Background Variations in intervention rates, without subsequent reductions in adverse outcomes, can indicate overuse. We studied variations in and associations between commonly used childbirth interventions and adverse outcomes, adjusted for population characteristics. Methods and findings In this multinational cross-sectional study, existing data on 4,729,307 singleton births at �37 weeks in 2013 from Finland,

This study suggests that measurement of the content and timing of care of antenatal care using the new CTP tool is a better assessment of the risk of preterm birth than assessment of the number of antenatal visits alone.

BackgroundAntenatal care has a positive effect on pregnancy, both clinically and psychologically, but consensus about the optimal number of antenatal visits is lacking. This study aims to provide insight into the dynamics of the number of antenatal visits a woman receives. Independent effects of predisposing, enabling and pregnancy-related determinants are examined.MethodsWomen were recruited in nine clinical centres in the Brussels Metropolitan region. Antenatal care use was measured prospectively. A Poisson regression model was applied to measure the independent effect of individual determinants on the number of antenatal visits.ResultsData on antenatal care trajectories in 333 women were collected. The multivariate analyses showed that women with a Maghreb or Turkish origin had 14% fewer visits compared with European (EU15) women. More highly educated women had 22% more visits compared with those with a low education. Women with a high income had 14% more antenatal visits compared with those with a low income. Fewer antenatal visits were observed in multiparae (15%), women initiating care after 14 weeks of gestation (31%), women without medical risks during the pregnancy (12%) and in women with a continuity of care index of 50% or more (12%). More visits were observed in delivering after week 37 (22% increase).ConclusionsPredisposing and enabling factors have to be considered when antenatal care programmes are evaluated in a metropolitan area. Variations in the number of antenatal visits show that socially vulnerable women are more at risk of having fewer visits.

BackgroundCurrent measures of antenatal care use are limited to initiation of care and number of visits. This study aimed to describe the development and application of a tool to assess the adequacy of the content and timing of antenatal care.MethodsThe Content and Timing of care in Pregnancy (CTP) tool was developed based on clinical relevance for ongoing antenatal care and recommendations in national and international guidelines. The tool reflects minimal care recommended in every pregnancy, regardless of parity or risk status. CTP measures timing of initiation of care, content of care (number of blood pressure readings, blood tests and ultrasound scans) and whether the interventions were received at an appropriate time. Antenatal care trajectories for 333 pregnant women were then described using a standard tool (the APNCU index), that measures the quantity of care only, and the new CTP tool. Both tools categorise care into 4 categories, from 'Inadequate' (both tools) to 'Adequate plus' (APNCU) or 'Appropriate' (CTP). Participants recorded the timing and content of their antenatal care prospectively using diaries. Analysis included an examination of similarities and differences in categorisation of care episodes between the tools.ResultsAccording to the CTP tool, the care trajectory of 10,2% of the women was classified as inadequate, 8,4% as intermediate, 36% as sufficient and 45,3% as appropriate. The assessment of quality of care differed significantly between the two tools. Seventeen care trajectories classified as 'Adequate' or 'Adequate plus' by the APNCU were deemed 'Inadequate' by the CTP. This suggests that, despite a high number of visits, these women did not receive the minimal recommended content and timing of care.ConclusionsThe CTP tool provides a more detailed assessment of the adequacy of antenatal care than the current standard index. However, guidelines for the content of antenatal care vary, and the tool does not at the moment grade over-use of interventions as 'Inappropriate'. Further work needs to be done to refine the content items prior to larger scale testing of the impact of the new measure.