Relationship between malpractice litigation pressure and rates of cesarean section and vaginal birth after cesarean section

Medical Care

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 234-242

  Yang, Y Tony ^a   Mello, Michelle M ^b   Subramanian, S V ^b   Studdert, David M ^c  

^a GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cesarean section; Defensive medicine; Liability; Medical malpractice; Tort reform

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIRTH; CESAREAN SECTION; COST; ENVIRONMENT; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGY; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; LAW SUIT; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MALPRACTICE; OBSTETRICS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHYSICIAN; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SCREENING; UNITED STATES; VAGINAL DELIVERY; ADULT; DELIVERY; INSURANCE; LABOR COMPLICATION; LEGAL ASPECT; LEGAL LIABILITY; MEDICARE; MORTALITY; NEWBORN; PREGNANCY; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICS; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ADULT; CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; INSURANCE, LIABILITY; LIABILITY, LEGAL; MALPRACTICE; MEDICARE; OBSTETRIC LABOR COMPLICATIONS; PREGNANCY; RISK FACTORS; UNITED STATES; UTILIZATION REVIEW; VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CESAREAN;

EID: 59049099392     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31818475de     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Cragin EB. Conservatism in obstetrics. NY Med J. 1916;104:1-3.
2. Placek PJ, Taffel SM. Vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) in the 1980s. Am J Pub Health. 1988;78:512-515.
3. US Department of Health and Human Services. Cesarean Childbirth. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health; 1981. NIH publication 82-2067.
4. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Guidelines for Vaginal Delivery After Cesarean Birth. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 1984. Committee Opinion #17.
5. Menacker F. Trends in cesarean rates for first births and repeat cesarean rates for low-risk women: United States, 1990-2003. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2005;54:1-9.
6. Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Martin JA, et al. Preliminary Births for 2004. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2004. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/hestats/prelim-births/ prelim-births04.htm. Accessed June 7, 2007.
7. Harer WB. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: current status. JAMA. 2002;287:2627-2630.
8. Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TR, et al. Risk of uterine rupture during labor among women with a prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:3-8.
9. Flamm BL. Once a cesarean, always a controversy. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90:312-315.
10. Guise J-M, Berlin M, McDonagh M, et al. Safety of vaginal birth after cesarean: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:420-429.
11. Landon MB, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2581-2589.
12. Coleman VH, Erickson K, Shulkin J, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: practice patterns of obstetrician-gynecologists. J Reprod Med. 2005;50:261-266.
13. Grady D. Repeat caesareans becoming harder to avoid. New York Times. November 29, 2004.
14. First Professionals Insurance Company. Reducing Obstetrical Liability: Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Section. Jacksonville, FL: First Professionals Insurance Company; 2004.
15. Deutchman M, Roberts RG. VBAC: protecting patients, defending doctors. Am Fam Phys. 2003;67:931-936.
16. Rock SM. Malpractice premiums and primary cesarean section rates in New York and Illinois. Public Health Rep. 1988;103:459-463.
17. Tussing AD, Wojtowycz MA. The cesarean decision in New York State, 1986: economic and noneconomic aspects. Med Care. 1992;30:529-540.
18. Localio AR, Lawthers AG, Bengtson JM, et al. Relationship between malpractice claims and cesarean delivery. JAMA. 1993;269:366-373.
19. Dubay L, Kaestner R, Waidmann T. The impact of malpractice fears on cesarean section rates. J Health Econ. 1999;18:491-522.
20. Murthy K, Grobman WA, Lee TA, et al. Association between rising professional liability insurance premiums and primary cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynec. 2007;110:1264-1269.
21. Baldwin LM, Hart LG, Lloyd M, et al. Defensive medicine and obstetrics. JAMA. 1995;274:1606-1610.
22. Sloan FA, Entman SS, Reilly BA, et al. Tort liability and obstetricians' care levels. Int Rev Law Econ. 1997;17:245-260.
23. Baicker K, Chandra A. The effect of malpractice liability on the delivery of health care. In: Cutler DM, Garber AM, eds. Frontiers in Health Policy. Vol 8. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2005.
24. Thorpe KE. The medical malpractice 'crisis': recent trends and the impact of state tort reforms. Health Aff. 2004;(suppl web exclusives: W4-20-30).
25. Kessler DP, McClellan M. The effects of malpractice pressure and liability reforms on physicians' perceptions of medical care. Law Con-temp Probs. 1997;60:81-106.
26. Sloan F, Bovbjerg RR, Githens PB. Insuring Medical Malpractice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1991.
27. National Center for Health Statistics. Natality Detail File 1991-2003. Hyattsville, Md: National Center for Health Statistics 2007.
28. National Association of Insurance Commissioners. Market Share Reports for Groups and Companies: Medical Malpractice. National Association of Insurance Commissioners; 1993-2004.
29. American Medical Association. Physician Characteristics and Distribution in the US, 1993-2004. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association; 1993-2004.
30. National Conference of State Legislatures. Medical Malpractice Tort Reform. Available at: http://www.ncsl.org/standcornrn/sclaw/medmaloverview. htm. Accessed June 7, 2007.
31. American Tort Reform Association. State and Federal Reforms. Available at: http://www.atra.org/reforms. Accessed June 7, 2007.
32. McCullough, Campbell & Lane LLP. Summary of Medical Malpractice Law: Index of States. Available at: http://www.mcandl.com/states.html. Accessed June 7, 2007.
33. Yang YT, Studdert DM, Subramanian SV, et al. A longitudinal analysis of the impact of liability pressure on the supply of obstetrician-gynecologists. J Empir Leg Stud. 2008;5:21-53.
34. Avraham R. Database of State Tort Law Reforms (DSTLR 2nd). Northwestern Law & Econ Research Paper No. 06-08. November 2006. Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=902711. Accessed November 30, 2007.
35. Tussing AD, Wojtowycz MA. Health maintenance organizations, independent practice associations, and cesarean section rates. Health Serv Res. 1994;29:75-93.
36. Goodrick E, Salancik GR. Organizational discretion in responding to institutional practices: hospitals and cesarean births. Admin Sci Q. 1996;41:1-28.
37. Sieck CC. Vaginal birth after cesarean section: a comparison of rural and metropolitan rates in Oklahoma,. J Okla State Med Assoc. 1997;90:444-449.
38. Avery MD, Carr CA, Burkhardt P. Vaginal birth after cesarean section: a pilot study of outcomes in women receiving midwifery care. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2004;49:113-117.
39. Morgan Quitno Press. Health Care State Rankings, 1993-2004. Lawrence, KS: Morgan Quitno Press; 1993-2004.
40. American Hospital Association. Hospital Statistics, 1993-2004. Washington, DC: American Hospital Association; 1993-2004.
41. Bergholt T, Lim LK, Jorgensen JS, et al. Maternal body mass index in the first trimester and risk of cesarean delivery in nulliparous women in spontaneous labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;196:163.el-e5.
42. Brost BC, Goldenberg RL, Mercer BM, et al. The Preterm Prediction Study: association of cesarean delivery with increases in maternal weight and body mass index. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177:333-337.
43. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/. Accessed June 7, 2007.
44. Unuigbe JA, Orhue AA, Feyi-Waboso PA. Outcome of cesarean section in twin pregnancy. Jnt J Gynaecol Obstet. 1988;26:393-397.
45. Keeler EB, Brodie M. Economic incentives in the choice between vaginal delivery and cesarean section. Milbank Q. 1993;71:365-404.
46. Aron DC, Howard S, Gordon DL, et al. Variations in risk-adjusted cesarean delivery rates according to race and health insurance. Med Care. 2000;38:35-44.
47. U.S. Census Bureau. Health Insurance. Available at: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/hlthins.html. Accessed June 7, 2007.
48. Braveman P, Egerter S, Edmonston F, et al. Racial/ethnic differences in the likelihood of cesarean delivery, California. Am J Public Health. 1995;85:625-630.
49. Kabir AA, Pridjian G, Steinmann WC, et al. Racial differences in cesareans: an analysis of U.S. 2001 National Inpatient Sample Data. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:710-718.
50. Kenkel DS. Health behavior, health knowledge, and schooling. J Pol Econ. 1991;99:287-305.
51. Kaufmann T, Liu D. Should cesareans be performed only on the basis of medical need? Nurs Times. 2001;97:17.
52. King DE, Lahiri K. Socioeconomic factors and the odds of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. JAMA. 1994;272:524-529.
53. Frees EW. Longitudinal and Panel Data: Analysis and Applications in the Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press; 2004.
54. Mushinski M. Average charges for uncomplicated vaginal, cesarean and VBAC deliveries: regional variations, United States, 1996. Stat Bull. 1998;79:17-28.
55. Currie J, MacLeod WB. First do no harm? Tort reform and birth outcomes. NBER Working Paper, August 2006. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract-id=926057. Accessed June 7, 2007.
56. Mello MM. Medical Malpractice: Impact of the Crisis and Effect of State Tort Reforms. Princeton, NJ: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; 2006. Available at: http://www.rwjf.org/publications/synthesis/reports-and-briefs/ issuel0.html. Accessed June 7, 2007.
57. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. Defensive Medicine and Medical Malpractice. Washington, DC: Office of Technology Assessment; 1994. OTA-H-602.
58. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Professional Liability and Its Effects: Report of a Survey of ACOG's Membership. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 1983, 1985, 1987, 1990, 1992.
59. Gossman GL, Joesch JM, Tanfer K. Trends in maternal request cesarean delivery from 1991 to 2004. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108:1506-1516.
60. Betran AP, Mario M, Lauer JA, et al. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatric Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21:98-113.
61. Burt RD, Vaughan TL, Daling JR. Evaluating the risks of cesarean section: low Apgar score in repeat C-section and vaginal deliveries. Am J Pub Health. 1988;78:1312-1314.
62. Studdert DM, Yang YT, Mello MM. Are damages caps regressive? A study of malpractice jury verdicts in California. Health Aff. 2004;23: 54-67.