{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,3]],"date-time":"2026-08-03T16:19:21Z","timestamp":1785773961391,"version":"3.56.0"},"reference-count":33,"publisher":"Public Library of Science (PLoS)","issue":"8","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,18]],"date-time":"2025-08-18T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1755475200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"funder":[{"name":"Koninklijke Nederlandse Organisatie van Verloskundigen","award":["2012862"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["2012862"]}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["www.plosone.org"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["PLoS One"],"abstract":"<jats:sec id=\"sec001\">\n<jats:title>Objective<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>To examine the experiences, perspectives, and impact on daily work of maternity care providers regarding the updated Dutch national guideline on the management of late-term pregnancies.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec id=\"sec002\">\n<jats:title>Design and setting<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>This was a cross-sectional survey for maternity care providers in the Netherlands in 2024.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec id=\"sec003\">\n<jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>An online questionnaire was developed, improved on the basis of four semi-structured interviews, piloted, and distributed to primary care and hospital-based midwives, residents, and obstetricians. A 5-point Likert Scale was used for most questions. Descriptive analyses and data visualisation were performed. Linear regressions were performed to assess the association between characteristics and agreement with and adherence to the recommendations. The main outcome measures were awareness of the guideline, agreement with and adherence to the recommendations, opinions and perspectives on the impact of the guideline, and experiences of participants regarding the guideline.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec id=\"sec004\">\n<jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>A total of 643 care providers were included, of whom 53% were primary care midwives, 29% obstetricians\/residents and 19% hospital-based midwives. There was 72% agreement and 87% adherence to \u201coffer induction of labour (IOL) at 41 weeks alongside expectant management\u201d. Although 92% agreed with \u201cdiscuss the advantages and disadvantages\u201d, only 67% agreed with \u201cspecify perinatal outcomes\u201d and 63% agreed with \u201cspecify outcomes for nulliparous versus multiparous women\u201d. Adherence to these and to recommendations regarding monitoring were lower (43\u201359%). There was uncertainty among 45% about the benefits of the guideline, with only 17% believing in maternal and 20% believing in neonatal benefits.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec id=\"sec005\">\n<jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>Care providers widely agreed with and adhered to the recommendation to offer IOL at 41 weeks, but adherence to specific elements of shared decision-making was lower, and care providers expressed limited confidence on the benefits of the policy for mother and child.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0329843","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,18]],"date-time":"2025-08-18T17:38:43Z","timestamp":1755538723000},"page":"e0329843","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.corrections_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["Maternity care providers\u2019 perspectives on late-term gestation management (LATE-study): A cross-sectional survey"],"prefix":"10.1371","volume":"20","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-5946-2205","authenticated-orcid":true,"given":"Anna E.","family":"Seijmonsbergen-Schermers","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Fatima","family":"Hammiche","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Hannah","family":"de Klerk","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Judit K.J.","family":"Keulen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-8150-2835","authenticated-orcid":true,"given":"Caroline J.","family":"Bax","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Lilian L.","family":"Peters","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Corine J.","family":"Verhoeven","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"340","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,18]]},"reference":[{"issue":"3","key":"pone.0329843.ref001","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"407","DOI":"10.1111\/ajo.13486","article-title":"Five-year trends in induction of labour in a large Australian metropolitan maternity service","volume":"62","author":"C O\u2019 Sullivan","year":"2022","journal-title":"Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol"},{"issue":"4","key":"pone.0329843.ref002","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"235","DOI":"10.1097\/NMC.0000000000000824","article-title":"Trends in Labor Induction in the United States, 1989 to 2020","volume":"47","author":"KR Simpson","year":"2022","journal-title":"MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs"},{"issue":"2","key":"pone.0329843.ref003","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"158","DOI":"10.1111\/aogs.14489","article-title":"Is the increasing prevalence of labor induction accompanied by changes in pregnancy outcomes? An observational study of all singleton births at gestational weeks 37-42 in Norway during 1999-2019","volume":"102","author":"C Haavaldsen","year":"2023","journal-title":"Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"},{"issue":"12","key":"pone.0329843.ref004","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1422","DOI":"10.1111\/aogs.14447","article-title":"Trends in labor induction indications: A 20-year population-based study","volume":"101","author":"EM Swift","year":"2022","journal-title":"Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"},{"issue":"1","key":"pone.0329843.ref005","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"98","DOI":"10.1111\/birt.12765","article-title":"Trends in postpartum hemorrhage and manual removal of the placenta and the association with childbirth interventions: A Dutch nationwide cohort study","volume":"51","author":"AE Seijmonsbergen-Schermers","year":"2024","journal-title":"Birth"},{"issue":"1","key":"pone.0329843.ref006","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0228196","article-title":"A systematic scoping review of clinical indications for induction of labour","volume":"15","author":"D Coates","year":"2020","journal-title":"PLoS One"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref007","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"100479","DOI":"10.1016\/j.srhc.2019.100479","article-title":"Which level of risk justifies routine induction of labor for healthy women?","volume":"23","author":"AE Seijmonsbergen-Schermers","year":"2020","journal-title":"Sex Reprod Healthc"},{"issue":"6","key":"pone.0329843.ref008","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"513","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1800566","article-title":"Labor Induction versus Expectant Management in Low-Risk Nulliparous Women","volume":"379","author":"WA Grobman","year":"2018","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"1","key":"pone.0329843.ref009","article-title":"Planned early birth versus expectant management (waiting) for prelabour rupture of membranes at term (37 weeks or more)","volume":"1","author":"P Middleton","year":"2017","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"issue":"12","key":"pone.0329843.ref010","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1003436","article-title":"Induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks: A systematic review and an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised trials","volume":"17","author":"M Alkmark","year":"2020","journal-title":"PLoS Med"},{"issue":"8","key":"pone.0329843.ref011","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"870","DOI":"10.1055\/a-1519-7713","article-title":"Induction of Labour. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k, AWMF Registry No.\u2009015-088, December 2020)","volume":"81","author":"S Kehl","year":"2021","journal-title":"Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref012","unstructured":"National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Inducing labour. NICE guideline [NG207] 2021. Available from: https:\/\/www.nice.org.uk\/guidance\/NG207"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref013","unstructured":"Ministry of Health New Zealand (Manatu Hauora). Induction of Labour in Aotearoa New Zealand: A Clinical Practice Guideline 2019 2021. Available from: https:\/\/www.health.govt.nz\/publication\/induction-labour-aotearoa-new-zealand-clinical-practice-guideline-2019"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref014","unstructured":"Morken NH, Haavaldsen C, Heimstad R, Murzakanova G, Stokke AM. Overtidig svangerskap 2020. Available from: https:\/\/www.legeforeningen.no\/foreningsledd\/fagmed\/norsk-gynekologisk-forening\/veiledere\/veileder-i-fodselshjelp\/overtidig-svangerskap\/"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref015","unstructured":"Polish Society of Gynecologists and Obstetricians. Rekomendacje Polskiego Towarzystwa Ginekolog\u00f3w. i Po\u0142o\u017cnik\u00f3w dotycza\u0328ce indukcji porodu. Aktualizacja 2021 2021. Available from: https:\/\/www.ptgin.pl\/sites\/scm\/files\/2022-01\/10.2021%20Rekomendacje%20Polskiego%20Towarzystwa%20Ginekolog%C3%B3w%20i%20Po%C5%82o%C5%BCnik%C3%B3w%20dotycz%C4%85ce%20indukcji%20porodu.%20Aktualizacja%202021_0.pdf"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref016","unstructured":"Federatie Medisch Specialisten. Beleid zwangerschap 41 weken 2021. Available from: https:\/\/richtlijnendatabase.nl\/richtlijn\/beleid_zwangerschap_41_weken\/beleid_zwangerschap_vanaf_41_weken.html."},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref017","article-title":"Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management until 42 weeks (INDEX): multicentre, randomised non-inferiority trial","volume":"364","author":"JK Keulen","year":"2019","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref018","article-title":"Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial","volume":"367","author":"U-B Wennerholm","year":"2019","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"6","key":"pone.0329843.ref019","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"768","DOI":"10.1111\/ajo.13718","article-title":"Barriers and enablers to implementing an induction of labour guideline: A clinician survey","volume":"63","author":"S John","year":"2023","journal-title":"Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol"},{"issue":"10","key":"pone.0329843.ref020","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1122","DOI":"10.1016\/j.midw.2013.07.007","article-title":"What does it take to have a strong and independent profession of midwifery? Lessons from the Netherlands","volume":"29","author":"R De Vries","year":"2013","journal-title":"Midwifery"},{"issue":"3","key":"pone.0329843.ref021","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"216","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmwh.2010.01.001","article-title":"Pregnancy and labour in the Dutch maternity care system: what is normal? The role division between midwives and obstetricians","volume":"55","author":"MP Amelink-Verburg","year":"2010","journal-title":"J Midwifery Womens Health"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref022","unstructured":"Castor EDC. Castor Electronic Data Capture 2019. Available from: https:\/\/castoredc.com"},{"issue":"1","key":"pone.0329843.ref023","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2392160","DOI":"10.1080\/0167482X.2024.2392160","article-title":"Validation of the Birth Beliefs Scale for maternity care professionals in The Netherlands","volume":"45","author":"DC Zondag","year":"2024","journal-title":"J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref024","article-title":"Shared decision-making on late-term gestation management (LATE-study): a cross-sectional survey among maternity care providers","author":"AE Seijmonsbergen-Schermers","year":"2025","journal-title":"Submitted"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref025","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"169","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2023.08.017","article-title":"The barriers and facilitators for the implementation of clinical practice guidelines in healthcare: an umbrella review of qualitative and quantitative literature","volume":"162","author":"P Zhou","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"issue":"2","key":"pone.0329843.ref026","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"161","DOI":"10.1111\/jmwh.13168","article-title":"The Attitudes and Beliefs of Australian Midwives and Obstetricians About Birth Options and Labor Interventions","volume":"66","author":"D Coates","year":"2021","journal-title":"J Midwifery Womens Health"},{"issue":"4","key":"pone.0329843.ref027","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"352","DOI":"10.1016\/j.wombi.2020.07.003","article-title":"Exploring unwarranted clinical variation: The attitudes of midwives and obstetric medical staff regarding induction of labour and planned caesarean section","volume":"34","author":"C Dominiek","year":"2021","journal-title":"Women Birth"},{"issue":"4","key":"pone.0329843.ref028","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"270","DOI":"10.7326\/M14-0295","article-title":"Evidence-based risk communication: a systematic review","volume":"161","author":"DA Zipkin","year":"2014","journal-title":"Ann Intern Med"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref029","first-page":"100165","article-title":"Elective induction of labour and expectant management in late-term pregnancy: A prospective cohort study alongside the INDEX randomised controlled trial","volume":"16","author":"A Bruinsma","year":"2022","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X"},{"issue":"5","key":"pone.0329843.ref030","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"612","DOI":"10.1111\/aogs.14536","article-title":"Does induction of labor at 41\u2009weeks (early, mid or late) improve birth outcomes in low-risk pregnancy? A nationwide propensity score-matched study","volume":"102","author":"ACJ Ravelli","year":"2023","journal-title":"Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"},{"key":"pone.0329843.ref031","first-page":"100339","article-title":"Foeto-Maternal outcomes of pregnancies beyond 41 weeks of gestation after induced or spontaneous labour","volume":"24","author":"S Turkmen","year":"2024","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X"},{"issue":"12","key":"pone.0329843.ref032","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2019-032815","article-title":"Routine induction in late-term pregnancies: follow-up of a Danish induction of labour paradigm","volume":"9","author":"E Rydahl","year":"2019","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"issue":"2","key":"pone.0329843.ref033","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"242","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000005217","article-title":"Effects of the ARRIVE (A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management) Trial on Elective Induction and Obstetric Outcomes in Term Nulliparous Patients","volume":"142","author":"E Nethery","year":"2023","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"}],"container-title":["PLOS One"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/dx.plos.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0329843","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,18]],"date-time":"2025-08-18T17:38:49Z","timestamp":1755538729000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/dx.plos.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0329843"}},"subtitle":[],"editor":[{"given":"Patrick Ifeanyi","family":"Okonta","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"editor"}]}],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,18]]},"references-count":33,"journal-issue":{"issue":"8","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,18]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0329843","relation":{},"ISSN":["1932-6203"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1932-6203","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,18]]}}}