Lipkind Heather S, Duzyj Christina, Rosenberg Terry J, Funai Edmund F, Chavkin Wendy, Chiasson Mary Ann
From the Section of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Public Health Solutions, New York, New York; and the Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Jun;113(6):1239-1247. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181a4c3e5.
To examine the primary cesarean delivery rates and associated neonatal outcomes by insurance status in public and private hospitals in New York City.
We accessed Vital statistics data on all births to women with Medicaid or private insurance from 1996 through 2003, compiling a total of 321,308 nulliparous women who delivered singleton neonates by either normal spontaneous vaginal delivery or primary cesarean delivery. Rates of primary cesarean delivery and adverse neonatal outcomes were examined by hospital type and insurance status while controlling for potential confounders.
There were 51,682 and 269,626 women who delivered in public hospitals and private hospitals, respectively. The cesarean delivery rate of women with private insurance delivering in private hospitals was 30.4% compared with a cesarean rate of 21.2% in Medicaid patients delivering in public hospitals (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53-1.63). The percent of infants born to women with private insurance and Medicaid delivering in private hospitals with a 5-minute Apgar score less than 7 was 0.6% and 0.8% compared with 1.0% of infants delivering in the public hospital system (adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51- 0.68 and adjusted OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65- 0.82). The neonatal intensive care unit admission rate was also lower in neonates born in private hospitals at 6.7% and 8.5% compared with a 12.8% admission rate in public hospitals (adjusted OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.46-0.51 and adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.57- 0.62 after controlling for mode of delivery).
Even when controlling for confounders, there was an association between primary cesarean delivery and insurance status regardless of hospital type. There was also a higher risk of adverse neonatal outcomes in the public hospitals regardless of mode of delivery.
III.
研究纽约市公立医院和私立医院中,按保险状况划分的初产妇剖宫产率及相关新生儿结局。
我们获取了1996年至2003年期间所有有医疗补助或私人保险的产妇的生命统计数据,汇总了总共321,308例经正常自然阴道分娩或初次剖宫产分娩单胎新生儿的未生育妇女。在控制潜在混杂因素的同时,按医院类型和保险状况检查初次剖宫产率和不良新生儿结局。
分别有51,682名和269,626名妇女在公立医院和私立医院分娩。在私立医院分娩的有私人保险的妇女剖宫产率为30.4%,而在公立医院分娩的医疗补助患者剖宫产率为21.2%(校正比值比[OR]为1.57,95%置信区间[CI]为1.53 - 1.63)。在私立医院分娩的有私人保险和医疗补助的妇女所生婴儿5分钟阿氏评分低于7分的比例分别为0.6%和0.8%,而在公立医院系统分娩的婴儿这一比例为1.0%(校正OR为0.59,95% CI为0.51 - 0.68;校正OR为0.73,95% CI为0.65 - 0.82)。私立医院出生的新生儿入住新生儿重症监护病房的比例也较低,分别为6.7%和8.5%,而公立医院的入住率为12.8%(在控制分娩方式后,校正OR为0.48,95% CI为0.46 - 0.51;校正OR为0.59,95% CI为0.57 - 0.62)。
即使控制了混杂因素,无论医院类型如何,初次剖宫产与保险状况之间仍存在关联。无论分娩方式如何,公立医院不良新生儿结局的风险也更高。
III级