Ethnicity and Language Proficiency Differences in the Provision of and Intention to Use Prenatal Screening for Down's Syndrome and Congenital Anomalies. A Prospective, Non-selected, Register-Based Study in the Netherlands

Out of pocket health-care services in Germany during pregnancy under consideration of migration and acculturation

PURPOSE

More than a quarter of the German population has a migration background (MB). As various studies in the healthcare sector have already shown, ethnic background and migration status can have an influence on individual patient care. The aim of our study was to evaluate whether there are differences in utilization of out of pocket health-care services and the consultation situation in the context of prenatal care, taking into account migration status, acculturation and socio-demographic aspects.

METHODS

In the period from 01.03.21-01.03.22, a total of 511 women in childbed at the University Women's Hospital Ulm were interviewed in a retrospective survey using a standardized questionnaire translated into 9 languages and asked about their prenatal care. Due to the COVID pandemic, the study had to be terminated after one year.

RESULTS

Women with MB-particularly 1st generation migrant women-used significantly fewer out of pocket prenatal care services (p < 0.001) and felt less informed and counselled regarding costs and benefits of possible prenatal care examinations (p < 0.001) compared to women without MB. Consistent with these results, there were associations between the assimilation index (AI) of patients with MB and both utilization and perception of individual healthcare services.

CONCLUSION

Our study indicates that even today there are still differences in the treatment and perception of various health services in the context of prenatal care between women with and those without MB.

Counselling for prenatal anomaly screening to migrant women in the Netherlands: An interview study of primary care midwives’ perceived barriers with client–midwife communication

INTRODUCTION

Large ethnic inequalities exist in the prenatal screening offer, counselling, informed decision-making, and uptake of prenatal anomaly tests. More insight into midwives’ experiences with offering prenatal counselling to migrant women may provide better insight into the origins and consequences of these ethnic inequalities.

METHODS

We conducted interviews with 12 midwives certified as counsellors for prenatal anomaly screening for women they identified as migrants. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Midwives reported most difficulties in communicating with women of ‘non-western migrant background’, which include first- and second-generation migrants from Africa, Latin-America, Asia, and Turkey. They experienced barriers in communication related to linguistics, health literacy, sociocultural and religious differences, with midwife stereotyping affecting all three aspects of counselling: health education, decision-making support, and the client–midwife relation. Health education was difficult because of language barriers and low health-literacy of clients, decision-making support was hampered by sociocultural and religious midwife–client differences, and client–midwife relations were under pressure due to sociocultural and religious midwife–client differences and midwife stereotyping.

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers to optimal communication seem to contribute to suboptimal counselling, especially for women of ‘non-western migrant background’. Client–midwife communication thus potentially adds to the ethnic disparities observed in the offer of and informed decision-making about prenatal anomaly screening in the Netherlands. The quality of prenatal counselling for women from all ethnic backgrounds might be improved by addressing linguistic, health literacy, sociocultural and religious barriers in future training and continuing education of prenatal counsellors.

Non-invasive prenatal test uptake in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods

OBJECTIVE

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) is increasingly being implemented worldwide. In public health programs, equitable access to healthcare is a fundamental principle which also applies to fetal aneuploidy screening. However, the out-of-pocket costs of NIPT may lead to sociodemographic disparities in uptake of screening. This study assessed whether there is a difference in the uptake of NIPT in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods compared to all other neighborhoods in the Netherlands, where NIPT is implemented in a national screening program (TRIDENT-2 study).

METHOD

NIPT uptake, postal code and age of 156,562 pregnant women who received pre-test counselling for prenatal screening in 2018 were retrieved from the national prenatal screening database. Postal codes were used as a proxy to categorize neighborhoods as being either socioeconomically disadvantaged or other. The out-of-pocket costs for NIPT were €175.

RESULTS

NIPT uptake in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods was 20.3% whereas uptake in all other neighborhoods was 47.6% (p < 0.001). The difference in NIPT uptake between socioeconomic disadvantaged neighborhoods and other areas was smaller for the youngest maternal age-group (≤25 years) compared to other age-groups.

CONCLUSION

The variation in uptake suggest underlying disparities in NIPT uptake, which undermines the goals of a national fetal aneuploidy screening program of providing reproductive autonomy and equitable access. This has ethical and policy implications for ensuring fair and responsible implementation of fetal aneuploidy screening.

Racial and ethnic differences in uptake of cell-free fetal DNA aneuploidy screening in an urban safety net hospital

OBJECTIVE

To identify racial disparities in cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) first-line aneuploidy screening use among advanced maternal age women at a safety net hospital.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective cohort study of women 35 and older who delivered at Boston Medical Center from 2012 to 2015 compared to women who used cffDNA for first-line aneuploidy screening to those who did not. Maternal conventional demographics and social determinants of health were collected. We investigated the relationship between race and odds of cffDNA use, adjusting for covariates by stepwise logistic regression.

RESULTS

We identified 1223 women. Seventy-two percent were publicly insured. Upon adjusting for parity, prenatal care site, year of delivery, and insurance status, odds of cffNDA use remained lower for Black and Hispanic women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30, 0.71 and aOR 0.34 [0.21, 0.55]) compared to White women. Language proved to be an effect modifier among Hispanic women that attenuated but did not resolve the disparity in use among Hispanic compared to White women. Racial differences in cffDNA use persisted across the study period.

CONCLUSION

Disparity in cffDNA screening uptake exists by race in this diverse urban population. The gap in utilization between Hispanic and White women may be related to primary preferred language.

Why NIPT should be publicly funded

Asking pregnant women to (co)pay for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) out of pocket leads to unequal access across socioeconomic strata. To avoid these social justice issues, first-trimester prenatal screening should be publicly funded in countries such as the Netherlands, with universal coverage healthcare systems that offer all other antenatal care services and screening programmes free of charge. In this reply, we offer three additional reasons for public funding of NIPT. First, NIPT may not primarily have medical utility for women and children, but rather offers relevant information and reproductive options, and thus serves important autonomy interests of women. Second, public funding of NIPT can be justified because it results in a reduction of collectively borne costs associated with care and support for children with chromosomal abnormalities. It is important to note that this is not an argument for individual women to take part in screening or to terminate an affected pregnancy. However, it is a legitimate argument in policy making regarding funding arrangements for screening programmes. Finally, public funding would help to amend current misunderstandings among pregnant women (eg, that they are not at risk), and thus to support informed consent for first-trimester prenatal screening.

An unwanted pregnancy and language proficiency level are associated with first antenatal visit after the first trimester: Results from a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To study the association between the reasons for a 'late' first antenatal visit and the influence of several maternal determinants and practical limitations on the timing of the first antenatal visit.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Southwest region of The Netherlands, mainly characterised by large urban and suburban areas.

PARTICIPANTS

Women receiving information and counselling about prenatal screening between April 2010 and December 2010 were included (n = 9,268).

MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS

Timing of first antenatal visit, categorised as: 'in time' (<12+0 weeks of gestation), 'late' (≥12-23+6 weeks of gestation) and 'very late' (≥24 weeks of gestation). An unplanned or unwanted pregnancy was the most frequently reported reason for delay of the first antenatal visit (30.7%) especially in Surinamese women (79%), and women younger than 20 years (63%) or older than 40 years (50.0%). Compared to women who timed their first antenatal visit 'in time', women with a delay in their first visit were more often younger than 20 or older than 40 years of age, high order multiparous (P ≥3), with a previous miscarriage, and had an absent Dutch language proficiency level. The latter showed the strongest association with a 'very late' first antenatal visit (OR 4.96, 95%CI 2.45-10.05).

KEY CONCLUSIONS

Language proficiency level was highly associated with a delay in the timing of the first antenatal visit. When women timed their first antenatal visit late, having an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy was the most frequently reported reason for this delay.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Findings from this study can be used to inform and develop interventions to improve timely antenatal care use.

Satisfaction with obstetric care in a population of low-educated native Dutch and non-western minority women. Focus group research

Background

Low-educated native Dutch and non-western minority women have inadequate access to obstetric care. Moreover, the care they receive lacks responsiveness to their needs and cultural competences. Gaining a deeper understanding of their experiences and satisfaction with antenatal, birthing and maternity care will help to adjust healthcare responsiveness to meet their needs during pregnancy, childbirth and the postpartum period.

Methods

We combined the World Health Organization conceptual framework of healthcare responsiveness with focus group research to measure satisfaction with antenatal, birthing and maternity care of women with a low-educated native Dutch and non-western ethnic background.

Results

From September 2011 until December 2013, 106 women were recruited for 20 focus group sessions. Eighty-five percent of the women had a non-western immigrant background and 89% a low or intermediate educational attainment. The study population was mostly positive about the provided care during the antenatal phase. They were less positive about the other two phases of care. Moreover, the obstetric healthcare systems’ responsiveness in all phases of care (antenatal, birthing and maternity) did not meet these women’s needs. The ‘respect for persons’ domains ‘autonomy’, ‘communication’ and ‘dignity’ and the ‘client orientation’ domain ‘prompt attention’ were judged most negatively.

Conclusions

The study findings give contextual meaning and starting points for improvement of responsiveness in the provision of obstetric care within a multi-ethnic women’s population.