Zoekresultaten

Tool geboortezorg: De verlegenheid voorbij!

Professionals in de geboortezorg en moeders in de Haagse Schilderswijk ervaren verlegenheid om elkaar vragen te stellen. Dat belemmert hen om onderling vertrouwen op te bouwen, rondom zwangerschap en bevalling. En, het maakt het lastig om de kennis van professionals te verbinden met de kennis en ervaringen van moeders. Samenwerken aan vertrouwen en verbinden zijn belangrijk om passende en integrale geboortezorg te bieden. De Tool Geboortezorg is ontwikkeld om deze samenwerking te ondersteunen. De tool richt zich op moeders die te maken met problemen op meerdere levensgebieden tegelijkertijd voor, tijdens en na de zwangerschap. Die problemen hangen samen met de sociale, economische en culturele kenmerken van deze moeders en de omgeving waarin zij leven. De kenmerken van deze moeders bepalen ook hoe ze denken over zwangerschap, bevalling en babyverzorging. Dat geldt ook voor waar, wanneer en hoe zij daarover vragen stellen. De tool bevat handvatten om onderling vertrouwen op te bouwen en aan te sluiten bij de vragen en behoeften van moeders.

The paradoxes of communication and collaboration in maternity care

Background: Research on maternity care often focuses on factors that prevent good communication and collaboration and rarely includes important stakeholders – parents – as co-researchers. To understand how professionals and parents in Dutch maternity care accomplish constructive communication and collaboration, we examined their interactions in the clinic, looking for “good practice”. Methods: We used the video-reflexive ethnographic method in 9 midwifery practices and 2 obstetric units. Findings: We conducted 16 meetings where participants reflected on video recordings of their clinical interactions. We found that informal strategies facilitate communication and collaboration: “talk work” – small talk and humour – and “work beyond words” – familiarity, use of sight, touch, sound, and non-verbal gestures. When using these strategies, participants noted that it is important to be sensitive to context, to the values and feelings of others, and to the timing of care. Our analysis of their ways of being sensitive shows that good communication and collaboration involves “paradoxical care”, e.g., concurrent acts of “regulated spontaneity” and “informal formalities”. Discussion: Acknowledging and reinforcing paradoxical care skills will help caregivers develop the competencies needed to address the changing demands of health care. The video-reflexive ethnographic method offers an innovative approach to studying everyday work, focusing on informal and implicit aspects of practice and providing a bottom up approach, integrating researchers, professionals and parents. Conclusion: Good communication and collaboration in maternity care involves “paradoxical care” requiring social sensitivity and self-reflection, skills that should be included as part of professional training.

Andere vrouwen, andere zorg, andere cijfers

Review van Perined jaarboek 2015

CCT: continuous care trial - a randomized controlled trial of the provision of continuous care during labor by maternity care assistants in the Netherlands

Background: In 2009, the Steering Committee for Pregnancy and Childbirth in the Netherlands recommended the implementation of continuous care during labor in order to improve perinatal outcomes. However, in current care, routine maternity caregivers are unable to provide this type of care, resulting in an implementation rate of less than 30%. Maternity care assistants (MCAs), who already play a nursing role in low risk births in the second stage of labor and in homecare during the postnatal period, might be able to fill this gap. In this study, we aim to explore the (cost) effectiveness of adding MCAs to routine first- and second-line maternity care, with the idea that these MCAs would offer continuous care to women during labor. Methods: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be performed comparing continuous care (CC) with care-as-usual (CAU). All women intending to have a vaginal birth, who have an understanding of the Dutch language and are > 18 years of age, will be eligible for inclusion. The intervention consists of the provision of continuous care by a trained MCA from the moment the supervising maternity caregiver establishes that labor has started. The primary outcome will be use of epidural analgesia (EA). Our secondary outcomes will be referrals from primary care to secondary care, caesarean delivery, instrumental delivery, adverse outcomes associated with epidural (fever, augmentation of labor, prolonged labor, postpartum hemorrhage, duration of postpartum stay in hospital for mother and/or newborn), women’s satisfaction with the birth experience, cost-effectiveness, and a budget impact analysis. Cost effectiveness will be calculated by QALY per prevented EA based on the utility index from the EQ-5D and the usage of healthcare services. A standardized sensitivity analysis will be carried out to quantify the outcome in addition to a budget impact analysis. In order to show a reduction from 25 to 17% in the primary outcome (alpha 0.05 and bèta 0.20), taking into account an extra 10% sample size for multi-level analysis and an attrition rate of 10%, 2 × 496 women will be needed (n = 992). Discussion: We expect that adding MCAs to the routine maternity care team will result in a decrease in the use of epidural analgesia and subsequent costs without a reduction in patient satisfaction. It will therefore be a costeffective intervention. Trial registration: Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NL8065. Registered 3 October 2019 - Retrospectively registered.

Women’s characteristics and care outcomes of caseload midwifery care in the Netherlands

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.

Een goede start voor iedereen! Een participatief actieonderzoek naar integrale samenwerking rondom prenatale huisbezoeken in Delft

Niet alle pasgeborenen hebben een goede start, bijvoorbeeld omdat hun ouders in een moeilijke situatie zitten. Een prenataal huisbezoek (PHB) is bedoeld om te inventariseren wat zij nodig hebben en hen waar nodig te helpen. In dit onderzoek zagen we dat de partijen in Delft het kleinschalige weten te benutten. Professionals kennen elkaar, hebben onderling vertrouwen opgebouwd en kunnen gemakkelijk contact zoeken om af te stemmen. Tussen praktijk en beleid bestaan eveneens korte lijntjes. De aansturing vanuit de gemeente biedt professionals ruimte om te zoeken wat het beste werkt voor aanstaande ouders en activiteiten op elkaar af te stemmen. Ouders kunnen van de kleinschaligheid profiteren, bijvoorbeeld omdat de JGZ-verpleegkundigen zowel prenatale huisbezoeken doen, als de mogelijkheid hebben om vervolghulp te bieden waardoor continuïteit in de zorg en ondersteuning kan worden gerealiseerd. Ouders hebben dan te maken met een vertrouwd gezicht. Juist in deze omgeving van kleinschaligheid is het mogelijk om prenatale zorg en ondersteuning voor ouders steeds verder te ontwikkelen en de samenhang erin te verbeteren. Partijen waren hier al enkele jaren mee bezig, dit onderzoek heeft hieraan verder een bijdrage willen leveren en we hopen dat partijen hier na het onderzoek ook weer mee verder gaan.

Omgaan met armoede in de jeugdgezondheid.

An Approach to measuring Integrated Care within a Maternity Care System

INTRODUCTION: Integrated care is considered to be a means to reduce costs, improve the quality of care and generate better patient outcomes. At present, little is known about integrated care in maternity care systems. We developed questionnaires to examine integrated care in two different settings, using the taxonomy of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care. The aim of this study was to explore the validity of these questionnaires.METHODS: We used data collected between 2013 and 2015 from two studies: the Maternity Care Network Study (634 respondents) and the Dutch Birth Centre Study (56 respondents). We assessed the feasibility, discriminative validity, and reliability of the questionnaires.RESULTS: Both questionnaires showed good feasibility (overall missing rate < 20%) and reliability (Cronbach's Alpha coefficient > 0.70). Between-subgroups post-hoc comparisons showed statistically significant differences on integration profiles between regional networks (on all items, dimensions of integration and total integration score) and birth centres (on 50% of the items and dimensions of integration).DISCUSSION: Both questionnaires are feasible and can discriminate between sites with different integration profiles in The Netherlands. They offer an opportunity to better understand integrated care as one step in understanding the complexity of the concept.