Background Variations in intervention rates, without subsequent reductions in adverse outcomes, can indicate overuse. We studied variations in and associations between commonly used childbirth interventions and adverse outcomes, adjusted for population characteristics. Methods and findings In this multinational cross-sectional study, existing data on 4,729,307 singleton births at �37 weeks in 2013 from Finland,

ObjectiveInfants from multiple pregnancies have higher rates of preterm birth, stillbirth and neonatal death and differences in multiple birth rates (MBR) exist between countries. We aimed to describe differences in MBR in Europe and to investigate the impact of these differences on adverse perinatal outcomes at a population level.MethodsWe used national aggregate birth data on multiple pregnancies, maternal age, gestational age (GA), stillbirth and neonatal death collected in the Euro-Peristat project (29 countries in 2010, N = 5 074 643 births). We also used European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) data on assisted conception and single embryo transfer (SET). The impact of MBR on outcomes was studied using meta-analysis techniques with random-effects models to derive pooled risk ratios (pRR) overall and for four groups of country defined by their MBR. We computed population attributable risks (PAR) for these groups.ResultsIn 2010, the average MBR was 16.8 per 1000 women giving birth, ranging from 9.1 (Romania) to 26.5 (Cyprus). Compared to singletons, multiples had a nine-fold increased risk (pRR 9.4, 95% Cl 9.1–9.8) of preterm birth (<37 weeks GA), an almost 12-fold increased risk (pRR 11.7, 95% CI 11.0–12.4) of very preterm birth (<32 weeks GA). Pooled RR were 2.4 (95% Cl 1.5–3.6) for fetal mortality at or after 28 weeks GA and 7.0 (95% Cl 6.1–8.0) for neonatal mortality. PAR of neonatal death and very preterm birth were higher in countries with high MBR compared to low MBR (17.1% (95% CI 13.8–20.2) versus 9.8% (95% Cl 9.6–11.0) for neonatal death and 29.6% (96% CI 28.5–30.6) versus 17.5% (95% CI 15.7–18.3) for very preterm births, respectively).ConclusionsWide variations in MBR and their impact on population outcomes imply that efforts by countries to reduce MBR could improve perinatal outcomes, enabling better long-term child health.

Objective To describe: (i) trends in centralisation and unplanned out-of-hospital births; (ii) perinatal mortality by place of birth; and (iii) health and birth outcomes in areas served by hospitals of different levels.Design Cross-sectional analysis of medical birth register data. Methods In the hospital-based analysis, birthweight was adjusted by logistic regression. In the area-based analysis results were calculated according to where women lived, grouping them into areas served by different hospitals. The mother's background characteristics were adjusted for by logistic regression.Main outcome measures Place of birth, unplanned out-of-hospital birth, perinatal mortality, newborn outcomes, and birth procedures.Results The number of birthing hospitals declined, the mean number of births per hospital increased, and more births, particularly high-risk births, occurred in university hospitals. Unplanned out-of-hospital births were rare, and their numbers increased in the 2000s, but regional differences declined. Perinatal mortality was higher in the university hospitals than in other hospitals, but after adjusting for birthweight, it was lower. Among children weighing more than 2500 g, mortality was similar for all hospital levels. In out-of-hospital births, perinatal mortality was much higher than in other children. The area-based analysis did not systematically show better or worse results for the areas served by lower level hospitals: after adjusting for the background characteristics of the mothers, all differences were found to be small. ConclusionsThe health and service data do not support the need to close down small hospitals in a regionalised system where there is a referral system that functions well.

The issue of conscientious objection (CO) arises in healthcare when doctors and nurses refuse to have any involvement in the provision of treatment of certain patients due to their religious or moral beliefs. Most commonly CO is invoked when it comes to induced abortion. Of the EU member states where induced abortion is legal, invoking CO is granted by law in 21 countries. The same applies to the non-EU countries Norway and Switzerland. CO is not legally granted in the EU member states Sweden, Finland, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic. The Icelandic legislation provides no right to CO either. European examples prove that the recommendation that CO should not prevent women from accessing services fails in a number of cases. CO puts women in an unequal position depending on their place of residence, socio-economic status and income. CO should not be presented as a question that relates only to health professionals and their rights. CO mainly concerns women as it has very real consequences for their reproductive health and rights. European countries should assess the laws governing CO and its effects on women's rights. CO should not be used as a subtle method for limiting the legal right to healthcare.

ObjectiveDiabetes in pregnancy and consequently the need for treatment with antidiabetic medication (ADM) has become increasingly prevalent. The prevalence and patterns of use of ADM in pregnancy from 2006 onward in seven different countries was assessed.Research design and methodsData sources included individually linked data from the nationwide health registers in Denmark (2006–2016), Finland (2006–2016), Iceland (2006–2012), Norway (2006–2015), Sweden (2006–2015), state-wide administrative and claims data for New South Wales, Australia (2006–2012) and two US insurance databases: Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX; 2006–2012, public) and IBM MarketScan (2012–2015, private). The prevalence of ADM use was calculated as the proportion of pregnancies with at least one filled prescription of an ADM in the 90 days before pregnancy or within the three trimesters of pregnancy.ResultsPrevalence of any ADM use in 5 279 231 pregnancies was 3% (n=147 999) and varied from under 2% (Denmark, Norway, and Sweden) to above 5% (Australia and US). Insulin was the most used ADM, and metformin was the most used oral hypoglycemic agent with increasing use over time in all countries. In 11.4%–62.5% of pregnancies with prepregnancy use, ADM (primarily metformin) was discontinued. When ADM treatment was initiated in late pregnancy for treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus, insulin was most often dispensed, except in the US, where glibenclamide was most often used.ConclusionsPrevalence and patterns of use of ADM classes varied between countries and over time. While insulin remained the most common ADM used in pregnancy, metformin use increased significantly over the study period.