Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31117985›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2019

Management of late-term pregnancy in midwifery- and obstetrician-led care.

Joep C Kortekaas, Aafke Bruinsma, Judit K J Keulen, Frank P H A Vandenbussche, Jeroen van Dillen, Esteriek de Miranda

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Foeto-Maternal outcomes of pregnancies beyond 41 weeks of gestation after induced or spontaneous labour.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Joep C KortekaasDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6523 GA, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. joepkortekaas@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5851-3728
Aafke BruinsmaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Judit K J KeulenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Frank P H A VandenbusscheDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6523 GA, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jeroen van DillenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6523 GA, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Esteriek de MirandaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Management of late-term pregnancy in midwifery- and obstetrician-led care.

backgroundSince there is no consensus regarding the optimal management in late-term pregnancies (≥41.0 weeks), we explored the variety of management strategies in late-term pregnancy in the Netherlands to identify the magnitude of this variety and the attitude towards late-term pregnancy.

methodsTwo nationwide surveys amongst all midwifery practices (midwifery-led care) and all hospitals with an obstetric unit (obstetrician-led care) were performed with questions on timing, frequency and content of consultations/surveillance in late-term pregnancy and on timing of induction. Propositions about late-term pregnancy were assessed using Likert scale questions.

resultsThe response rate was 40% (203/511) in midwifery-led care and 92% (80/87) in obstetrician-led care. All obstetric units made regional protocols with their collaborating midwifery practices about management in late-term pregnancy. Most midwifery-led care practices (93%) refer low-risk women at least once for consultation in obstetrician-led care in late-term pregnancy. The content of consultations varies among hospitals. Membrane sweeping is performed more in midwifery-led care compared to obstetrician-led care (90% vs 31%, p < 0.001). Consultation at 41 weeks should be standard care according to 47% of midwifery-led care practices and 83% of obstetrician-led care units (p < 0.001). Induction of labour at 41.0 weeks is offered less often to women in midwifery-led care in comparison to obstetrician-led care (3% vs 21%, p < 0.001).

conclusionsSubstantial practice variation exists within and between midwifery-and obstetrician-led care in the Netherlands regarding timing, frequency and content of antenatal monitoring in late-term pregnancy and timing of labour induction. An evidence based interdisciplinary guideline will contribute to a higher level of uniformity in the management in late- term pregnancies.

Indexed as

AdultAttitude of Health PersonnelDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHumansMidwiferyNetherlandsNurse MidwivesObstetricsPhysiciansPregnancyPregnancy, ProlongedInduction of labourLate- term pregnancyManagement of careMidwifery-led careObstetrician-led carePostterm pregnancy

Identifiers

PMID31117985
PMCPMC6532173
OpenAlexW2947188116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.