Literature DB >> 15228995

Cesarean delivery rates and neonatal morbidity in a low-risk population.

Jeffrey B Gould1, Beate Danielsen, Lisa M Korst, Roderic Phibbs, Kathy Chance, Elliott Main, David D Wirtschafter, David K Stevenson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the relationship between case-mix adjusted cesarean delivery rates and neonatal morbidity and mortality in infants born to low-risk mothers.
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used vital and administrative data for 748,604 California singletons born without congenital abnormalities in 1998-2000. A total of 282 institutions was classified as average-, low-, or high-cesarean delivery hospitals based on their cesarean delivery rate for mothers without a previous cesarean delivery, in labor at term, with no evidence of maternal, fetal, or placental complications. Neonatal mortality, diagnoses, and therapeutic interventions determined by International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes, and neonatal length of stay were compared across these hospital groupings.
RESULTS: Compared with average-cesarean delivery-rate hospitals, infants born to low-risk mothers at low-cesarean delivery hospitals had increased fetal hemorrhage, birth asphyxia, meconium aspiration syndrome, feeding problems, and electrolyte abnormalities (P <.02). Infused medication, pressors, transfusion for shock, mechanical ventilation, and length of stay were also increased (P <.001). This suggests that some infants born in low-cesarean delivery hospitals might have benefited from cesarean delivery. Infants delivered at high-cesarean delivery hospitals demonstrated increased fetal hemorrhage, asphyxia, birth trauma, electrolyte abnormalities, and use of mechanical ventilation (P <.001), suggesting that high cesarean delivery rates themselves are not protective.
CONCLUSION: Neonatal morbidity is increased in infants born to low-risk women who deliver at both low- and high-cesarean delivery-rate hospitals. The quality of perinatal care should be assessed in these outlier hospitals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15228995     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000127035.64602.97

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  13 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.  Hospital rates of maternal and neonatal infection in a low-risk population.

Authors:  Lisa M Korst; Moshe Fridman; Philippe S Friedlich; Michael C Lu; Carolina Reyes; Calvin J Hobel; Gilberto F Chavez; Kimberly D Gregory
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2005-09

3.  Factors associated with increased cesarean risk among African American women: evidence from California, 2010.

Authors:  Marco Huesch; Jason N Doctor
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2015-03-19       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  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

5.  Fetal congenital heart disease - mode of delivery and obstetrical complications.

Authors:  Keren Zloto; Alyssa Hochberg; Kinneret Tenenbaum-Gavish; Alexandra Berezowsky; Shiri Barbash-Hazan; Ron Bardin; Eran Hadar; Anat Shmueli
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 3.105

6.  Pelvic floor consequences of cesarean delivery on maternal request in women with a single birth: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Xiao Xu; Julie S Ivy; Divya A Patel; Sejal N Patel; Dean G Smith; Scott B Ransom; Dee Fenner; John O L Delancey
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.681

7.  Active management of risk in nulliparous pregnancy at term: association between a higher preventive labor induction rate and improved birth outcomes.

Authors:  James M Nicholson; Morghan H Stenson; Lisa C Kellar; Aaron B Caughey; George A Macones
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009-01-24       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Timing of planned caesarean section and the morbidities of the newborn.

Authors:  Mohammad Hourani; Fouad Ziade; Mariam Rajab
Journal:  N Am J Med Sci       Date:  2011-10

9.  Screening for inter-hospital differences in cesarean section rates in low-risk deliveries using administrative data: an initiative to improve the quality of care.

Authors:  Willem Aelvoet; Francis Windey; Geert Molenberghs; Hans Verstraelen; Patrick Van Reempts; Jean-Michel Foidart
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-01-04       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Using hospital discharge data for determining neonatal morbidity and mortality: a validation study.

Authors:  Jane B Ford; Christine L Roberts; Charles S Algert; Jennifer R Bowen; Barbara Bajuk; David J Henderson-Smart
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-11-20       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.