Literature DB >> 22422056

Evaluating the effect of hospital and insurance type on the risk of 1-year mortality of very low birth weight infants: controlling for selection bias.

Songthip Ounpraseuth1, C Heath Gauss, Janet Bronstein, Curtis Lowery, Richard Nugent, Richard Hall.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We examined the effect of hospital type and medical coverage on the risk of 1-year mortality of very low birth weight (VLBW) infants while adjusting for possible selection bias.
METHODS: The study population was limited to singleton live birth infants having birth weight between 500 and 1500 g with no congenital anomalies who were born in Arkansas hospitals between 2001 and 2007. Propensity score (PS) matching and PS covariate adjustment were used to mitigate selection bias. In addition, a conventional multivariable logistic regression model was used for comparison purposes.
RESULTS: Generally, all 3 analytical approaches provided consistent results in terms of the estimated relative risk, absolute risk reduction, and the number needed to treat. Using the PS matching method, VLBW infants delivered at a hospital with a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) were associated with a 35% relative decrease (95% bootstrap confidence interval, 18.5%-48.9%) in the risk of 1-year mortality as compared with those infants delivered at non-NICU hospitals. Furthermore, our results showed that on average, 16 VLBW infants (95% bootstrap confidence interval, 11-32), would need to be delivered at a hospital with an NICU to prevent 1 additional death at 1 year. However, there was not a difference in the risk of 1-year mortality between VLBW infants born to Medicaid-insured versus non-Medicaid-insured women.
CONCLUSIONS: Estimated relative risk of infant mortality was significantly lower for births that occurred in hospitals with an NICU; therefore, greater efforts should be made to deliver VLBW neonates in an NICU hospital.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22422056      PMCID: PMC3306601          DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318245a128

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


  35 in total

1.  Validating recommendations for coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: a matched analysis using propensity scores.

Authors:  S T Normand; M B Landrum; E Guadagnoli; J Z Ayanian; T J Ryan; P D Cleary; B J McNeil
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 2.  Invited commentary: propensity scores.

Authors:  M M Joffe; P R Rosenbaum
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1999-08-15       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Perinatal regionalization for very low-birth-weight and very preterm infants: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sarah Marie Lasswell; Wanda Denise Barfield; Roger William Rochat; Lillian Blackmon
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  A comparison of propensity score methods: a case-study estimating the effectiveness of post-AMI statin use.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Muhammad M Mamdani
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2006-06-30       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Paul Grootendorst; Geoffrey M Anderson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group.

Authors:  R B D'Agostino
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 7.  Medicaid and preterm birth and low birth weight: the last two decades.

Authors:  Emmanuel A Anum; Sheldon M Retchin; Jerome F Strauss
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.681

8.  The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect.

Authors:  R J Cook; D L Sackett
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-02-18

9.  A multicenter study of preterm birth weight and gestational age-specific neonatal mortality.

Authors:  R L Copper; R L Goldenberg; R K Creasy; M B DuBard; R O Davis; S S Entman; J D Iams; S P Cliver
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 8.661

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
  1 in total

1.  Distinguishing Selection Bias and Confounding Bias in Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Authors:  Sebastien Haneuse
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 2.983

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.