Rates of labor induction and primary cesarean delivery do not correlate with rates of adverse neonatal outcome in level I hospitals

Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 636-642

  Glantz, J Christopher ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY   (United States)

Author keywords

interventions; Labor; low Apgar; NICU admission; ventilation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIRTH CERTIFICATE; CESAREAN SECTION; DATA BASE; DEMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FETUS OUTCOME; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; LABOR INDUCTION; LABOR MANAGEMENT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ADULT; CESAREAN SECTION; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; FEMALE; HOSPITALS, MATERNITY; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; INFANT, NEWBORN, DISEASES; INTENSIVE CARE UNITS, NEONATAL; LABOR, INDUCED; PATIENT ADMISSION; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79952376704     PISSN: 14767058     EISSN: 14764954     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2010.514629     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Wennberg JE, Gittelsohn A. Health care delivery in Maine I: patterns of use of common surgical procedures. J Maine Med Assoc 1975;66:123-130, 149.
2. Lewis S. Another day, another variation: when is enough enough? Can Med Assoc J 1998;158:61-62.
3. Fisher ES. Medical care - is more always better? N Engl Jmed 2003;349:1665-1667. (Pubitemid 37288573)
4. Fisher ES, Welch HG. Avoiding the unintended consequences of growth in medical care: how might more be worse? J Am Med Assoc 1999;281:446-453. (Pubitemid 29069443)
5. Glantz JC. Cesarean delivery risk adjustment for regional interhospital comparisons. Am J of Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181:1425-1431. (Pubitemid 30021888)
6. Glantz JC. Labor induction rate variation in upstate New York: what is the difference? Birth 2003;30:168-174. (Pubitemid 37047101)
7. Glantz JC, Guzick DS. Can differences in labor induction rates be explained by case mix? J Reprod Med 2004;49: 175-181. (Pubitemid 38405781)
8. McKenzie L, Stephenson PA. Variation in cesarean section rates among hospitals in Washington State. Am J Public Health 1993;83:1109-1112. (Pubitemid 23229113)
9. Centers for Disease Control. Births: final data for 2006. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2009;57:1-104.
10. Bailit JL, Garrett JM, Miller WC, McMahon MJ, Cefalo RC. Hospital primary cesarean delivery rates and the risk of poor neonatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187: 721-727.
11. Mascarenhas L, Eliot BW, Mackenzie IZ. A comparison of perinatal outcome, antenatal and intrapartum care between England and Wales, and France. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 99:955-958.
12. Nicholson JM, Parry S, Caughey AB, Rosen S, Keen A, Macones GA. The impact of the active management of risk in pregnancy at term on birth outcomes: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;198:511.e1-511.e15.
13. Roohan PJ, Josberger RE, Acar J, Dabir P, Feder HM, Gagliano PJ. Validation of birth certificate data in New York State. J Commun Health 2003;28:335-346. (Pubitemid 38113243)
14. Librero J, Peiro S, Calderon SM. Inter-hospital variations in caesarean sections. A risk adjusted comparison in the Valencia public hospitals. J Epidemiol Commun Health 2000;54: 631-636. (Pubitemid 30460020)
15. Glantz JC. Term labor induction compared with expectant management. Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:70-76.
16. Seyb ST, Berka RJ, Socol ML, Dooley SL. Risk of cesarean delivery with elective induction of labor at term in nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 1999;94:600-607. (Pubitemid 29460948)
17. Vahratian A, Zhang J, Troendle JF, Sciscione AC, Hoffman MK. Labor progression and risk of cesarean delivery in electively induced nulliparas. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:698-704. (Pubitemid 40432184)
18. Gulmezoglu AM, Crowther CA, Middleton P. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;(4):CD004945.
19. Laye MR, Dellinger EH. Timing of scheduled cesarean delivery in patients on a teaching versus private service: adherence to American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines and neonatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;195:577-582; discussion 582-574. (Pubitemid 44142392)
20. Zdeb MS, Therriault GD, Logrillo VM. Cesarean sections in upstate New York, 1968-1978. Am J Epidemiol 1980;112: 395-403. (Pubitemid 10019230)
21. Srinivas SK, Fager C, Lorch SA. Evaluating risk-adjusted cesarean delivery rate as a measure of obstetric quality. Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:1007-1013.
22. Gould JB, Danielsen B, Korst LM, Phibbs R, Chance K, Main E, Wirtschafter DD, Stevenson DK, and the California Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative. Cesarean delivery rates and neonatal morbidity in a low-risk population. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104:11-19. (Pubitemid 40458899)
23. Bailit JL, Gregory KD, Reddy UM, Gonzalez-Quintero VH, Hibbard JU, Ramirez MM, Branch DW, Burkman R, Haberman S, Hatjis GG, et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes by labor onset type and gestational age. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;202:245 e241-245 e212