BackgroundLittle research into non-western women’s prenatal care utilisation in industrialised western countries has taken generational differences into account. In this study we examined non-western women’s prenatal care utilisation and its explanatory factors according to generational status.MethodsData from 3300 women participating in a prospective cohort of primary midwifery care clients (i.e. women with no complications or no increased risk for complications during pregnancy, childbirth and the puerperium who receive maternity care by autonomous midwives) in the Netherlands (the DELIVER study) was used. Gestational age at entry and the total number of prenatal visits were aggregated into an index. The extent to which potential factors explained non-western women’s prenatal care utilisation was assessed by means of blockwise logistic regression analyses and percentage changes in odds ratios.ResultsThe unadjusted odds of first and second-generation non-western women making inadequate use of prenatal care were 3.26 and 1.96 times greater than for native Dutch women. For the first generation, sociocultural factors explained 43% of inadequate prenatal care utilisation, socioeconomic factors explained 33% and demographic and pregnancy factors explained 29%. For the second generation, sociocultural factors explained 66% of inadequate prenatal care utilisation.ConclusionIrrespective of generation, strategies to improve utilisation should focus on those with the following sociocultural characteristics (not speaking Dutch at home, no partner or a first-generation non-Dutch partner). For the first generation, strategies should also focus on those with the following demographic, pregnancy and socioeconomic characteristics (aged ≤19 or ≥36, unplanned pregnancies, poor obstetric histories (extra-uterine pregnancy, molar pregnancy or abortion), a low educational level, below average net household income and no supplementary insurance.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12884-015-0528-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

women were highly satisfied with the care they received, although transfers across care levels during childbirth were associated with substantially lower client satisfaction. The differences in client satisfaction between transferred and non-transferred women can largely be explained by pregnancy and childbirth characteristics, and by clients' experiences with the care process.

BackgroundThe client experience is an important outcome in the evaluation and development of perinatal healthcare. But because clients meet different professionals, measuring such experiences poses a challenge. This is especially the case in the Netherlands, where pregnant women are often transferred between professionals due to the nation’s approach to risk selection. This paper explores questions around how clients experience transfers of care during pregnancy, childbirth, and the neonatal period, as well as how these experiences compare to the established quality of care aspects the Dutch Patient Federation developed.MethodNarratives from 17 Dutch women who had given birth about their experiences with transfers were collected in the Netherlands. The narratives, for which informed consent was obtained, were collected on paper and online. Storyline analysis was used to identify story types. Story types portray patterns that indicate how clients experience transfers between healthcare providers. A comparative analysis was performed to identify differences and similarities between existing quality criteria and those clients mentioned.ResultsFour story types were identified: 1) Disconnected transfers of care lead to uncertainties; 2) Seamless transfers of care due to proper collaboration lead to positive experiences; 3) Transfers of care lead to disruption of patient-provider connectedness; 4) Transfer of care is initiated by the client to make pregnancy and childbirth dreams come true. Most of the quality aspects derived from these story types were identified as being similar or complementary to the Dutch Patient Federation list. A ‘new’ aspect identified in the clients’ stories was the influencing role of prior experiences with transfers of care on current expectations, fears, and wishes.ConclusionsTransfers of care affect clients greatly and influence their experiences. Good communication, seamless transfers, and maintaining autonomy contribute to more positive experiences. The stories also show that previous experiences influence client’s expectations for the next pregnancy, childbirth, and transfers of care.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12884-017-1369-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Given the potential negative impact of adverse client experiences, this study highlights the need for healthcare professionals to be aware of what women are susceptible for having had negative experiences. It is advised that healthcare provision be altered to tailor to the needs of these women.

Background: In the Netherlands, the obstetric and neonatal healthcare system consists of multiple healthcare organizations. Due to this system, transfers between healthcare professionals are inevitable. Transfers can interrupt the continuity of care, which is an important aspect of care quality. The aim of this study is to examine how healthcare professionals transfer their clients and to understand factors that facilitate or impede continuity of care. Methods: We conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with community midwives (4), obstetricians/clinical midwives (4), maternity care assistants (4), and youth healthcare nurses (3) between June and September 2016. After discussing the meaning of transfers of care, we introduced a vignette on the care process of a pregnant woman and asked about the methods the professional would use to transfer a client and about factors that facilitate or impede continuity of care. Results: Obstetric and neonatal healthcare professionals mentioned 19 factors that facilitate or impede continuity of care. The facilitating factors were, e.g., usage of protocols and standard formats, transfers in person, being accessible, and multidisciplinary meetings. Impeding factors included, e.g., acute situations, experienced hierarchy, insufficient knowledge of protocols, and privacy concerns. Conclusion: Professionals mentioned a broad variety of factors facilitating and impeding continuity of care.