Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University College, Faculty of Social & Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Nieuwemarkt 1A, 3011 HP, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Eur J Epidemiol. 2018 Jun;33(6):579-589. doi: 10.1007/s10654-018-0387-7. Epub 2018 Mar 31.
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).
社会剥夺对健康结果有负面影响,但在产科风险选择中却很少受到关注。我们研究了以下方法是否能改善情况:(1)综合评估非医疗风险因素、生活方式因素和医疗风险因素的风险评估;(2)实施特定风险的护理路径;(3)来自治疗和公共卫生部门的护理提供者之间进行多学科咨询。我们在荷兰 14 个城市进行了一项整群随机对照试验。在随机分组之前,根据预期的有不良妊娠结局风险的孕妇比例,对城市进行排名和配对。主要结局是早产和/或小于胎龄儿(SGA)的分娩,采用多水平混合效应逻辑回归分析进行分析,调整了聚类和个体基线特征。共有 33 个社区助产士实践和 9 家医院参与了整个研究。4302 名参与者的数据纳入意向治疗(ITT)分析。干预措施对主要结局没有明显影响:调整后的优势比(aOR)为 1.17(95%可信区间 0.84-1.63)。在次要结局中,干预措施提高了妊娠期威胁早产和胎儿生长受限的检出率[aOR 1.27(95%可信区间 1.01-1.61)]。将额外的非医疗风险评估和预防策略纳入常规实践是可行的,但并没有降低贫困城市地区指数妊娠中早产和/或 SGA 出生的发生率。
试验注册荷兰国家试验注册处(NTR-3367)。