Literature DB >> 10900580

Indications for labor induction. Differences between university and community hospitals.

L A Beebe1, W F Rayburn, C M Beaty, K L Eberly, J R Stanley, L A Rayburn.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the rates of and indications for labor induction between a university hospital and two community hospitals and to examine the risk of cesarean delivery among labor induction cases. STUDY
DESIGN: Labor induction cases over a six-month period were included (N = 536). Medical records were reviewed by a trained abstractor using a standardized form to determine maternal characteristics, reason for induction and perinatal outcomes.
RESULTS: Rates of labor induction were significantly different between the three hospitals: university, 18.2%; community hospital A, 21.4%; community hospital B, 33.7% (P < .001). At the university hospital, 95% of labor inductions were medically indicated using American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) criteria. Forty-four percent of labor inductions at community hospital A and 57% at community hospital B were for elective reasons. Cesarean rates among induction cases were highest at the university hospital (19%) as compared to community hospital A (15%) and community hospital B (11%), although the difference was not statistically significant. Parity, race and cervical status, but not elective induction, were significantly associated with cesarean delivery.
CONCLUSION: Labor induction was more frequent in community hospitals but more likely to meet ACOG-approved indications at the university hospital. The more-frequent inductions at the community hospitals did not result in higher cesarean rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10900580

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Reprod Med        ISSN: 0024-7758            Impact factor:   0.142


  4 in total

1.  Elective induction versus spontaneous labour in Latin America.

Authors:  Gláucia Virgínia Guerra; José Guilherme Cecatti; João Paulo Souza; Aníbal Faúndes; Sirlei Siani Morais; Ahmet Metin Gülmezoglu; Renato Passini; Mary Angela Parpinelli; Guillermo Carroli
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2011-07-05       Impact factor: 9.408

2.  Patient-Perceived Pressure from Clinicians for Labor Induction and Cesarean Delivery: A Population-Based Survey of U.S. Women.

Authors:  Judy Jou; Katy B Kozhimannil; Pamela Jo Johnson; Carol Sakala
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Epidemiologic considerations: scope of problem and disparity concerns.

Authors:  Darios Getahun
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.190

Review 4.  Factors that influence the practice of elective induction of labor: what does the evidence tell us?

Authors:  Jennifer Moore; Lisa Kane Low
Journal:  J Perinat Neonatal Nurs       Date:  2012 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.638

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.