Practice Variation and the Risk of Low Birth Weight in a Public Prenatal Care Program

Medical Care

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 16-31

  Helfand, Mark ^a,b   Zimmer Gembeck, Melanie J ^a  

^a OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b OHSUBICC   (United States)

Author keywords

Low birth weight; Outcomes; Practice variation; Public prenatal care

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUP; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; LOW BIRTH WEIGHT; MALE; MEDICAID; METHODOLOGY; NEWBORN; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRENATAL CARE; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS; UNITED STATES; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ADULT; CALIFORNIA; DIAGNOSIS-RELATED GROUPS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT, LOW BIRTH WEIGHT; INFANT, NEWBORN; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MEDICAID; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRENATAL CARE; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; RISK FACTORS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0030636337     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199701000-00002     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Oakley A. Measuring the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions in pregnancy. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1992;8(suppl 1):129.
2. Covington D, Carl J, Daley J, et al. Effects of the North Carolina Prematurity Prevention Program among public patients delivering at New Hanover Memorial Hospital. Am J Public Health 1988;78:1493.
3. Yawn B. Preterm birth prevention: A physician's perspective. Minn Med 1990;73:31.
4. Fink A, Yano E, Goya D. Prenatal programs: What the literature reveals. Obstet Gynecol 1992;80:867.
5. Collaborative Group on Preterm Birth Prevention. Multicenter randomized, controlled trial of a preterm birth prevention program. Med Care 1993;169:352.
6. Main D. The epidemiology of preterm birth. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1988;31:521.
7. Arbuckle T, Sherman G. Comparison of the risk factors for pre-term delivery and intrauterine growth retardation. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1989;3:115.
8. Quick J, Greenlick M, Roghmann K. Prenatal care and pregnancy outcome in an HMO and general population: A multivariate cohort analysis. Am J Public Health 1981;71:381.
9. Tyson J, Guzick D, Rosenfeld C, et al. Prenatal care evaluation and cohort analyses. Pediatrics 1990; 85:195.
10. Ruderman J, Carroll J, Reid A, Murray M. Are physicians changing the way they practise obstetrics? Can Med Assoc J 1993;148:409.
11. Young G. Rethinking antenatal care. Practitioner 1992;236:293.
12. Newnham J, Evans S, Michael C, et al. Effects of frequent ultrasound during pregnancy: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1993;342:887.
13. Thomas P, Golding J, Peters T. Delayed antenatal care: Does it effect pregnancy outcome? Soc Sci Med 1991;32:715.
14. Chalmers I. Minimizing harm and maximizing benefit during innovation in health care: Controlled or uncontrolled experimentation. Birth 1986;13:155.
15. Read J, Stern R, Thibodeau L, et al. Variation in antenatal testing over time and between clinic settings. JAMA 1983;249:1605.
16. McCloskey L, Petitti D, Hobel C. Variations in the use of cesarean delivery for dystocia: Lessons about the source of care. Med Care 1992;30:126.
17. Krieger J, Connell F, LoGerfo J. Medicaid prenatal care: A comparison of use and outcomes in fee-for-service and managed care. Am J Pub Health 1992;82:18.
18. Murata P, McGlynn E, Siu A, et al. Quality measures for prenatal care: A comparison of care in six health plans. Arch Fam Med 1994;3:41.
19. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. New York, NY: Wiley and Sons 1989.
20. Terris M, Glasser M. A life table analysis of the relation of prenatal care to prematurity. Am J Public Health 1974;64:869.
21. Kramer M. Intrauterine growth and gestational duration determinants. Pediatrics 1987;80:502.
22. Malloy M, Tzu-Cheg K, Lee Y. Analyzing the effect of prenatal care on pregnancy outcome: A conditional approach. Am J Public Health 1992;82:448.
23. Lemrow N, Adams D, Coffey R, Farley D. The 50 most frequent diagnosis-related groups (DRGs), diagnoses, and procedures: Statistics by hospital size and location. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1990. Publication no. 90-3465.
24. Iezzoni L. Risk adjustment for medical outcome studies. In: Grady M, Schwartz H, eds. Effectiveness research data methods. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1992. Publication no 92-0056.
25. Helfand M, Marton K, Ueland K. Factors involved in the interpretation of fetal monitor tracings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985;151:737.
26. Neutra R, Fienberg S, Greenland S, Friedman E. Effect of fetal monitoring on neonatal death rates. N Engl J Med 1978;299:324.
27. Jorge CS, Artal R, Paul RH, et al. Antepartum fetal surveillance in diabetic pregnant patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981;141:641.
28. Helfand M. Medical decision-making: Applications of principles of logic to clinical practice. In: Brody SA, Ueland K, eds. Endocrine disorders in pregnancy. Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Lange, 1989:29.
29. Finberg HJ, Kurtz AB, Johnson RL, Wapner RJ. The biophysical profile: A literature review and reassessments of its usefulness in the evaluation of fetal well-being. J Ultra Med 1990;9:583.
30. Almstrom H, Axelsson O, Cnattingius S, et al. Comparison of umbilical-artery velocimetry and cardiotocography for surveillance of small-for-gestational age fetuses. Lancet 1992;340:936.
31. Lagrew D, Pircon R, Towers C, et al. Antepartum fetal surveillance in patients with diabetes: When to start? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;168:1820.
32. Soothill P, Ajayi R, Campbell S, Nicolaides K. Prediction of morbidity in small and normally grown fetuses by fetal heart rate variability, biophysical profile score, and umbilical artery Doppler studies. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993;100:742.
33. Odendaal H, Steyn W, Theron G, et al. Does a nonreactive fetal heart rate pattern really mean fetal distress? Am J Perinatol 1994;11:194.