No abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between nuchal translucency measurements and outcome of pregnancy with special regard to fetuses with an enlarged nuchal translucency and a normal karyotype. Fetal nuchal translucency measurements were performed on consecutive mothers attending the prenatal diagnosis center of our hospital. A complete follow-up was obtained in 88.4% of the cases. Of the 74 fetuses (4.4%) with an enlarged nuchal translucency (> or = 3 mm), 25 (33.8%) had an abnormal karyotype. Two pregnancies ended in a spontaneous abortion before karyotyping was performed. In the remaining 47 eukaryotic fetuses with enlarged nuchal translucency, five (10.6%) had a structural anomaly, two were affected by genetic syndromes (4.2%) and an additional four fetuses (8.5%) were affected by a single-gene disorder. A spontaneous abortion or an intrauterine death occurred in 6.4% and in 2.1% of these fetuses, respectively. The total incidence of an unfavorable outcome in the group of chromosomally normal fetuses with enlarged nuchal translucency was 32%. In contrast, in the group with a normal nuchal translucency (< 3 mm), the incidence of an unfavorable outcome was 7.5%. There is a strong association between enlarged nuchal translucency measurements and congenital (structural and genetic) abnormalities, as assessed by receiver operator characteristic analysis. This may represent, in fetuses with a normal karyotype, a non-specific sign of a disturbance in the developmental process. In these cases, detailed ultrasound surveillance is recommended.

Discontinuing IV oxytocin stimulation after the active phase of labour has been established may reduce caesarean delivery but the evidence for this was low certainty. When restricting our analysis to those trials that separately reported participants who reached the active phase of labour, our results showed there is probably little or no difference between groups. Discontinuing IV oxytocin may reduce uterine tachysystole combined with abnormal FHR.Most of the trials had 'Risk of bias' concerns which means that these results should be interpreted with caution. Our GRADE assessments ranged from very low certainty to moderate certainty. Downgrading decisions were based on study limitations, imprecision and indirectness.Future research could account for all women randomised and, in particular, note those who delivered before the point at which they would be eligible for the intervention (i.e. those who had caesareans in the latent phase), or because labour was so rapid that the infusion could not be stopped in time.Future trials could adopt the outcomes listed in this review including maternal and neonatal mortality, maternal satisfaction, and breastfeeding.

BackgroundHome 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.MethodsAn 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.ResultsFour 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.ConclusionsThe 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.

When changing the maternity care system it will be a challenge to maintain a high level of experienced job autonomy for professionals. A decrease in job autonomy could lead to a reduction in job related wellbeing and in satisfaction with care among pregnant women.