Use of quality indicators by obstetric caregivers in the Netherlands: A descriptive study

Publication date

2017-04-01

Authors

Cellissen, Evelien
Franx, ArieISNI 0000000396875911
Roes, Kit C BORCID 0000-0002-6775-1963ISNI 0000000040154793

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article

Collections

Open Access logo

License

taverne

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the use of quality indicators by obstetric caregivers in hospitals in the Netherlands. Study design An anonymous, self-administered survey was conducted in a convenience sample of obstetricians and clinical midwives in Dutch hospitals. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data, both for all caregivers and stratified by hospital setting and profession (obstetricians and midwives). Differences between strata were tested at a 5% significance level. Results The response rate to the online questionnaire was 61% (n = 171/279). Of all respondents 83% were aware of the quality indicators and 63% contributed to their registration. Caregivers received information about the indicators by mail or in meetings according to 64% (internal indicators) and 48% (external indicators) of the respondents. Of the respondents 56% (internal indicators) and 41% (external indicators) stated to use the results of indicators when designing plans to improve the quality of care. Conclusion We conclude that obstetric quality indicators are not widely used by obstetricians and midwives in Dutch hospitals to improve quality of care. To improve quality of care and the effective use of quality indicators we suggest to focus first on registering outcome indicators. These indicators should be implemented in quality structures that ensure that action is taken.

Keywords

Obstetrics, Quality improvement, Quality indicators, Quality of care, Taverne, Reproductive Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Journal Article

Citation

Cellissen, E, Franx, A & Roes, K C B 2017, 'Use of quality indicators by obstetric caregivers in the Netherlands : A descriptive study', European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, vol. 211, pp. 177-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.02.016