for nulliparous women while it is unlikely cost-effective for multiparous women.Cost-effectiveness in other settings will depend on baseline characteristics of the population and health system organisation and funding.

Costs and effects of screening and treating low risk women with a singleton pregnancy for asymptomatic bacteriuria, the ASB study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) in pregnancy is 2-10% and is associated with both maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes as pyelonephritis and preterm delivery. Antibiotic treatment is reported to decrease these adverse outcomes although the existing evidence is of poor quality. METHODS/DESIGN: We plan a combined screen and treat study in women with a singleton pregnancy. We will screen women between 16 and 22 weeks of gestation for ASB using the urine dipslide technique. The dipslide is considered positive when colony concentration ≥105 colony forming units (CFU)/mL of a single microorganism or two different colonies but one ≥105 CFU/mL is found, or when Group B Streptococcus bacteriuria is found in any colony concentration. Women with a positive dipslide will be randomly allocated to receive nitrofurantoin or placebo 100 mg twice a day for 5 consecutive days (double blind). Primary outcomes of this trial are maternal pyelonephritis and/or preterm delivery before 34 weeks. Secondary outcomes are neonatal and maternal morbidity, neonatal weight, time to delivery, preterm delivery rate before 32 and 37 weeks, days of admission in neonatal intensive care unit, maternal admission days and costs. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence for the benefit and cost-effectiveness of dipslide screening for ASB among low risk women at 16-22 weeks of pregnancy and subsequent nitrofurantoin treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trial registry: NTR-3068.

Comparison of risk calculation approaches in a screening programme for Down syndrome.

In the Netherlands, both the LifeCycle Elipse (LC) and the Astraia software package are used to calculate the risk of having a child with Down syndrome. Therefore, pregnant women can be presented with dissimilar risks. In this study the conformity between these risks before and after harmonization of the screening program and its influence on the performance indicators of the first trimester screening were evaluated. The agreement between combined risks (based on the biochemical parameters PAPP-A and fß-hCG and a nuchal translucency measurement) was expressed as intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.99. Conformity between combined risks was better after harmonization (Cohen's κ=0.75) than before harmonization (Cohen's κ=0.63). For both risk calculation software packages the area under the ROC-curve was 0.84. The database contained 42 Down syndrome cases; based on the odds of being affected given a positive result (OAPR), LC performed slightly better than Astraia before harmonization (17.9 vs. 21.5, respectively). It has been acknowledged that using different software packages could lead to dissimilar risk calculations. In this study the screening performance indicators of two software packages were quite similar. The agreement of the screening performance after harmonization remains to be seen, but is expected to be even higher.

Elective induction of labour and expectant management in late-term pregnancy: A prospective cohort study alongside the INDEX randomised controlled trial.

Objective: To assess adverse perinatal outcomes and caesarean section of low-risk women receiving elective induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks according to their preferred and actual management strategy. Design: Multicentre prospective cohort study alongside RCT. Setting: 90 midwifery practices and 12 hospitals in the Netherlands. Population: 3642 low-risk women with uncomplicated singleton late-term pregnancy. Main outcome measures: Composite adverse outcome (perinatal death, Apgar score 5' < 7, NICU admission, meconium aspiration syndrome), composite severe adverse perinatal outcome (all above with Apgar score 5' < 4 instead of < 7) and caesarean section. Results: From 2012-2016, 3642 women out of 6088 eligible women for the INDEX RCT, participated in the cohort study for observational data collection (induction of labour n = 372; expectant management n = 2174; unknown preference/management strategy n = 1096).Adverse perinatal outcome occurred in 1.1 % (4/372) in the induction group versus 1.9 % (42/2174) in the expectant group (adjRR 0.56; 95 %CI: 0.17-1.79), with severe adverse perinatal outcome occurring in 0.3 % (1/372) versus 1.0 % (22/2174), respectively (adjRR 0.39; 95 % CI: 0.05-2.88). There were no stillbirths among all 3642 women; one neonatal death occurred in the unknown preference/management group. Caesarean section rates were 10.5 % (39/372) after induction and 8.9 % (193/2174) after expectant management (adjRR 1.32; 95 % CI: 0.95-1.84).A higher incidence of adverse perinatal outcome was observed in nulliparous compared to multiparous women. Nulliparous 1.8 % (3/170) in the induction group versus 2.6 % (30/1134) in the expectant management group (adjRR 0.58; 95 % CI 0.14-2.41), multiparous 0.5 % (1/201) versus 1.1 % (11/1039) (adjRR 0.54; 95 % CI 0.07-24.19). One maternal death due to amniotic fluid embolism occurred after elective induction at 41 weeks + 6 days. Conclusion: In this cohort study among low-risk women receiving the policy of their preference in late-term pregnancy, a non-significant difference was found between induction of labour at 41 weeks and expectant management until 42 weeks in absolute risks of composite adverse (1.1 % versus 1.9 %) and severe adverse (0.3 % versus 1.0 %) perinatal outcome. The risks in this cohort study were lower than in the trial setting. There were no stillbirths among all 3642 women. Caesarean section rates were comparable.

Preventing preterm birth with progesterone: costs and effects of screening low risk women with a singleton pregnancy for short cervical length, the Triple P study.

BACKGROUND: Women with a short cervical length in mid-trimester pregnancy have a higher risk of preterm birth and therefore a higher rate of neonatal mortality and morbidity. Progesterone can potentially decrease the number of preterm births and lower neonatal mortality and morbidity. Previous studies showed good results of progesterone in women with either a history of preterm birth or a short cervix. However, it is unknown whether screening for a short cervix and subsequent treatment in mid trimester pregnancy is effective in low risk women. METHODS/DESIGN: We plan a combined screen and treat study among women with a singleton pregnancy without a previous preterm birth. In these women, we will measure cervical length at the standard anomaly scan performed between 18 and 22 weeks. Women with cervical length ≤ 30 mm at two independent measurements will be randomly allocated to receive either vaginal progesterone tablets or placebo between 22 and 34 weeks. The primary outcome of this trial is adverse neonatal condition, defined as a composite outcome of neonatal mortality and severe morbidity. Secondary outcomes are time to delivery, preterm birth rate before 32, 34 and 37 weeks, days of admission in neonatal intensive care unit, maternal morbidity, maternal admission days for preterm labour and costs. We will assess growth, physical condition and neurodevelopmental outcome of the children at two years of age. DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence for the usefulness and cost-effectiveness of screening for short cervical length at the 18-22 weeks and subsequent progesterone treatment among low risk women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR207.

'She convinced me'- partner involvement in choosing a high risk birth setting against medical advice in the Netherlands: A qualitative analysis.

Home births in high risk pregnancies and unassisted childbirth seem to be increasing in the Netherlands. There is a lack of qualitative data on women's partners' involvement in these choices in the Dutch maternity care system, where integrated midwifery care and home birth are regular options in low risk pregnancies. The majority of available literature focuses on the women's motivations, while the partner's influence on these decisions is much less well understood. We aimed to examine partners' involvement in the decision to birth outside the system, in order to provide medical professionals with insight and recommendations regarding their interactions with these partners in the outpatient clinic. An exploratory qualitative research design with a constructivist approach and a grounded theory method were used. In-depth interviews were performed with twenty-one partners on their involvement in the decision to go against medical advice in choosing a high risk childbirth setting. Open, axial and selective coding of the interview data was done in order to generate themes. Four main themes were found: 1) Talking it through, 2) A shared vision, 3) Defending our views, and 4) Doing it together. One overarching theme emerged that covered all other themes: 'She convinced me'. These data show that the idea to choose a high risk birth setting almost invariably originated with the women, who did most of the research online, filtered the information and convinced the partners of the merit of their plans. Once the partners were convinced, they took a very active and supportive role in defending the plan to the outside world, as well as in preparing for the birth. Maternity care providers can use these findings in cases where there is a discrepancy between the wishes of the woman and the advice of the professional, so they can attempt to involve partners actively during consultations in pregnancy. That will ensure that partners also receive information on all options, risks and benefits of possible birth choices, and that they are truly in support of a final plan.

Addressing a need. Holistic midwifery in the Netherlands: A qualitative analysis.

The Netherlands has a maternity care system with integrated midwifery care, including the option of home birth for low risk women. A small group of Dutch (holistic) midwives is willing to assist women in high risk pregnancies during a home birth against medical advice. We examined holistic midwives' motivations and way of practice, in order to provide other maternity care professionals with insight into the way they work and to improve professional relationships between all care providers in the field. An exploratory qualitative research design with a constructivist approach and a grounded theory method were used. We performed in-depth interviews with twenty-four holistic midwives on their motivations for working outside their professional boundaries. Open, axial and selective coding of the interview data was done in order to generate themes. We held a focus group for a member check of the findings. Four main themes were found: 1) The regular system is failing women, 2) The relationship as basis for empowerment, 3) Delivering client centered care in the current system is demanding, and 4) Future directions. One core theme emerged that covered all other themes: Addressing a need. Holistic midwives explained that many of their clients had no other choice than to choose a home birth in a high risk pregnancy because they felt let down by the regular system of maternity care. Holistic midwives appear to deliver an important service. They provide continuity of care and succeed in establishing a relationship with their clients built on trust and mutual respect, truly putting their clients' needs first. Some women feel let down by the regular system, and holistic midwives may be the last resort before those women choose to deliver unattended by any medical professional. Maternity care providers should consider working with holistic midwives in the interest of good patient care.

Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management until 42 weeks (INDEX): multicentre, randomised non-inferiority trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare induction of labour at 41 weeks with expectant management until 42 weeks in low risk women. DESIGN: Open label, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. SETTING: 123 primary care midwifery practices and 45 hospitals (secondary care) in the Netherlands, 2012-16. PARTICIPANTS: 1801 low risk women with an uncomplicated singleton pregnancy: randomised to induction (n=900) or to expectant management until 42 weeks (n=901). INTERVENTIONS: Induction at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks with induction if necessary. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was a composite of perinatal mortality and neonatal morbidity (Apgar score <7 at five minutes, arterial pH <7.05, meconium aspiration syndrome, plexus brachialis injury, intracranial haemorrhage, and admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Secondary outcomes included maternal outcomes and mode of delivery. The null hypothesis that expectant management is inferior to induction was tested with a non-inferiority margin of 2%. RESULTS: Median gestational age at delivery was 41 weeks+0 days (interquartile range 41 weeks+0 days-41 weeks+1 day) for the induction group and 41 weeks+2 days (41 weeks+0 days-41 weeks+5 days) for the expectant management group. The primary outcome was analysed for both the intention-to-treat population and the per protocol population. In the induction group, 15/900 (1.7%) women had an adverse perinatal outcome versus 28/901 (3.1%) in the expectant management group (absolute risk difference -1.4%, 95% confidence interval -2.9% to 0.0%, P=0.22 for non-inferiority). 11 (1.2%) infants in the induction group and 23 (2.6%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score <7 at five minutes (relative risk (RR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.98). No infants in the induction group and three (0.3%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score <4 at five minutes. One fetal death (0.1%) occurred in the induction group and two (0.2%) in the expectant management group. No neonatal deaths occurred. 3 (0.3%) neonates in the induction group versus 8 (0.9%) in the expectant management group were admitted to an NICU (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.41). No significant difference was found in composite adverse maternal outcomes (induction n=122 (13.6%) v expectant management n=102 (11.3%)) or in caesarean section rate (both groups n=97 (10.8%)). CONCLUSIONS: This study could not show non-inferiority of expectant management compared with induction of labour in women with uncomplicated pregnancies at 41 weeks; instead a significant difference of 1.4% was found for risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in favour of induction, although the chances of a good perinatal outcome were high with both strategies and the incidence of perinatal mortality, Apgar score <4 at five minutes, and NICU admission low. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR3431.

Less or more? Maternal requests that go against medical advice.

PROBLEM AND BACKGROUND: This study explores the experiences of Dutch midwives and gynaecologists with pregnant women who request more, less or no care during pregnancy and/or childbirth. METHODS: All Dutch midwives and (trainee) gynaecologists were invited to fill out a questionnaire specifically designed for the purposes of this study. Holistic midwives were analysed separately from regular community midwives. FINDINGS: Most maternity care providers in the Netherlands receive requests for less care than recommended at least once a year. The most frequently maternal requests were declining testing for gestational diabetes (66.3%), opting for a home birth in case of a high risk pregnancy (65.3%), and declining foetal monitoring during labour (39.6%). Holistic midwives are more convinced of an increasing demand for less care than community midwives (73.1% vs. 35.2%, p=<0.001). More community midwives than hospital staff reported to have declined one or more request for less care than recommended (48.6% vs. 27.9%, p=<0.001). The majority of hospital staff also receive at least one request for an elective caesarean section every year. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Requests for more and less care than indicated during pregnancy and childbirth are equally prevalent in this study. However, a request for less care is more likely to be declined than a request for more care. Counselling women who disagree with their care provider demands time. In case of requests for less care, second best care should be considered.