Riddell Corinne A, Hutcheon Jennifer A, Strumpf Erin C, Abenhaim Haim A, Kaufman Jay S
Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montréal, QC.
Faculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, BC Women's Hospital, Vancouver, BC.
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2017 Nov;39(11):988-995. doi: 10.1016/j.jogc.2017.05.003. Epub 2017 Sep 12.
To establish the degree of variation across hospitals in the use of Caesarean delivery for the indication of labour dystocia before and after accounting for maternal, fetal, and hospital characteristics.
This study was a retrospective, population-based cohort study of nulliparous women delivering term singletons in cephalic position following labour. Delivery visits were extracted from three provincial perinatal registries in the Canadian provinces of Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia, from 2008-2012. Crude hospital-specific rates of Caesarean delivery for labour dystocia were reported, and these rates were then stabilized to account for hospitals with low delivery volumes. Rates were then adjusted for maternal, fetal, and hospital characteristics using hierarchical logistic regression.
Among 403 205 women delivering at 170 hospitals, the overall Caesarean delivery rate was 21.0%, and the rate of Caesarean delivery for labour dystocia was 12.7%, indicating that 60% of all Caesarean deliveries were performed in part for this indication. The middle 95% of hospitals had Caesarean delivery rates for labour dystocia ranging from 4.5% to 24.7%. Differences in maternal case mix and hospital characteristics explained only a small proportion of this variation (95% central range 6.3%-21.7%).
Considerable inter-hospital variation in rates of Caesarean delivery for labour dystocia remained after accounting for differences in maternal and hospital factors. Reporting systems that monitor variation in inter-institutional rates should incorporate stabilization and adjustment for case-mix differences and consider indication-specific rates of Caesarean delivery to more fairly compare hospital performance and better target interventions to reduce Caesarean delivery for specific indications.
在考虑产妇、胎儿及医院特征前后,确定各医院因产程异常而行剖宫产的差异程度。
本研究为一项基于人群的回顾性队列研究,纳入分娩后单胎足月头位的初产妇。分娩记录取自加拿大安大略省、艾伯塔省和不列颠哥伦比亚省的三个省级围产期登记处,时间跨度为2008年至2012年。报告了各医院因产程异常而行剖宫产的粗率,然后对这些率进行稳定处理,以考虑分娩量较低的医院。随后使用分层逻辑回归对产妇、胎儿及医院特征进行调整。
在170家医院分娩的403205名妇女中,总体剖宫产率为21.0%,因产程异常而行剖宫产的率为12.7%,这表明所有剖宫产中有60%部分是出于该指征进行的。中间95%的医院因产程异常而行剖宫产的率在4.5%至24.7%之间。产妇病例组合和医院特征的差异仅解释了这种差异的一小部分(95%中心范围6.3%-21.7%)。
在考虑产妇和医院因素的差异后,各医院因产程异常而行剖宫产的率仍存在相当大的差异。监测机构间剖宫产率差异的报告系统应纳入病例组合差异的稳定化和调整,并考虑特定指征的剖宫产率,以便更公平地比较医院表现,并更好地针对干预措施以减少特定指征的剖宫产。