A retrospective cohort study of mode of delivery among public and private patients in an integrated maternity hospital setting

BMJ Open

Volumn 3, Issue 11, 2013, Pages

  Murphy, Deirdre J ^a   Fahey, Tom ^b  

^a TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS IN IRELAND   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIRTH; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFOUNDING VARIABLE; CONSULTATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DELIVERY; EMERGENCY SURGERY; FEMALE; FETUS; FORCEPS DELIVERY; FUNDING; GESTATIONAL AGE; HEALTH CARE DISPARITY; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTAL DELIVERY; IRELAND; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MATERNITY WARD; MULTIPLE PREGNANCY; NEWBORN; NEWBORN DEATH; NULLIPARA; OBSTETRIC PROCEDURE; OBSTETRICIAN; OPERATOR; PARITY; PATIENT CARE; PERINATAL DEATH; PREGNANCY; PRIVATE HOSPITAL; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIAL ASPECT; STILLBIRTH; TREATMENT INDICATION; URBAN AREA; VACUUM EXTRACTOR; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

EID: 84889029636     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003865     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Wilkinson C, Brennan D. Universal healthcare - trick or treat?. http://www.irishhealth.com (last accessed 7 Aug 2013).
2. Freeman M. Expert group to examine universal health insurance proposal. http://www.thejournal.ie (17 Feb 2012). (accessed 7 Aug 2013).
3. Public and private patients in Public hospitals. Guidance to health service management on the treatment of public and private patients. http://www.hse.ie (16 Sep 2009) (accessed 7 Aug 2013).
4. Kmietowicz Z. Hospitals will be able to earn 49% of their income from private patients from October. BMJ 2012;345:e4823.
5. Fineberg HV. Shattuck lecture. A successful and sustainable system - how to get there from here. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1020-7.
6. O' Leary CM, De Klerk N, Keogh J, et al. Trends in mode of delivery during 1984-2003: can they be explained by pregnancy and delivery complications? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2007;114:855-64.
7. National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's health. Caesarean section: clinical guidelines. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology, 2004.
8. Belizan JM, Althabe F, Barros FC, et al. Rates and implications of caesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study. BMJ 1999;319:1397-400.
9. Kirby RS. Trends in labor induction in the United States: is it true that what goes up must come down? Birth 2004;31:148-51.
10. Leitch CR, Walker JJ. The rise in caesarean section rate: the same indications but a lower threshold. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:621-6.
11. Cleary-Goldman J, Malone FD, Vidaver J, et al. Impact of maternal age on obstetric outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:983-90.
12. Bell JS, Campbell DM, Graham WJ, et al. Do obstetric complications explain high caesarean section rates among women over 30? A retrospective analysis. BMJ 2001;322:894-5.
13. Vaughan D, Cleary B, Murphy DJ. Delivery outcomes for nulliparous women at the extremes of maternal age-a cohort study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2013; [Epub ahead of print 21 Jun 2013]. doi:10.1111/1471-0528. 12311
14. BirthChoiceUK [Internet]. United Kingdom; 2010. http://www.birthchoiceuk. com/Professionals/Frame.htm (accessed 15 Feb 2013).
15. Consumer guide to maternity services in Ireland [Internet]. Ireland; 2010. http://www.bump2babe.ie/column/N/statistics/ (accessed 15 Feb 2013).
16. Soltani H, Sandall J. Organisation of maternity care and choices of mode of birth: a worldwide view. Midwifery 2012;28:146-9.
17. Turner M. Should women be able to request a caesarean section? Yes. BMJ 2011;343:d7570.
18. Rouhe H. Should women be able to request a caesarean section? No. BMJ 2011;343:d7565.
19. Villar J, Carroli G, Zavaleta N, et al. World Health Organization 2005 Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health Research Group. Maternal and neonatal individual risks and benefits associated with caesarean delivery: multicentre prospective study. BMJ 2007;335:1025.
20. Movsas TZ, Wells E, Mongoven A, et al. Does medical insurance type (private vs public) influence physician's decision to perform Caesarean delivery? J Med Ethics 2012;38:470-3.
21. Lipkind HS, Duzyi C, Rosenberg TJ, et al. Disparities in cesarean delivery rates and associated adverse neonatal outcomes in New York City hospitals. Obstet Gynecol 2009;113:1239-47.
22. Einarsdottir K, Stock S, Haggar F, et al. Neonatal complications in public and private patients: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open 2013;3:pii:e002786.
23. Robson M. Classification of cesarean sections. Fetal Matern Med Rev 2001;12:23-9.
24. Barbadoro P, Chiatti C, D'Errico MM, et al. Caesarean delivery in south Italy: women without choice. A cross sectional survey. PLoS ONE 2012;7:e43906.
25. Coulm B, Le Ray C, Lelong N, et al. Obstetric interventions for low-risk pregnant women in France: do maternity unit characteristics make a difference? Birth 2012;39:183-91.
26. Rebelo F, da Rocha CM, Cortes TR, et al. High cesarean prevalence in a national population-based study in Brazil: the role of private practice. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2010;89:903-8.
27. Al-Mufti R, McCarthy A, Fisk NM. Survey of obstetricians' personal preference and discretionary practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1997;73:1-4.
28. Wright JB, Wright AL, Simpson NA, et al. A survey of trainee obstetricians preferences for childbirth. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001;97:23-5.
29. Land R, Parry E, Rane A, et al. Personal preferences of obstetricians towards childbirth. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynecol 2001;41:249-52.
30. Sur S, Murphy KW, Mackenzie IZ. Delivery after caesarean section: consultant obstetricians' professional advice and personal preferences. J Obstet Gynaecol 2009;29:212-16.
31. Murray SF. Relation between private health insurance and high rates of caesarean section in Chile: qualitative and quantitative study. BMJ 2000;321:1501-5.
32. Catling-Paull C, Johnston R, Ryan C, et al. Non-clinical interventions that increase the uptake and success of vaginal birth after caesarean section: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs 2011;67:1662-76.
33. Montgomery AA, Emmett CL, Fahey TP, et al. DiAMOND Study Group. Two decision aids for mode of delivery among women with previous caesarean section: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2007;334:1305.
34. Bahl R, Strachan B, Murphy DJ. Outcome of subsequent pregnancy three years after previous operative delivery in the second stage of labour: cohort study. BMJ 2004;328:311.
35. Einarsdottir K, Kemp A, Haggar FA, et al. Increase in caesarean deliveies after the Australian Private Health insurance incentive policy reforms. PLoS ONE 2012;7:e41436.