Literature DB >> 15725980

Rethinking the cesarean rate: how pregnancy complications may affect interhospital comparisons.

Lisa M Korst1, Jeffrey A Gornbein, Kimberly D Gregory.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The cesarean rate has served an integral role in the monitoring of obstetrical care, and in 2002, the national rate reached 26.1%, the highest ever reported.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe the effect of clinical complications on hospital cesarean rates. RESEARCH
DESIGN: This was a population-based cohort study.
SUBJECTS: All laboring women without a previous cesarean who delivered in California in 1995 as reported through public-use hospital discharge data were included. MEASURES: Women with and without maternal, fetal, or placental complications were compared with respect to cesarean use. Using recursive partitioning algorithms, women with complications were stratified into clinically homogeneous categories, which were analyzed separately with respect to cesarean use.
RESULTS: The 443,532 women delivered at 288 hospitals and included 116,170 women (26.2%) in the complicated group (cesarean rate 22.6%); and 327,362 women (73.8%) in the uncomplicated group (cesarean rate 6.7%). At the hospital level, the cesarean rates among the complicated and uncomplicated patients respectively were: median 23.5% (range, 2.2-9.9%); and median 6.5% (range, 1.8-18.2%). Recursive partitioning algorithms suggested 16 distinct clinical categories, with cesarean rates varying from 8.9% for women with asthma to 84.5% for women with an unengaged fetal head.
CONCLUSIONS: Cesarean rates varied widely across complication types, and complication-specific rates varied widely among hospitals. Although the presence of pregnancy complications upon hospital admission comprised the strongest factor affecting first-time cesarean use among laboring women, the importance and interdependence of these clinical conditions has yet to be incorporated into commonly used models for cesarean rate comparisons.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15725980     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200503000-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  12 in total

1.  Association between type of health insurance and elective cesarean deliveries: New Jersey, 2004-2007.

Authors:  Marco D Huesch
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2011-09-22       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of caesarean delivery rates in low-risk deliveries.

Authors:  Elisa Stivanello; Paola Rucci; Elisa Carretta; Giulia Pieri; Chiara Seghieri; Sabina Nuti; Eugene Declercq; Martina Taglioni; Maria Pia Fantini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-11-23       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony.

Authors:  Maria P Fantini; Elisa Stivanello; Brunella Frammartino; Anna P Barone; Danilo Fusco; Laura Dallolio; Paolo Cacciari; Carlo A Perucci
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2006-08-15       Impact factor: 2.655

4.  Risk-adjusted cesarean section rates for the assessment of physician performance in Taiwan: a population-based study.

Authors:  Chao-Hsiun Tang; Han-I Wang; Chun-Sen Hsu; Hung-Wen Su; Mei-Ju Chen; Herng-Ching Lin
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2006-10-09       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 5.  Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ilir Hoxha; Lamprini Syrogiannouli; Xhyljeta Luta; Kali Tal; David C Goodman; Bruno R da Costa; Peter Jüni
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 6.  Caesarean sections and private insurance: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ilir Hoxha; Lamprini Syrogiannouli; Medina Braha; David C Goodman; Bruno R da Costa; Peter Jüni
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Caesarean section in uninsured women in the USA: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ilir Hoxha; Medina Braha; Lamprini Syrogiannouli; David C Goodman; Peter Jüni
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-03-03       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Risk adjustment for cesarean delivery rates: how many variables do we need? An observational study using administrative databases.

Authors:  Elisa Stivanello; Paola Rucci; Elisa Carretta; Giulia Pieri; Maria P Fantini
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Determinants of cesarean delivery: a classification tree analysis.

Authors:  Elisa Stivanello; Paola Rucci; Jacopo Lenzi; Maria Pia Fantini
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-06-28       Impact factor: 3.007

Review 10.  A step-wise approach to developing indicators to compare the performance of maternity units using hospital administrative data.

Authors:  R S Geary; H E Knight; F E Carroll; I Gurol-Urganci; E Morris; D A Cromwell; J H van der Meulen
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 6.531

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.