Implementation of a cost-effective strategy to prevent neonatal early-onset group B haemolytic streptococcus disease in the Netherlands

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Margot AH Fleuren⁴  Christianne JM de Groot³  CPB Kitty van der Ploeg¹  M Elske van den Akker-van Marle²  Maurice GAJ Wouters³  Marlies EB Rijnders¹  Diny GE Kolkman³ 

[1] Department of Child Health, TNO, PO Box 2215, 2301 CE Leiden, The Netherlands;Department of Medical decision making, Leiden University Medical Center, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands;Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, VUmc, VU University Medical Centre, PO Box 7057 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Department of Life Style, TNO, PO Box 2215, 2301 CE Leiden, The Netherlands

关键词: Guidelines;    Implementation;    Dutch maternity care;    Prevention;    Early-onset Group B streptococcus;   

Others  :  1137925
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2393-13-155

 received in 2013-04-17, accepted in 2013-06-14,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Early-onset Group B haemolytic streptococcus infection (EOGBS) is an important cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality in the first week of life. Primary prevention of EOGBS is possible with intra-partum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP.) Different prevention strategies are used internationally based on identifying pregnant women at risk, either by screening for GBS colonisation and/or by identifying risk factors for EOGBS in pregnancy or labour. A theoretical cost-effectiveness study has shown that a strategy with IAP based on five risk factors (risk-based strategy) or based on a positive screening test in combination with one or more risk factors (combination strategy) was the most cost-effective approach in the Netherlands. IAP for all pregnant women with a positive culture in pregnancy (screening strategy) and treatment in line with the current Dutch guideline (IAP after establishing a positive culture in case of pre-labour rupture of membranes or preterm birth and immediate IAP in case of intra-partum fever, previous sibling with EOGBS or GBS bacteriuria), were not cost-effective. Cost-effectiveness was based on the assumption of 100% adherence to each strategy. However, adherence in daily practice will be lower and therefore have an effect on cost-effectiveness.

Method/Design

The aims are to: a.) implement the current Dutch guideline, the risk-based strategy and the combination strategy in three pilot regions and b.) study the effects of these strategies in daily practice. Regions where all the care providers in maternity care implement the allocated strategy will be randomised. Before the introduction of the strategy, there will be a pre-test (use of the current guideline) involving 105 pregnant women per region. This will be followed by a post-test (use of the allocated strategy) involving 315 women per region. The outcome measures are: 1.) adherence to the specific prevention strategy and the determinants of adherence among care providers and pregnant women, 2.) outcomes in pregnant women and their babies and 3.) the costs of each strategy in relation to the effects.

Discussion

This study will provide recommendations for the implementation of the most cost-effective prevention strategy for EOGBS in the Netherlands on the basis of feasibility in daily practice.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Register, NTR3965

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Kolkman et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Trijbels-Smeulders M, Gerards LJ, PC M, De Jong P, Van Lingen RA, Adriaanse AH, De Jonge GA, Kollee LA: Epidemiology of neonatal group B streptococcal disease in The Netherlands 1997–98. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2002, 16(4):334-341.
• [2]Benitz WE, Gould JB, Druzin ML: Antimicrobial prevention of early-onset group B streptococcal sepsis: estimates of risk reduction based on a critical literature review. Pediatrics 1999, 103(6):e78.
• [3]Heath PT, Balfour G, Weisner AM, Efstratiou A, Lamagni TL, Tighe H, O'Connell LA, Cafferkey M, Verlander NQ, Nicoll A, McCartney AC, PHLS Group B Streptococcus Working Group: Group B streptococcal disease in UK and Irish infants younger than 90 days. Lancet 2004, 363(9405):292-294.
• [4]Money DM, Dobson S, Canadian Paediatric Society, Infectious Diseases Commitee: The prevention of early-onset neonatal group B streptococcal disease. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2004, 26(9):826-840.
• [5]Perinatal registration Netherlands: Data obtained from the Perinatal registration Netherlands. PRN 2007. http://www.perinatreg.nl webcite
• [6]Verani JR, McGee L, Schrag SJ, Division of Bacterial Diseases: Prevention of perinatal group B streptococcal disease--revised guidelines from CDC, 2010. MMWR Recomm Rep 2010, 59(RR-10):1-36.
• [7]Andersen J, Christensen R, Hertel J: Clinical features and epidemiology of septicaemia and meningitis in neonates due to Streptococcus agalactiae in Copenhagen County, Denmark: a 10 year survey from 1992 to 2001. Acta Paediatr 2004, 93(10):1334-1339.
• [8]Bergseng H, Rygg M, Bevanger L, Bergh K: Invasive group B streptococcus (GBS) disease in Norway 1996–2006. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2008, 27(12):1193-1199.
• [9]Fluegge K, Siedler A, Heinrich B, Schulte-Moenting J, Moennig MJ, Bartels DB, Dammann O, Von Kries R, Berner R, German Pediatric Surveillance Unit Study Group: Incidence and clinical presentation of invasive neonatal group B streptococcal infections in Germany. Pediatrics 2006, 117(6):e1139-e1145.
• [10]Lyytikainen O, Nuorti JP, Halmesmaki E, Carlson P, Uotila J, Vuento R, Ranta T, Sarkkinen H, Ammala M, Kostiala A, Jarvenpaa AL: Invasive group B streptococcal infections in Finland: a population-based study. Emerg Infect Dis 2003, 9(4):469-473.
• [11]Neto MT: Group B streptococcal disease in Portuguese infants younger than 90 days. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2008, 93(2):F90-F93.
• [12]Simetka O, Petros M, Podesvova H: Prevention of early-onset neonatal group B streptococcal infection: neonatal outcome after introduction of national screening guideline. Ceska Gynekol 2010, 75(1):41-46.
• [13]Trijbels-Smeulders M, De Jonge GA, Pasker-de Jong PC, Gerards LJ, Adriaanse AH, Van Lingen RA, Kollee LA: Epidemiology of neonatal group B streptococcal disease in the Netherlands before and after introduction of guidelines for prevention. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2007, 92(4):F271-F276.
• [14]Georges S, Antona D, Goulet V, Six C, Judlin P, Jourdan-Da Silva N, Levy-Bruhl D: Infections néonatales à streptocoque B en France: données d'incidence de 1997 à 2006 et pratiques de prévention en maternité. Bulletin épidémiologique hebdomadaire, BEH 2008, 14–15:110-113.
• [15]Stoll BJ, Hansen NI, Sanchez PJ, Faix RG, Poindexter BB, Van Meurs KP, Bizzarro MJ, Goldberg RN, Frantz ID III, Hale EC, Shankaran S, Kennedy K, Carlo WA, Watterberg KL, Bell EF, Walsh MC, Schibler K, Laptook AR, Shane AL, Schrag SJ, Das A, Higgins RD, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network: Early onset neonatal sepsis: the burden of group B Streptococcal and E. coli disease continues. Pediatrics 2011, 127(5):817-826.
• [16]Vergnano S, Embleton N, Collinson A, Menson E, Russell AB, Heath P: Missed opportunities for preventing group B streptococcus infection. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2010, 95(1):F72-F73.
• [17]Berardi A, Lugli L, Baronciani D, Creti R, Rossi K, Ciccia M, Gambini L, Mariani S, Papa I, Serra L, Tridapalli E, Ferrari F, GBS Prevention Working Group of Emilia-Romagna: Group B streptococcal infections in a northern region of Italy. Pediatrics 2007, 120(3):e487-e493.
• [18]Berardi A, Lugli L, Baronciani D, Rossi C, Ciccia M, Creti R, Gambini L, Mariani S, Papa I, Tridapalli E, Vagnarelli F, Ferrari F, GBS Prevention Working Group of Emilia-Romagna: Group B Streptococcus early-onset disease in Emilia-romagna: review after introduction of a screening-based approach. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010, 29(2):115-121.
• [19]Nederlandse Vereniging voor Obstetrie en Gynaecologie (NVOG): Preventie van neonatale groep-B-streptokokkenziekte (GBS ziekte) versie 2.0. [Guideline on prevention of neonatal group B streptococcal disesase version 2.0] available at: [http://www.nvog-documenten.nl/index.php?pagina=/richtlijn/item/pagina.php&id=26959&richtlijn_id=827 webcite]
• [20]Akker-van Marle ME, Rijnders ME, Dommelen P, Fekkes M, Wouwe JP, Amelink-Verburg MP, Verkerk PH: Cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies with intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent early-onset group B streptococcal disease. BJOG 2005, 112(6):820-826.
• [21]Grol R, Wensing M, Eccles M: lmproving patient care: the implementation of change in clinical practice. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2005.
• [22]Guldbrandsson K: From news to everyday use. In The difficult art of implementation. Östersund: Swedish National Institute for Public Health; 2008. 978-91-7257-553-0
• [23]Fleuren M, Wiefferink K, Paulussen T: Determinants of innovation within health care organizations: literature review and Delphi study. Int J Qual Health Care 2004, 16(2):107-123.
• [24]Fleuren MAH, Paulussen TGWM, Van Dommelen P, Van Buuren S: Ontwikkeling van Meetinstrument voor Determinanten van Innovaties (MIDI). 2012. [Development of Measuring Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI)] TNO 2012 R10625
• [25]Paulussen T: Adoption and implementation of AIDS education in Dutch secondary schools. Utrecht Dutch centre for Health promotion and health education: PhD. University of Maastricht; 1994.
• [26]Fleuren M: Managing (imminent) miscarriage in primary health care. Amsterdam: PhD. Vrije Universiteit; 1997.
• [27]Crone MR, Verlaan M, Willemsen MC, van Soelen P, Reijneveld SA, Sing RA, Paulussen TG: Sustainability of the prevention of passive infant smoking within well-baby clinics. Health Educ Behav 2006, 33(2):178-196.
• [28]Fleuren M, Dusseldorp E, van den Bergh S, Vlek H, Wildschut J, van den Akker E, Wijkel D: Implementation of a shared care guideline for back pain: effect on unnecessary referrals. Int J Qual Health Care 2010, 22(5):415-420.
• [29]Vlemmix F, Rosman AN, Fleuren MA, Rijnders ME, Beuckens A, Haak MC, Akerboom BM, Bais JM, Kuppens SM, Papatsonis DN, Opmeer BC, van der Post JA, Mol BW, Kok M: Implementation of the external cephalic version in breech delivery. Dutch national implementation study of external cephalic version. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2010, 10:20-2393. 10-20 BioMed Central Full Text
• [30]De Veer AJ, Fleuren MA, Bekkema N, Francke AL: Successful implementation of new technologies in nursing care: a questionnaire survey of nurse-users. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2011, 11:67-6947. 11-67 BioMed Central Full Text
• [31]Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O: Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004, 82(4):581-629.
• [32]Fixsen DL, Naoom SF, Blase KA, Friedman RM, Wallace F: Implementation research: a synthesis of the literature. Tampa, Florida: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National implementation Research Network; 2005.
• [33]Bartholomew LK, Parcel GS, Kok G, Gottlieb NH: Planning health promotion programs: an intervention mapping approach. San Franscisco: Jossey Bass; 2006.
• [34]Mulder-Folkerts DK, van den Hoek JA, van der Bij AK, Boer K, Schutte MF, Coutinho RA: Less refusal to participate in HIV screening among pregnant women in the Amsterdam region since the introduction of standard HIV screening using the opting-out method. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2004, 148(41):2035-2037.
• [35]Behjati S, Prentice P, Rennie J: Management of Group B streptococcal sepsis risk in well, term newborns. Acta Paediatr 2012, 101(2):128-131.