Literature DB >> 19764843

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

W K Nicholson1, F Witter, N R Powe.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Efforts to improve health care outcomes in the United States have led some organizations to recommend specific hospital settings or case volumes for complex medical diagnoses and procedures. But there are few studies of the effect of setting and volume on maternal outcomes, particularly in complicated conditions, such as diabetes. Our objective was to estimate the effect of hospital setting and volume on childbirth morbidity and length of stay in pregnancies complicated by type 2 and gestational diabetes.
METHODS: We analyzed Maryland hospital discharge data during 1999-2004. The dependent variables were primary cesarean delivery, episiotomy, a composite variable for severe maternal morbidity, and hospital length of stay. The independent variables were hospital setting (community, non-teaching hospitals, community, teaching hospitals, and academic medical centers) and tertiles of annual hospital diabetes delivery volume. Multivariable regression analysis was used to assess the relation of hospital setting with each outcome, adjusting for hospital volume and maternal case mix.
RESULTS: 5,507 deliveries with type 2 (15%) and gestational (85%) diabetes were analyzed. Primary cesarean delivery rates among women with any diabetes did not vary across settings. After adjustment for volume and patient case mix, the likelihood of severe maternal morbidity was higher among deliveries at academic centers compared to community, non-teaching hospitals (odds ratio [OR], 2.1; 95% confidence interval: 1.0, 4.2). Academic centers had a protective effect (OR, 0.3; 95% CI: 0.2, 0.7) and community teaching hospitals had a borderline protective effect (OR, 0.8; 95% CI: 0.7, 1.0) on episiotomy, compared to community, non-teaching hospitals. Length of stay was greater at academic centers and community, teaching hospitals compared to community, non-teaching hospitals (5.4 days, 3.5 days vs. 2.8 days, respectively). We did not identify an independent association between hospital diabetes volume and clinical outcomes after adjustment for case mix.
CONCLUSIONS: Among women with type 2 and gestational diabetes, hospital setting is associated with a higher likelihood of severe maternal morbidity and length of stay, independent of volume. Patient case mix accounts for some of the variation across settings. The volume-outcome relationship found with other complex medical conditions or procedures was not found among diabetic pregnancies. Further investigations are needed to explain variations in outcomes across hospital settings and volumes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19764843      PMCID: PMC2864466          DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2008.1114

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)        ISSN: 1540-9996            Impact factor:   2.681


  37 in total

Review 1.  Type 2 diabetes in pregnancy: a growing concern.

Authors:  Denice S Feig; Valerie A Palda
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-05-11       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States.

Authors:  John D Birkmeyer; Andrea E Siewers; Emily V A Finlayson; Therese A Stukel; F Lee Lucas; Ida Batista; H Gilbert Welch; David E Wennberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-04-11       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Effect of academic affiliation and obstetric volume on clinical outcome and cost of childbirth.

Authors:  F A Garcia; H B Miller; G R Huggins; T A Gordon
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Are the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality obstetric trauma indicators valid measures of hospital safety?

Authors:  William A Grobman; Joe Feinglass; Sumithra Murthy
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 5.  Obstetric management in gestational diabetes.

Authors:  Deborah L Conway
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 19.112

6.  Surgical rates and operative mortality for open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Maryland.

Authors:  C A Steiner; E B Bass; M A Talamini; H A Pitt; E P Steinberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1994-02-10       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Physicians' perceptions of patients' social and behavioral characteristics and race disparities in treatment recommendations for men with coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Michelle van Ryn; Diana Burgess; Jennifer Malat; Joan Griffin
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2005-12-27       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 8.  Outcomes of routine episiotomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Katherine Hartmann; Meera Viswanathan; Rachel Palmieri; Gerald Gartlehner; John Thorp; Kathleen N Lohr
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-05-04       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Effect of hospital volume on maternal outcomes in women with prior cesarean delivery undergoing trial of labor.

Authors:  Jen Jen Chang; David M Stamilio; George A Macones
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2008-01-11       Impact factor: 4.897

10.  Level and volume of neonatal intensive care and mortality in very-low-birth-weight infants.

Authors:  Ciaran S Phibbs; Laurence C Baker; Aaron B Caughey; Beate Danielsen; Susan K Schmitt; Roderic H Phibbs
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-05-24       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  5 in total

1.  Inpatient dermatology consultations and the July effect: A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Sheena Tsai; Harib H Ezaldein; Rosalynn R Z Conic; Miesha Merati; Jeffrey F Scott
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2019-02-18       Impact factor: 11.527

2.  Association between ethnicity and prostate cancer outcomes across hospital and surgeon volume groups.

Authors:  Ravishankar Jayadevappa; Sumedha Chhatre; Jerry C Johnson; Stanley Bruce Malkowicz
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2010-08-13       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  The association between hospital obstetric volume and perinatal outcomes in California.

Authors:  Jonathan M Snowden; Yvonne W Cheng; Caitlin P Kontgis; Aaron B Caughey
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  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

5.  Health system factors and caesarean sections in Kosovo: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Ilir Hoxha; Alban Fejza; Mrika Aliu; Peter Jüni; David C Goodman
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-04-11       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.