Obst T E, Nauenberg E, Buck G M
State University of New York at Buffalo, USA.
J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2001 May;12(2):177-91. doi: 10.1353/hpu.2010.0780.
This study measures the association between health insurance and the likelihood of receiving different obstetrical anesthesia protocols among 121,351 singleton live births in upstate New York during 1992. Mothers receiving a cesarean under Medicaid were approximately twice as likely to receive general anesthesia as those with traditional private coverage. Those receiving a cesarean under an HMO were least likely to receive general anesthesia with adjusted odds of 0.73 (confidence interval [CI] = 0.68-0.79), compared to those with traditional private insurance. Those delivering vaginally under Medicaid, HMO, or no coverage had adjusted odds of receiving an epidural of 0.45 (CI = 0.43-0.48), 0.68 (CI = 0.64-0.71), and 0.44 (CI = 0.38-0.52), respectively, compared to those under traditional private insurance. Although there was some differences by race, the strongest determinant of anesthesia remained insurance type. Insurance-mediated disparities in obstetrical anesthesia care are evident in upstate New York and warrant further study nationally.
本研究测量了1992年纽约州北部121,351例单胎活产中医疗保险与接受不同产科麻醉方案可能性之间的关联。接受医疗补助计划剖宫产的母亲接受全身麻醉的可能性约为有传统私人保险母亲的两倍。与有传统私人保险的母亲相比,接受健康维护组织(HMO)剖宫产的母亲接受全身麻醉的可能性最小,调整后的优势比为0.73(置信区间[CI]=0.68 - 0.79)。与有传统私人保险的母亲相比,接受医疗补助计划、健康维护组织(HMO)或无保险阴道分娩的母亲接受硬膜外麻醉的调整后优势比分别为0.45(CI = 0.43 - 0.48)、0.68(CI = 0.64 - 0.71)和0.44(CI = 0.38 - 0.52)。尽管种族存在一些差异,但麻醉的最强决定因素仍然是保险类型。纽约州北部产科麻醉护理中保险介导的差异很明显,值得在全国范围内进一步研究。