Literature DB >> 8342718

Variation in cesarean section rates among hospitals in Washington State.

L McKenzie1, P A Stephenson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study examined hospital characteristics and hospital population risk factors and their associations with hospital-specific cesarean section rates in Washington State.
METHODS: Data were obtained from 1987 birth certificates. The study population included all hospitals that had 12 or more singleton live births.
RESULTS: Hospital-specific cesarean section rates varied from 0% to 43% and were positively associated with proprietary ownership, size of delivery service, and the proportions of women who had complications or high-birthweight infants. The proportion of women who had late prenatal care was inversely associated with cesarean section rates. Although proprietary hospitals had higher cesarean section rates, their patient populations were lower risk than patients of public or teaching hospitals.
CONCLUSIONS: Variation in cesarean section rates among hospitals cannot be fully explained by either hospital or patient population characteristics. A combined strategy may be necessary to lower unjustifiably high cesarean section rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8342718      PMCID: PMC1695162          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.83.8.1109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  18 in total

1.  Alternative strategies for controlling rising cesarean section rates.

Authors:  R S Stafford
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 2.  Do practice guidelines guide practice? The effect of a consensus statement on the practice of physicians.

Authors:  J Lomas; G M Anderson; K Domnick-Pierre; E Vayda; M W Enkin; W J Hannah
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-11-09       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Factors associated with hospital-specific cesarean birth rates.

Authors:  E R Newton; C S Higgins
Journal:  J Reprod Med       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 0.142

4.  Recent trends in cesarean delivery rates in California.

Authors:  D B Petitti
Journal:  Birth       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 3.689

5.  Controlling the rise in cesarean section rates by the dissemination of information from vital records.

Authors:  R L Williams; P M Chen
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1983-08       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Cesarean section, fetal monitoring, and perinatal mortality in California.

Authors:  R L Williams; W E Hawes
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Meeting the challenge of the rising cesarean birth rate.

Authors:  R P Porreco
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  Relation of private or clinic care to the cesarean birth rate.

Authors:  R H de Regt; H L Minkoff; J Feldman; R H Schwarz
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1986-09-04       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  The physician factor in cesarean birth rates.

Authors:  G L Goyert; S F Bottoms; M C Treadwell; P C Nehra
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-03-16       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Cesarean section use and source of payment: an analysis of California hospital discharge abstracts.

Authors:  R S Stafford
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 9.308

View more
  9 in total

1.  Inter-hospital variations in caesarean sections. A risk adjusted comparison in the Valencia public hospitals.

Authors:  J Librero; S Peiró; S M Calderón
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  A regional evaluation of variation in low-severity hospital admissions.

Authors:  G E Rosenthal; D L Harper; A Shah; K E Covinsky
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Adoption of diagnostic technology and variation in caesarean section rates: a test of the practice style hypothesis in Norway.

Authors:  Jostein Grytten; Lars Monkerud; Rune Sørensen
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Impact of Provider Competition under Global Budgeting on the Use of Cesarean Delivery.

Authors:  Bradley Chen; Chin-Shyan Chen; Tsai-Ching Liu
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-02-19       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Cesarean delivery among nulliparous women in Beirut: assessing predictors in nine hospitals.

Authors:  Hala Tamim; Souheil Y El-Chemaly; Anwar H Nassar; Alia M Aaraj; Oona M R Campbell; Afamia A Kaddour; Khalid A Yunis
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.689

6.  Interspecialty differences in the obstetric care of low-risk women.

Authors:  R A Rosenblatt; S A Dobie; L G Hart; R Schneeweiss; D Gould; T R Raine; T J Benedetti; M J Pirani; E B Perrin
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Caesarean section rates in South Africa: evidence of bias among different 'population groups'.

Authors:  K P Matshidze; L M Richter; G T Ellison; J B Levin; J A McIntyre
Journal:  Ethn Health       Date:  1998 Feb-May       Impact factor: 2.772

8.  Mind the information gap: fertility rate and use of cesarean delivery and tocolytic hospitalizations in Taiwan.

Authors:  Ke-Zong M Ma; Edward C Norton; Shoou-Yih D Lee
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2011-12-12

9.  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

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.