OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to quantify patient populations and practice patterns at perinatal centers with the highest and lowest cesarean delivery rates. METHODS: The 2 perinatal centers in our state with the lowest (Hospital A-16.6%) and highest (Hospital B-20.3%) overall cesarean rates for Robson group 1 (term primigravidas, vertex, spontaneous labor) and group 2 (term primigravidas, vertex, induced labor) were identified. A total of 174 medical records at Hospital A and 150 records at Hospital B were reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed using independent-sample t tests, chi(2), and multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Indications for cesarean delivery were not different between the 2 groups, with the majority being for failure to progress in labor and nonreassuring fetal status. There were no differences between groups in rates of postpartum hemorrhage, chorioamnionitis, or endometritis. There were no differences in neonatal outcomes. Although women delivering in hospital A were not more likely to receive oxytocin augmentation (P = .291), their mean maximal oxytocin dosage was higher (14.5 units compared with 11.6 units, P < .001), and they were more likely to receive both fetal scalp electrodes (60.9% compared with 37.3%, P < .001) and intrauterine pressure catheters (63.8% compared with 26.0%, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Because safe reduction in cesarean delivery rates for primigravidas will proportionately reduce the number of repeat cesarean delivery required, benchmarking practices as described in this study can be considered in obstetric practices interested in long-term reductions of their cesarean delivery rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to quantify patient populations and practice patterns at perinatal centers with the highest and lowest cesarean delivery rates. METHODS: The 2 perinatal centers in our state with the lowest (Hospital A-16.6%) and highest (Hospital B-20.3%) overall cesarean rates for Robson group 1 (term primigravidas, vertex, spontaneous labor) and group 2 (term primigravidas, vertex, induced labor) were identified. A total of 174 medical records at Hospital A and 150 records at Hospital B were reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed using independent-sample t tests, chi(2), and multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Indications for cesarean delivery were not different between the 2 groups, with the majority being for failure to progress in labor and nonreassuring fetal status. There were no differences between groups in rates of postpartum hemorrhage, chorioamnionitis, or endometritis. There were no differences in neonatal outcomes. Although women delivering in hospital A were not more likely to receive oxytocin augmentation (P = .291), their mean maximal oxytocin dosage was higher (14.5 units compared with 11.6 units, P < .001), and they were more likely to receive both fetal scalp electrodes (60.9% compared with 37.3%, P < .001) and intrauterine pressure catheters (63.8% compared with 26.0%, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Because safe reduction in cesarean delivery rates for primigravidas will proportionately reduce the number of repeat cesarean delivery required, benchmarking practices as described in this study can be considered in obstetric practices interested in long-term reductions of their cesarean delivery rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Authors: Lorie M Harper; Anthony L Shanks; Methodius G Tuuli; Kimberly A Roehl; Alison G Cahill Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-04-02 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Ana Pilar Betrán; Nadia Vindevoghel; Joao Paulo Souza; A Metin Gülmezoglu; Maria Regina Torloni Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-06-03 Impact factor: 3.240