Regional variations in childbirth interventions in the Netherlands: a nationwide explorative study

Abstract

BackgroundAlthough interventions in childbirth are important in order to prevent neonatal and maternal morbidity and mortality, non-indicated use may cause avoidable harm. Regional variations in intervention rates, which cannot be explained by maternal characteristics, may indicate over- and underuse. The aim of this study is to explore regional variations in childbirth interventions in the Netherlands and their associations with interventions and adverse outcomes, controlled for maternal characteristics.MethodsChildbirth intervention rates were compared between twelve Dutch regions, using data from the national perinatal birth register for 2010–2013. All single childbirths from 37 weeks’ gestation onwards were included. Primary outcomes were induction and augmentation of labour, pain medication, instrumental birth, caesarean section (prelabour, intrapartum) and paediatric involvement. Secondary outcomes were adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to adjust for maternal characteristics. Associations were expressed in Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients.ResultsMost variation was found for type of pain medication and paediatric involvement. Epidural analgesia rates varied from between 12 and 38% (nulliparous) and from between 5 and 14% (multiparous women). These rates were negatively correlated with rates of other pharmacological pain relief, which varied from between 15 and 43% (nulliparous) and from between 10 and 27% (multiparous). Rates of paediatric involvement varied from between 37 and 60% (nulliparous) and from between 26 and 43% (multiparous). For instrumental vaginal births, rates varied from between 16 and 19% (nulliparous) and from between 3 and 4% (multiparous). For intrapartum caesarean section, the variation was 13–15% and 5–6%, respectively. A positive correlation was found between intervention rates in midwife-led and obstetrician-led care at the onset of labour within the same region. Adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes were not lower in regions with higher intervention rates. Higher augmentation of labour rates correlated with higher rates of severe postpartum haemorrhage.ConclusionsMost variation was found for type of pain medication and paediatric involvement, and least for instrumental vaginal births and intrapartum caesarean sections. Care providers and policy makers should critically audit remarkable variations, since these may be unwarranted. Limited variation for some interventions may indicate consensus for their use. Further research should focus on variations in evidence-based interventions and indications for the use of interventions in childbirth.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-018-1795-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Regional variations in childbirth interventions and their correlations with adverse outcomes, birthplace and care provider: A nationwide explorative study

“…The total number of women in this study was 614,730. The number of women in midwife-or obstetrician-led care at the onset of labour and at the time of birth, for nulliparous and multiparous women separately, are presented in Fig 1. Maternal characteristics have previously been published [23]. Fig 2 shows that the largest regional variations for the use of episiotomy and postpartum administration of oxytocin, were found in women who received midwife-led care at the time of birth.…”

“…The methods of this explorative study have been described previously in more detail [23]. For this nationwide study, we used data on single births after 37 weeks of gestation.…”

“…The decreased rate of midwife-led births in the Netherlands corresponded with an increased use of interventions on the national level [15,28]. A previous article described regional variations in rates of induction and augmentation of labour, pain medication, caesarean section, and involvement of paediatrician in the first 24 h after birth [23]. Little information is available as to how regional variations in rates of referral, place of birth, and interventions during childbirth, relate to each other, nor how they might relate to adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes.…”

“…Interventions such as episiotomy, artificial rupture of membranes (AROM), and postpartum administration of oxytocin are used in both midwife-led and obstetrician-led care settings [22]. Box 1 citesthe description of the maternity care system in the Netherlands from our previous publication on regional variations in the Netherlands [23].…”

“…This article focuses on rates of referral, place of birth, and interventions that are used in both primary midwife-led, and secondary obstetrician-led Box 1. The maternity care system in the Netherlands [23] In the Netherlands, there are no regional differences in the maternity healthcare system. Low-risk women start antenatal care in midwife-led primary care.…”