Literature DB >> 12237654

Hospital primary cesarean delivery rates and the risk of poor neonatal outcomes.

Jennifer L Bailit1, Joanne M Garrett, William C Miller, Michael J McMahon, Robert C Cefalo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether risk-adjusted hospital primary cesarean delivery rates are associated with poor neonatal outcomes. STUDY
DESIGN: The Washington State Birth Events Records for 1995 and 1996 were used. Predicted primary cesarean delivery rates were calculated for each hospital. Women were divided by whether the hospital had an actual primary cesarean delivery rate below, within, or greater than the predicted CI. Asphyxia (a lack of oxygen that leads to organ damage) was used as a marker of poor neonatal outcome. Risk of neonatal asphyxia was compared for each of the 3 cesarean rating groups.
RESULTS: The risk for asphyxia among infants who were born to women who delivered at hospitals that had more, within, or fewer cesarean deliveries than predicted were 0.58%, 0.17%, and 0.33%, respectively (P <.0001).
CONCLUSION: Infants born to women who delivered at hospitals that had more than or fewer than the predicted number of primary cesarean deliveries experienced a greater risk of neonatal asphyxia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12237654     DOI: 10.1067/mob.2002.125886

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  9 in total

1.  The role of race in cesarean delivery rate case mix adjustment.

Authors:  Jennifer L Bailit; Thomas E Love
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 8.661

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.  Evaluating risk-adjusted cesarean delivery rate as a measure of obstetric quality.

Authors:  Sindhu K Srinivas; Corinne Fager; Scott A Lorch
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Cesarean delivery rates vary tenfold among US hospitals; reducing variation may address quality and cost issues.

Authors:  Katy Backes Kozhimannil; Michael R Law; Beth A Virnig
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 6.301

5.  Risk-adjusted operative delivery rates and maternal-neonatal outcomes as measures of quality assessment in obstetric care: a multicenter prospective study.

Authors:  Gianpaolo Maso; Lorenzo Monasta; Monica Piccoli; Luca Ronfani; Marcella Montico; Francesco De Seta; Sara Parolin; Caterina Businelli; Laura Travan; Salvatore Alberico
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  Ever-increasing Caesarean section and its economic burden in Bangladesh.

Authors:  Mohammad Rifat Haider; Mohammad Masudur Rahman; Md Moinuddin; Ahmed Ehsanur Rahman; Shakil Ahmed; M Mahmud Khan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-10       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Maternal quality and safety outcomes for Asians and Pacific Islanders in Hawai'i: an observational study from five years of statewide data.

Authors:  Tetine Sentell; Ann Chang; Yongjun Cheng; Jill Miyamura
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-08-30       Impact factor: 3.007

8.  Factors associated with the need for ventilation at birth of neonates weighing ≥2,500 g.

Authors:  José Roberto Pereira de Sousa; Álvaro Jorge Madeiro Leite; Adriana Sanudo; Ruth Guinsburg
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 2.365

9.  Cesarean Section and Maternal-fetal Mortality Rates in Nigeria: An Ecological Lens into the Last Decade.

Authors:  Hadiza Galadanci; Deepa Dongarwar; Wolfgang Künzel; Oladapo Shittu; Murtala Yusuf; Sadiq Abdurrahman; Dolapo Lufadeju; Hamisu M Salihu
Journal:  Int J MCH AIDS       Date:  2020-03-06
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.