1
|
Barsties LS, Daalderop LA, Lagendijk J, van Steenbergen F, Been JV, Bertens LCM, Waelput AJM, van Zoest H, Loorbach D, Steegers EAP. Addressing perinatal health inequities in Dutch municipalities: Protocol for the Healthy Pregnancy 4 All-3 programme. Health Policy 2020; 125:385-392. [PMID: 33487480 DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.12.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2020] [Revised: 12/13/2020] [Accepted: 12/22/2020] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Health inequities are already present at birth and affect individuals' health and socioeconomic outcomes across the life course. Addressing these inequities requires a cross-sectoral approach, covering the first 1,000 days of life. We believe that - in the Dutch context - municipal governments can be the main responsible actor to drive such an approach, since they are primarily responsible for organising adequate public health. Therefore, we aim to identify and develop transformative change towards the implementation of perinatal health into municipal approaches and policies concerning health inequities. METHODS A transition analysis will be combined with action research in six Dutch municipalities. Interviews and interactive group sessions with professionals and organisations that are relevant for the institutional embedding of perinatal health into approaches and policies regarding health inequities, will be organised in each municipality. As a follow-up, a questionnaire will be administered among all participants one year after completion of the group sessions. DISCUSSION We expect to gain insights into the role of municipalities in addressing perinatal health inequities, learn more about the interaction between different key stakeholders, and identify barriers and facilitators for a cross-sectoral approach to perinatal health. This knowledge will serve to inform the development of approaches to perinatal health inequities in areas with relatively poor perinatal health outcomes, both in the Netherlands and abroad.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa S Barsties
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Dutch Research Institute for Transitions, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Leonie A Daalderop
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Dutch Research Institute for Transitions, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Jacqueline Lagendijk
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Frank van Steenbergen
- Dutch Research Institute for Transitions, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Jasper V Been
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Paediatrics, Erasmus MC - Sophia Children's Hospital, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Loes C M Bertens
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Adja J M Waelput
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Hanneke van Zoest
- Pharos, The Dutch Centre of Expertise on Health Disparities, PO Box 13318, 3507 LH, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Derk Loorbach
- Dutch Research Institute for Transitions, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Eric A P Steegers
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ravelli ACJ, Eskes M, van der Post JAM, Abu-Hanna A, de Groot CJM. Decreasing trend in preterm birth and perinatal mortality, do disparities also decline? BMC Public Health 2020; 20:783. [PMID: 32456627 PMCID: PMC7249399 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-08925-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2019] [Accepted: 05/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In the Netherlands, several initiatives started after the publication of the PERISTAT findings that showed the perinatal mortality risk was higher than in other European countries. The objective of this study is 1) to report recent trends in perinatal mortality and in intermediate risk groups (preterm birth, congenital anomalies and small for gestational age (SGA)), 2) describing perinatal mortality risk among children born preterm, with congenital anomalies or SGA, and born in maternal high risk groups (parity, age, ethnicity and socio-economic status (SES)). Methods A nationwide cohort study in the Netherlands among 996,423 singleton births in 2010–2015 with a gestational age between 24.0 and 42.6 weeks. Trend tests, univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used. We did separate analyses for gestational age subgroups and line of care. Results The perinatal mortality rate was 5.0 per 1000 and it decreased significantly from 5.6 in 2010 to 4.6 per 1000 in 2015. Preterm birth significantly declined (6.1% in 2010 to 5.6% in 2015). Analysis by gestational age groups showed that the largest decline in perinatal mortality of 32% was seen at 24–27 weeks of gestation where the risk declined from 497 to 339 per 1000. At term, the decline was 23% from 2.2 to 1.7 per 1000. The smallest decline was 3% between 32 and 36 weeks. In children with preterm birth, congenital anomalies or SGA, the perinatal mortality risk significantly declined. Main risk factors for perinatal mortality were African ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.1 95%CI [1.9–2.4]), maternal age ≥ 40 years (aOR1.9 95%CI [1.7–2.2]) and parity 2+ (aOR 1.4 95%CI [1.3–1.5]). Among the (post)term born neonates, there was no significant decline in perinatal mortality in women with low age, low or high SES, non-Western ethnicity and among women who started or delivered under primary care. Conclusions There is a decline in preterm birth and in perinatal mortality between 2010 and 2015. The decline in perinatal mortality is both in stillbirths and in neonatal mortality, most prominently among 24–27 weeks and among (post)term births. A possible future target could be deliveries among 32–36 weeks, women with high maternal age or non-Western ethnicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita C J Ravelli
- Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Martine Eskes
- Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joris A M van der Post
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ameen Abu-Hanna
- Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Christianne J M de Groot
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Antenatal non-medical risk assessment and care pathways to improve pregnancy outcomes: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Eur J Epidemiol 2018; 33:579-589. [PMID: 29605891 PMCID: PMC5995981 DOI: 10.1007/s10654-018-0387-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2017] [Accepted: 03/23/2018] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Social deprivation negatively affects health outcomes but receives little attention in obstetric risk selection. We investigated whether a combination of (1) risk assessment focused on non-medical risk factors, lifestyle factors, and medical risk factors, with (2) subsequent institution of risk-specific care pathways, and (3) multidisciplinary consultation between care providers from the curative and the public health sector reduced adverse pregnancy outcomes among women in selected urban areas in the Netherlands. We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial in 14 urban municipalities across the Netherlands. Prior to the randomisation, municipalities were ranked and paired according to their expected proportion of pregnant women at risk for adverse outcomes at birth. The primary outcome was delivery of a preterm and/or small for gestational age (SGA) baby, analysed with multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression analysis adjusting for clustering and individual baseline characteristics. A total of 33 community midwife practices and nine hospitals participated throughout the study. Data from 4302 participants was included in the Intention To Treat (ITT) analysis. The intervention had no demonstrable impact on the primary outcome: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.17 (95% CI 0.84–1.63). Among the secondary outcomes, the intervention improved the detection of threatening preterm delivery and fetal growth restriction during pregnancy [aOR 1.27 (95% CI 1.01–1.61)]. Implementation of additional non-medical risk assessment and preventive strategies into general practices is feasible but did not decrease the incidence of preterm and/or SGA birth in the index pregnancy in deprived urban areas. Trial registration Netherlands National Trial Register (NTR-3367).
Collapse
|