Literature DB >> 15738031

Clinical case mix adjustment of cesarean delivery rates in U.S. military hospitals, 2002.

Andrea Linton1, Michael R Peterson, Thomas V Williams.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether significant variations in observed cesarean rates in U.S. military hospitals may be attributed to differences in clinical case mix.
METHODS: Hospital discharge records for births in U.S. military hospitals in 2002 were grouped into mutually exclusive clinical strata to calculate predicted cesarean rates for subgroups defined by maternal race, health plan, hospital location, delivery volume, teaching status, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) status. The 95% confidence interval (CI) around each standardized ratio (SR) of the observed-to-predicted cesarean rate was used to assess statistical significance.
RESULTS: Observed cesarean rates were significantly higher than predicted rates for small hospitals (23.1% and 20.4%, respectively, SR 1.13, 95% CI 1.08-1.19), teaching hospitals (23.7% and 22.5%, respectively, SR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.08), black women (25.1% and 22.8%, respectively, SR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.14), and other minorities (22.7%, and 21.6%, respectively, SR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09). No significant differences between observed and predicted cesarean rates were found across hospital locations or NICU status. Significant differences found for non-managed care beneficiaries were attributed to teaching status of the hospitals in which they delivered.
CONCLUSION: Clinical case mix does not adequately account for the relatively high rates of cesarean delivery observed for small hospitals and teaching hospitals and among black women in the study population. Further study is recommended to identify additional clinical and nonclinical factors that should be considered when comparing performance across institutions, health plans, or individual providers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15738031     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000149158.21586.58

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


  7 in total

1.  Effect of hospital setting and volume on clinical outcomes in women with gestational and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  W K Nicholson; F Witter; N R Powe
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 2.681

2.  Racial and ethnic differences in indication for primary cesarean delivery at term: experience at one U.S. Institution.

Authors:  Sierra Washington; Aaron B Caughey; Yvonne W Cheng; Allison S Bryant
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 3.689

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.  Maternal clinical diagnoses and hospital variation in the risk of cesarean delivery: analyses of a National US Hospital Discharge Database.

Authors:  Katy B Kozhimannil; Mariana C Arcaya; S V Subramanian
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 11.069

5.  Case mix adjustment of health outcomes, resource use and process indicators in childbirth care: a register-based study.

Authors:  Johan Mesterton; Peter Lindgren; Anna Ekenberg Abreu; Lars Ladfors; Monica Lilja; Sissel Saltvedt; Isis Amer-Wåhlin
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  Caesarean sections in teaching hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis of hospitals in 22 countries.

Authors:  Ilir Hoxha; Esra Zhubi; Krenare Grezda; Blerta Kryeziu; Jeta Bunjaku; Fitim Sadiku; Riaz Agahi; Daniel Adrian Lungu; Manila Bonciani; George Little
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Hospital differences in cesarean deliveries in Massachusetts (US) 2004-2006: the case against case-mix artifact.

Authors:  Isabel A Cáceres; Mariana Arcaya; Eugene Declercq; Candice M Belanoff; Vanitha Janakiraman; Bruce Cohen; Jeffrey Ecker; Lauren A Smith; S V Subramanian
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-18       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.