The effect of labour induction on the risk of caesarean delivery: using propensity scores to control confounding by indication.

OBJECTIVE: To use propensity score methods to control for confounding by indication in the association between labour induction and caesarean delivery. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of administrative hospital discharge data supplemented by medical record information. SETTING: Fourteen US member hospitals of the National Perinatal Information Center. SAMPLE: A cohort of 166 559 singleton liveborn deliveries in the period 2007-2012. METHODS: We used propensity scores (PSs) to balance 83 covariates between induced and non-induced women, and compared estimates with traditional covariate adjustment. We estimated PSs for labour induction versus expectant management of pregnancy each week from 34 to 42 weeks of gestation. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) for the association between labour induction and primary caesarean delivery from models with no adjustment, traditional adjustment of five covariates, matched PS, and adjustment for continuous PS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Caesarean delivery in current or subsequent week of gestation. RESULTS: In crude models labour induction increased the risk of caesarean delivery in all weeks (RR 1.06-1.52), excepting 39 weeks of gestation (RR 0.89). After matching on PS, the analysis showed a significantly decreased risk of caesarean delivery with labour induction during weeks 35-39 (RR 0.77-0.92), and a significantly elevated risk at weeks 40 (RR 1.22) and 41 (RR 1.39). Traditional covariate and PS adjustment resulted in RRs between those from crude and PS-matched models. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of considerable confounding by indication in the association of labour induction and caesarean delivery, particularly for preterm deliveries. Using PS methods, we found a reduced risk of caesarean delivery with labour induction before 40 weeks of gestation, and an elevated risk for weeks 40-42. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: With confounding adjustment, labour induction does not increase the risk of caesarean at 34-39 weeks of gestation.

Changes in delivery methods at specialty care hospitals in the United States between 2006 and 2010.

OBJECTIVE: Given the increasing rates of labor induction and cesarean delivery, and efforts to reduce early term births, we examined recent trends in methods and timing of delivery. STUDY DESIGN: We identified delivery methods and medical indications for delivery from administrative hospital discharge data for 231 691 deliveries in 2006 and 213 710 deliveries in 2010 from 47 specialty care member hospitals of the National Perinatal Information Center/Quality Analytic Services. In a subset of 17 hospitals, we examined trends by gestational age. RESULT: From 2006 to 2010, there was an 11% increase in labor induction and a 6% increase in cesarean delivery, largely due to repeat cesareans. There was a 4 per 100 reduction in early term births (37 to 38 weeks), mostly due to a decline in non-medically indicated interventional deliveries. CONCLUSION: We report a shift in deliveries at 38 weeks, which we believe may be attributed to efforts to actively limit non-medically indicated early term deliveries.

Use of high-technology care among women with high-risk pregnancies in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Infant mortality has been reduced dramatically with the development of perinatal regionalized high-technology care. Our objective was to assess use of high technology care among women with high-risk pregnancies in the urban and rural United States. METHODS: The 1988 National Maternal and Infant Health Survey was linked to the 1988 American Hospital Association survey of all obstetrical hospitals. Hospitals were classified into five levels of care based on services and staffing. Women were classified as having high-risk pregnancies using two definitions: (1) gestational age < 34 weeks and birthweight < 1500 g (High Risk I) and (2) the first definition or an antenatal high-risk medical diagnoses (High Risk II). Analyses assessed the proportion of high-risk women delivering in appropriate locations in the rural and urban United States and explored how personal characteristics, insurance status, and use and source of prenatal care influenced where high-risk women delivered. RESULTS: 71.2% of High Risk I and 55.9% of High Risk II women delivered in a high-technology facility (Level IIA or III). Fifty percent of HRI rural women delivered in tertiary high-technology hospitals and 39% of HRII rural women delivered in a high-technology hospital. High-risk urban women were two to three times more likely to deliver in a high-technology facility compared to their rural counterparts. The multivariate analysis showed that Black high-risk women were more likely to deliver in a high-technology setting and that receipt of prenatal care in a private setting lowered the odds of delivering in a high-technology setting when other factors were controlled. CONCLUSIONS: In an era where regionalized perinatal care was not threatened by managed care, a large proportion of high-risk women received care in less than optimal settings. Rural high-risk women delivered in high-technology hospitals less often than their urban counterparts. The multivariate analyses implied that the potential barriers to care may be more important among those considered more socially advantaged, who may be more at the mercy of managed care. The current reimbursement environment, which discourages referral to specialists and high-technology care, could result in less access today.

Specialty newborn care: trends and issues.

OBJECTIVE: This report explores the availability of neonatal special care services in the US and examines the variation in those services from both the staffing and service perspectives. STUDY DESIGN: The American Hospital Association survey of hospitals and a special national survey of hospitals with special care services were used as data sources to describe changes in the status of high-risk care between 1983 and 1997. The latter survey had a 69% response rate and was a collaborative effort among the March of Dimes, the Maternal and Child Health Bureau, the American Hospital Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Ross Labs, and the National Perinatal Information Center (NPIC). RESULTS: The study found that across all regions of the US, the special care supply has expanded. However, the study shows wide variation in medical staffing even among those hospitals offering the most intensive services; 25% had no physician in-house coverage 24 hr/d. CONCLUSION: There is wide availability of high-risk newborn care which is a possible oversupply; however, differential physician staffing raises issues regarding the need for more standardized care.

Administrative data for quality improvement.

This article discusses the use of administrative data for quality improvement in perinatal and neonatal medicine. We review the nature of administrative data and focus on hospital discharge abstract data as the primary source of hospital- and community-based assessments. Although discharge abstract data lack the richness of primary data, these data are the most accessible comparative data source for examining all patients admitted to a hospital. When aggregated to the state level as occurs in more than 30 states, hospital discharge data reflects hospital utilization and outcomes for an entire geographic population at the state and community level. This article reviews some of the weaknesses of administrative data and then focuses how these data can be used for hospital- and community-based assessment of perinatal care citing as examples the measures of perinatal process and outcome used by the National Perinatal Information Center in its Quality/Efficiency Reports for member hospitals and a study of perinatal high-risk care in the State of Florida. The use of discharge abstract data for performance measurement at either the hospital or the system level requires a thorough understanding of how to select a patient group, its characteristics, the intervention, and the outcomes relevant to that patient group. In the perinatal arena, the National Perinatal Information Center has selected and presents those measures that rely on data items shown to be the most reliable based on validity studies and clinician opinion, delineation of the intervention, and the measurement of what occurred. As hospitals respond to the recent pressures of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations and other quality assurance entities, the accuracy of the discharge data will improve. With accepted caution, these data sets are invaluable to researchers studying comparative populations over time or across large geographic areas.

The Joint Commission's ORYX initiative: implications for perinatal nursing and care.

In 1986, the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations initiated the Agenda for Change, a new era in its accreditation process, announcing that it would begin to incorporate outcome or performance indicators into its review of hospitals. The expanded focus, to include performance indicators, was in direct response to the rapidly changing health care environment. From 1987 to 1993, the Joint Commission tested five sets of indicators at more than 450 volunteer hospitals. In February 1996, the Joint Commission announced the ORYX initiative. The article reviews the history of the Joint Commission's Agenda for Change and highlights the new ORYX initiative, with particular focus on the development of the perinatal indicators and the role of the perinatal nurse in meeting the ORYX requirements.