• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

选择妇产医院:是距离远近的问题还是医疗质量的问题?

Choosing a maternity hospital: a matter of travel distance or quality of care?

作者信息

Koller Daniela, Maier Werner, Lack Nicholas, Grill Eva, Strobl Ralf

机构信息

Institute of Medical Data Processing, Biometrics and Epidemiology (IBE), Faculty of Medicine, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.

Bavarian Institute for Quality Assurance, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Res Health Serv Reg. 2024 May 9;3(1):7. doi: 10.1007/s43999-024-00041-1.

DOI:10.1007/s43999-024-00041-1
PMID:39177927
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11281767/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The choice of a hospital should be based on individual need and accessibility. For maternity hospitals, this includes known or expected risk factors, the geographic accessibility and level of care provided by the hospital. This study aims to identify factors influencing hospital choice with the aim to analyze if and how many deliveries are conducted in a risk-appropriate and accessible setting in Bavaria, Germany.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional secondary data analysis based on all first births in Bavaria (2015-18) provided by the Bavarian Quality Assurance Institute for Medical Care. Information on the mother and on the hospital were included. The Bavarian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2010 was used to account for area-level socioeconomic differences. Multiple logistic regression models were used to estimate the strength of association of the predicting factors and to adjust for confounding.

RESULTS

We included 195,087 births. Distances to perinatal centers were longer than to other hospitals (16 km vs. 12 km). 10% of women with documented risk pregnancies did not deliver in a perinatal center. Regressions showed that higher age (OR 1.03; 1.02-1.03 95%-CI) and risk pregnancy (OR 1.44; 1.41-1.47 95%-CI) were associated with choosing a perinatal center. The distances travelled show high regional variation with a strong urban-rural divide.

CONCLUSION

In a health system with free choice of hospitals, many women chose a hospital close to home and/or according to their risks. However, this is not the case for 10% of mothers, a group that would benefit from more coordinated care.

摘要

背景

医院的选择应基于个人需求和可及性。对于妇产医院而言,这包括已知或预期的风险因素、地理可及性以及医院提供的护理水平。本研究旨在确定影响医院选择的因素,以分析在德国巴伐利亚州,有多少分娩是在风险适配且可及的环境中进行的。

方法

这是一项横断面二次数据分析,基于巴伐利亚州医疗质量保证研究所提供的巴伐利亚州所有头胎分娩数据(2015 - 2018年)。纳入了母亲和医院的信息。使用2010年巴伐利亚多重贫困指数来考量地区层面的社会经济差异。采用多重逻辑回归模型来估计预测因素的关联强度并调整混杂因素。

结果

我们纳入了195,087例分娩。到围产期中心的距离比到其他医院的距离更长(16公里对12公里)。有记录的风险妊娠妇女中有10%未在围产期中心分娩。回归分析表明,年龄较大(比值比1.03;95%置信区间为1.02 - 1.03)和风险妊娠(比值比1.44;95%置信区间为1.41 - 1.47)与选择围产期中心相关。出行距离存在很大的地区差异,城乡差距明显。

结论

在一个可自由选择医院的医疗体系中,许多女性根据自身风险选择了离家近的医院。然而,10%的母亲并非如此,这部分人群将受益于更协调的护理。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/49df/11281767/be19363d7250/43999_2024_41_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/49df/11281767/be19363d7250/43999_2024_41_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/49df/11281767/be19363d7250/43999_2024_41_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Choosing a maternity hospital: a matter of travel distance or quality of care?选择妇产医院:是距离远近的问题还是医疗质量的问题?
Res Health Serv Reg. 2024 May 9;3(1):7. doi: 10.1007/s43999-024-00041-1.
2
Proximity to risk-appropriate perinatal hospitals for pregnant women with congenital heart defects in New York state.纽约州先天性心脏病孕妇与风险适宜的围产医院的临近程度。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Jun 1;20(1):338. doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-03025-4.
3
Does Hypothetical Centralization of Revision THA and TKA Exacerbate Existing Geographic or Demographic Disparities in Access to Care by Increased Patient Travel Distances or Times? A Large-database Study.是否假设的全膝关节置换术和髋关节置换术翻修的集中化会通过增加患者的旅行距离或时间而加剧现有的地理或人口差异对护理的获取?一项大型数据库研究。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2022 Jun 1;480(6):1033-1045. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002072. Epub 2021 Dec 21.
4
Navigating geographical disparities: access to obstetric hospitals in maternity care deserts and across the United States.跨越地理差异:在美国各地的产科荒漠中获得产科医院的服务。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024 May 8;24(1):350. doi: 10.1186/s12884-024-06535-7.
5
Associations of area-level deprivation with adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes in Bavaria, Germany: Results from a cross-sectional study.德国巴伐利亚地区贫困程度与不良母婴围产结局的相关性:一项横断面研究结果。
PLoS One. 2020 Jul 20;15(7):e0236020. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236020. eCollection 2020.
6
Barriers for pregnant women living in rural, agricultural villages to accessing antenatal care in Cambodia: A community-based cross-sectional study combined with a geographic information system.柬埔寨农村农业村庄孕妇获得产前护理的障碍:基于社区的横断面研究结合地理信息系统。
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 19;13(3):e0194103. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194103. eCollection 2018.
7
The influence of distance and level of care on delivery place in rural Zambia: a study of linked national data in a geographic information system.赞比亚农村地区距离和医护水平对分娩地点的影响:地理信息系统中全国相关数据的研究。
PLoS Med. 2011 Jan 25;8(1):e1000394. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000394.
8
Remote rural women's choice of birthplace and transfer experiences in rural Otago and Southland New Zealand.新西兰奥塔哥和南地农村地区偏远农村妇女的出生地选择及转诊经历
Midwifery. 2017 Sep;52:49-56. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2017.05.014. Epub 2017 May 29.
9
Influence of travel time and distance to the hospital of care on stillbirths: a retrospective facility-based cross-sectional study in Lagos, Nigeria.旅行时间和到医疗机构的距离对死胎的影响:尼日利亚拉各斯的一项基于医疗机构的回顾性横断面研究。
BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Oct;6(10). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-007052.
10
Very low birth weight births at non-NICU hospitals: the role of sociodemographic, perinatal, and geographic factors.非新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)医院的极低出生体重儿出生情况:社会人口统计学、围产期及地理因素的作用
J Perinatol. 1999 Apr-May;19(3):197-205. doi: 10.1038/sj.jp.7200161.

本文引用的文献

1
Do patients' preferences prevail in hospital selection?: a comparison between discrete choice experiments and revealed hospital choice.患者的偏好是否在医院选择中占主导地位?:离散选择实验与揭示性医院选择的比较。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Sep 8;22(1):1136. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08403-6.
2
Distance is "a big problem": a geographic analysis of reported and modelled proximity to maternal health services in Ghana.距离是一个大问题:加纳报告和模拟的孕产妇保健服务接近度的地理分析。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2022 Aug 31;22(1):672. doi: 10.1186/s12884-022-04998-0.
3
Area Deprivation and COVID-19 Incidence and Mortality in Bavaria, Germany: A Bayesian Geographical Analysis.
德国巴伐利亚地区的贫困与 COVID-19 发病率和死亡率:一项贝叶斯地理分析。
Front Public Health. 2022 Jul 15;10:927658. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.927658. eCollection 2022.
4
National travel distances for emergency care.国家紧急护理旅行距离。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Mar 24;22(1):388. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-07743-7.
5
Choosing a Provider: What Factors Matter Most to Consumers and Patients?选择医疗服务提供者:哪些因素对消费者和患者最为重要?
J Patient Exp. 2022 Jan 19;9:23743735221074175. doi: 10.1177/23743735221074175. eCollection 2022.
6
Socio-spatial disparities in access to emergency health care-A Scandinavian case study.紧急医疗保健获取的社会空间差异——斯堪的纳维亚案例研究。
PLoS One. 2021 Dec 10;16(12):e0261319. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261319. eCollection 2021.
7
The effects of geographical accessibility to health facilities on antenatal care and delivery services utilization in Benin: a cross-sectional study.地理上接近医疗机构对贝宁产前护理和分娩服务利用的影响:一项横断面研究。
Reprod Health. 2021 Oct 14;18(1):205. doi: 10.1186/s12978-021-01249-x.
8
Influence of travel time and distance to the hospital of care on stillbirths: a retrospective facility-based cross-sectional study in Lagos, Nigeria.旅行时间和到医疗机构的距离对死胎的影响:尼日利亚拉各斯的一项基于医疗机构的回顾性横断面研究。
BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Oct;6(10). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-007052.
9
Germany: Health System Review.德国:卫生体系综述。
Health Syst Transit. 2020 Dec;22(6):1-272.
10
Interrupted time series study found mixed effects of the impact of the Bavarian smoke-free legislation on pregnancy outcomes.一项中断时间序列研究发现,巴伐利亚州无烟立法对妊娠结局的影响存在混合效应。
Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 18;11(1):4209. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-83774-0.