IPIngrid A. Peters

Ingrid A. Peters

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article


Ingrid A. Peters has a total of 66 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Screening for financial vulnerability in a paediatric hospital setting: a pilot study of the Financial Risk Questionnaire (FRIQuest)

    by Ashley J. P. Smit, Bente Q. Alderlieste, Lequisha G. Suisse, Ingrid A. Peters, Nicole Lucassen, Koen F. M. Joosten

    Growing up in poverty can significantly influence child health and access to healthcare. Paediatric healthcare providers can play an important role in identifying families experiencing financial vulnerability. However, various barriers prevent standard poverty screening in paediatric care. To support this, we developed a digital financial vulnerability screening questionnaire: the Financial Risk Questionnaire (FRIQuest). This study describes its development and evaluates its implementation, perceived usefulness, acceptability, and user friendliness. This mixed-methods implementation study was conducted in a tertiary paediatric hospital in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Quantitative data included response rates, FRIQuest item responses, parent evaluation survey data, and healthcare provider compliance rates. Qualitative data were obtained through interviews with parents and paediatric healthcare providers. The FRIQuest was sent out to parents of 1206 unique patients. A total of 485 (40.2%) completed the FRIQuest, of whom 22.0% reported (sometimes) experiencing financial vulnerability. Parents generally found the questionnaire easy to complete and felt comfortable answering its questions. They considered it appropriate for healthcare providers to address financial vulnerability, preferably as part of a broader conversation about family wellbeing rather than as a stand-alone topic. Healthcare providers reported that the questionnaire was useful for identifying families in need and was feasible in clinical practice. However, various barriers affected response rates, healthcare compliance, and initiation of conversations. Conclusion : FRIQuest is a feasible, generally acceptable, and potentially useful digital questionnaire to support the identification of financial vulnerability in paediatric hospital care. This study highlights that successful implementation requires not only suitable questionnaires, but also inclusive implementation strategies, provider engagement and support, and access to social support. Future research should evaluate its impact on referrals to support services and socioeconomic inequalities in child health. What is Known: • Growing up in poverty is associated with poorer health and reduced access to healthcare. • Paediatricians can contribute to improving child health outcomes by addressing financial vulnerability within clinical care. However, various barriers prevent standard financial vulnerability screening. What is New: • The Financial Risk Questionnaire is a feasible and generally acceptable digital questionnaire to support identification of financial vulnerability in paediatric hospital care. • Besides suitable questionnaires, successful financial vulnerability screening requires inclusive implementation strategies, provider support, and organisational embedding.

  • Open Access

    Enhancing Clinicians’ Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study

    by Veerle van Engen, Igna Bonfrer, Kees Ahaus, Monique Den Hollander-Ardon, Ingrid Peters, Martina Buljac-Samardzic

    Background: Despite the increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for collecting self-reported data among hospital outpatients, clinicians’ use of these data remains suboptimal. Insight into this issue and strategies to enhance the use of PROMs are critical but limited. Objective: This study aimed to examine clinicians’ use of PROM data for value-based outpatient consultations and identify efforts to enhance their use of PROMs in a Dutch university hospital. First, we aimed to investigate clinicians’ use of outpatients’ PROM data in 2023, focusing on adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Second, we aimed to develop insights into the organizational-level strategies implemented to enhance clinicians’ use of PROM data from 2020 to 2023. This included understanding the underlying rationales for these strategies and identifying strategies that appeared to be missing to address barriers or leverage facilitators. Third, we aimed to explore the key factors driving and constraining clinicians’ use of PROMs in 2023. Methods: We integrated data from 4 sources: 1-year performance data on clinicians’ use of PROMs (n=70 subdepartments), internal hospital documents from a central support team (n=56), a survey among clinicians (n=47), and interviews with individuals contributing to the organizational-level implementation of PROMs (n=20). The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework was used to analyze clinicians’ adoption, implementation, and maintenance of PROMs. Strategies were analyzed using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy, and results were structured around the constructs of capability, opportunity, and motivation. Results: On average, around 2023, clinicians accessed PROM data for approximately 3 of 20 (14%) patients during their outpatient consultation, despite numerous strategies to improve this practice. We identified issues in adoption, implementation, and maintenance. The hospital’s strategies, shaped organically and pragmatically, were related to 27 (37%) out of 73 Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change strategies. These strategies focused on enhancing clinicians’ capability, opportunity, and motivation. We found shortcomings in the quality of execution and completeness of strategies in relation to addressing all barriers and leveraging facilitators. We identified variations in the factors influencing the use of PROMs among frequent PROM users, occasional users, and nonusers. Challenges to effective facilitation were apparent, with certain desired strategies being unfeasible or impeded. Conclusions: Enhancing clinicians’ use of PROMs has remained challenging despite various strategies aimed at improving their capability, opportunity, and motivation. The use of PROMs may require more substantial changes than initially expected, necessitating a shift in clinicians’ professional attitudes and practices. Hospitals can facilitate rather than manage clinicians’ genuine use of PROMs. They must prioritize efforts to engage clinicians with PROMs for value-based outpatient care. Specific attention to their professionalization may be warranted. Tailored strategies, designed to address within-group differences in clinicians’ needs and motivation, hold promise for future efforts.


  • Open Access

    A decade of change towards Value-Based Health Care at a Dutch University Hospital: a complexity-informed process study

    by Veerle van Engen, Martina Buljac-Samardzic, Rob Baatenburg de Jong, Jeffrey Braithwaite, Kees Ahaus, Monique Den Hollander-Ardon, Ingrid Peters, Igna Bonfrer

    Background: While healthcare organizations in several countries are embracing Value-Based Health Care (VBHC), there are limited insights into how to achieve this paradigm shift. This study examines the decade-long (2012–2023) change towards VBHC in a pioneering Dutch university hospital. Method: Through retrospective, complexity-informed process research, we study how a Dutch university hospital’s strategy to implement VBHC evolved, how implementation outcomes unfolded, and the underlying logic behind these developments. Data include the hospital’s internal documents (n = 10,536), implementation outcome indicators (n = 4), a survey among clinicians (n = 47), and interviews with individuals contributing to VBHC at the hospital level (n = 20). Results: The change towards VBHC is characterized by three sequential strategies. Initially, the focus was on deep change through local, tailored implementation of multiple VBHC elements. The strategy then transitioned to a hospital-wide program aimed at evolutionary change on a large scale, emphasizing the integration of VBHC into mainstream IT and policies. Recognizing the advantages and limitations of both strategies, the hospital currently adopts a “hybrid” strategy. This strategy delicately combines deep and broad change efforts. The strategy evolved based on accumulated insights, contextual developments and shifts in decision-makers. The complexity of change was downplayed in plans and stakeholder communication. By the end of 2023, 68 (sub)departments engaged in VBHC, enabled to discuss patients’ responses to Patient Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) during outpatient care. However, clinicians’ use of PROMs data showed limitations. While pioneers delved deeper into VBHC, laggards have yet to initiate it. Conclusions: VBHC does not lend itself to linear planning and is not easily scalable. While there appears to be no golden standard for implementation, blending local and larger-scale actions appears advantageous. Local, deep yet harmonized and system-integrated changes culminate in large scale transformation. Embracing complexity and focusing on the ultimate aims of (re)institutionalization and (re)professionalization are crucial.


  • Open Access

    Enhancing Clinicians’ Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study (Preprint)

    by Veerle van Engen, Igna Bonfrer, Kees Ahaus, Monique Den Hollander-Ardon, Ingrid Peters, Martina Buljac-Samardzic

    BACKGROUND Despite the increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for collecting self-reported data among hospital outpatients, clinicians’ use of these data remains suboptimal. Insight into this issue and strategies to enhance the use of PROMs are critical but limited. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to examine clinicians’ use of PROM data for value-based outpatient consultations and identify efforts to enhance their use of PROMs in a Dutch university hospital. First, we aimed to investigate clinicians’ use of outpatients’ PROM data in 2023, focusing on adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Second, we aimed to develop insights into the organizational-level strategies implemented to enhance clinicians’ use of PROM data from 2020 to 2023. This included understanding the underlying rationales for these strategies and identifying strategies that appeared to be missing to address barriers or leverage facilitators. Third, we aimed to explore the key factors driving and constraining clinicians’ use of PROMs in 2023. METHODS We integrated data from 4 sources: 1-year performance data on clinicians’ use of PROMs (n=70 subdepartments), internal hospital documents from a central support team (n=56), a survey among clinicians (n=47), and interviews with individuals contributing to the organizational-level implementation of PROMs (n=20). The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework was used to analyze clinicians’ adoption, implementation, and maintenance of PROMs. Strategies were analyzed using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy, and results were structured around the constructs of capability, opportunity, and motivation. RESULTS On average, around 2023, clinicians accessed PROM data for approximately 3 of 20 (14%) patients during their outpatient consultation, despite numerous strategies to improve this practice. We identified issues in adoption, implementation, and maintenance. The hospital’s strategies, shaped organically and pragmatically, were related to 27 (37%) out of 73 Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change strategies. These strategies focused on enhancing clinicians’ capability, opportunity, and motivation. We found shortcomings in the quality of execution and completeness of strategies in relation to addressing all barriers and leveraging facilitators. We identified variations in the factors influencing the use of PROMs among frequent PROM users, occasional users, and nonusers. Challenges to effective facilitation were apparent, with certain desired strategies being unfeasible or impeded. CONCLUSIONS Enhancing clinicians’ use of PROMs has remained challenging despite various strategies aimed at improving their capability, opportunity, and motivation. The use of PROMs may require more substantial changes than initially expected, necessitating a shift in clinicians’ professional attitudes and practices. Hospitals can facilitate rather than manage clinicians’ genuine use of PROMs. They must prioritize efforts to engage clinicians with PROMs for value-based outpatient care. Specific attention to their professionalization may be warranted. Tailored strategies, designed to address within-group differences in clinicians’ needs and motivation, hold promise for future efforts.

  • Open Access

    Factors involved in the decision to decline prenatal screening with noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT)

    by Lisanne van Prooyen Schuurman, Karuna van der Meij, Nicolien van Ravesteyn, Neeltje Crombag, Janneke Gitsels‐Van der Wal, Caroline Kooij, Linda Martin, Ingrid Peters, Marike Polak, Elsbeth van Vliet‐Lachotzki, et al.

    Objective: To investigate factors involved in the decision to decline prenatal screening with noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT).Method: A questionnaire study was conducted among 219 pregnant women in the Netherlands who had declined prenatal screening with NIPT (TRIDENT‐2 study). Respondents were selectively recruited from three hospitals and 19 midwifery practices, primarily located in or near socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods. 44.3% of the respondents were of non‐Western ethnic origin and 64.4% were religious.Results: Most respondents (77.2%) found the decision to decline NIPT easy to make, and 59.8% had already made the decision before information about NIPT was offered. These respondents were more often religious, multigravida, and had adequate health literacy. The main reasons to decline NIPT were “I would never terminate my pregnancy” (57.1%) and “every child is welcome” (56.2%). For 16.9% of respondents, the out‐of‐pocket costs (175 euros) played a role in the decision, and the women in this group were more often nonreligious, primigravida, and had inadequate health literacy.Conclusion: The primary factors involved in the decision to decline NIPT were related to personal values and beliefs, consistent with autonomous choice. Out‐of‐pocket costs of NIPT hinder equal access for some pregnant women.


  • Open Access

    Satisfaction with obstetric care in a population of low-educated native Dutch and non-western minority women. Focus group research

    by Ingrid A Peters, Anke G Posthumus, Eric A P Steegers, Semiha Denktaş

    Low-educated native Dutch and non-western minority women have inadequate access to obstetric care. Moreover, the care they receive lacks responsiveness to their needs and cultural competences. Gaining a deeper understanding of their experiences and satisfaction with antenatal, birthing and maternity care will help to adjust healthcare responsiveness to meet their needs during pregnancy, childbirth and the postpartum period. We combined the World Health Organization conceptual framework of healthcare responsiveness with focus group research to measure satisfaction with antenatal, birthing and maternity care of women with a low-educated native Dutch and non-western ethnic background. From September 2011 until December 2013, 106 women were recruited for 20 focus group sessions. Eighty-five percent of the women had a non-western immigrant background and 89% a low or intermediate educational attainment. The study population was mostly positive about the provided care during the antenatal phase. They were less positive about the other two phases of care. Moreover, the obstetric healthcare systems’ responsiveness in all phases of care (antenatal, birthing and maternity) did not meet these women’s needs. The ‘respect for persons’ domains ‘autonomy’, ‘communication’ and ‘dignity’ and the ‘client orientation’ domain ‘prompt attention’ were judged most negatively. The study findings give contextual meaning and starting points for improvement of responsiveness in the provision of obstetric care within a multi-ethnic women’s population.


  • Open Access

    Ethnicity and Language Proficiency Differences in the Provision of and Intention to Use Prenatal Screening for Down’s Syndrome and Congenital Anomalies. A Prospective, Non-selected, Register-Based Study in the Netherlands

    by Ingrid A. Peters, Kirsten M. Heetkamp, Nicolette T. C. Ursem, Eric A. P. Steegers, Semiha Denktaş, Maarten F. C. M. Knapen

    Objective We aimed to conduct an analysis of the associations between the information provision procedure of prenatal screening for Down’s syndrome and congenital anomalies and the intention to participate in prenatal screening (PS) of ethnicity groups and Dutch language proficiency groups. Design Using a prospective web-based registration form, we asked counselors (midwives, general practitioners, nurses and gynecologists) to report whether and how they offered information about PS to pregnant women. Duration The study was conducted from 2008 to 2010. Participants We collected data on the characteristics of the women who received an information offer about PS from counselors. Measurements Measures included socio-demographic and language proficiency level (LPL) characteristics, key elements of the provision procedure of PS, and intentional participation in PS. Findings The dataset represents 37% of the total population in the study area. Women with a non-native Dutch background and/or insufficient Dutch LPL received fewer information offers about PS, faced a reduced chance of receiving counseling, and showed lower intentional participation rates for PS. Key Conclusions Women with a non-native Dutch background and/or with an insufficient LPL are underserved in the Dutch PS program. These findings present evidence indicating that the fundamental principle of the Dutch Population Screening Act, namely, equal access to PS for all pregnant women, is not being realized. Implications for Practice Therefore, the study findings are important for national and international healthcare, policy makers and governmental professionals to allow ethnic and LPL-related differences in the provision and intentional uptake of PS.


  • Inequalities in uptake of prenatal screening according to ethnicity and socio‐economic status in the four largest cities of the Netherlands (2011–2013)

    by Anke G. Posthumus, Ingrid A. Peters, Gerard J. Borsboom, Maarten F. C. M. Knapen, Gouke J. Bonsel

    Objectives: In the Netherlands, all women are claimed to have equal access to prenatal screening (PS). Prior research demonstrated substantial inequalities in PS uptake associated with socioeconomic status (SES) and ethnic background. The suggested pathway was a lack of intention to participate in PS among these subgroups. We studied the background of inequalities in PS participation, challenging intention heterogeneity as the single explanation.Methods: Multivariable logistic regression analyses of the national PS registry, focusing on the four largest cities in the Netherlands (n = 4578, years 2011–2013), stratified by SES. Outcome measures: (1) any uptake of PS (yes/no) and (2) uptake (one/two tests) for women who intended to participate in two tests. Determinants included intention, ethnicity, practice, and age.Results: Of non‐Western women, 85.7% were screened versus 89.7% of Western women. Intention was an important explanatory factor in all models. However, after correction for intention, ethnicity remained a significant determinant for differences in uptake. Ethnicity and SES also interacted, indicating that non‐Western women in low SES areas had the lowest uptake (corrected for intention).Conclusions for Practice: Socioeconomic status and ethnicity related inequalities in PS uptake are only partially explained by intention heterogeneity; other pathways, in particular provider‐related determinants, may play a role. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.