Suppr超能文献

监管产妇病房评级与临床结局及实践指标的比较:一项使用常规收集数据的观察性研究

A Comparison of Regulatory Maternity Unit Ratings With Clinical Outcomes and Practice Measures: An Observational Study Using Routinely Collected Data.

作者信息

Henderson Ian, Gurol-Urganci Ipek, Frémeaux Alissa, Morelli Alessandra, Webster Kirstin, Karia Amar M, Carroll Fran, Dunn George, Harris James, Oddie Sam, Khalil Asma, van der Meulen Jan

机构信息

Department of Health Services Research & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Centre for Quality Improvement and Clinical Audit, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London, UK.

出版信息

BJOG. 2025 Aug;132(9):1285-1296. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.18188. Epub 2025 May 5.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare inspection-informed ratings of individual maternity units published by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) with clinical outcomes and practice measures.

DESIGN

Observational study using linked national maternity and administrative hospital data.

SETTING

The English NHS.

POPULATION

Women with singleton pregnancies who gave birth at term, April 2018-March 2019.

METHODS

Outcomes and practice measures were compared with ratings using hierarchical models and empirical Bayes estimates adjusted for case-mix and unit characteristics.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Severe maternal and severe neonatal morbidity. Practice measures included non-spontaneous birth (either caesarean birth before labour or the induction of labour) and intrapartum caesarean birth.

RESULTS

Of 501 719 included women, 39 930 (8.0%) gave birth in 11 units rated 'outstanding', 357 114 (71.2%) in 110 units rated 'good', and 104 675 (20.9%) in 35 units rated 'requires improvement/inadequate'. Severe maternal morbidity did not vary by rating: 1.2% [95% confidence interval 0.87-1.5], 1.3% [1.1-1.4], and 1.0% [0.87-1.1], respectively (p = 0.59), nor did the risk of severe neonatal morbidity: 4.3% [3.3-5.6], 4.0% [3.6-4.5], and 3.4% [2.9-3.9], respectively (p = 0.48). There was no variation across the ratings in the rate of non-spontaneous birth (48.1% [42.2-53.9], 47.9% [46.4-49.4], and 47.9% [45.1-50.8], respectively; p = 0.87) nor intrapartum caesarean (16.8% [14.6-19.3], 16.6% [15.8-17.3], and 15.8% [14.9-16.7], respectively; p = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no association between ratings of maternity units published by the national healthcare regulator and clinical outcomes and practice measures derived from routinely collected data. Concerted action is urgently needed to improve the inspection-informed ratings of maternity services.

摘要

目的

比较护理质量委员会(CQC)公布的各产科单位基于检查得出的评级与临床结局及实践指标。

设计

利用全国产科与医院管理数据进行的观察性研究。

背景

英国国民医疗服务体系(NHS)。

研究对象

2018年4月至2019年3月足月分娩单胎妊娠的女性。

方法

采用分层模型和经病例组合及单位特征调整的经验贝叶斯估计,将结局和实践指标与评级进行比较。

主要结局指标

严重孕产妇和严重新生儿发病率。实践指标包括非自然分娩(分娩前剖宫产或引产)和产时剖宫产。

结果

纳入的501719名女性中,39930名(8.0%)在11个评级为“优秀”的单位分娩,357114名(71.2%)在110个评级为“良好”的单位分娩,104675名(20.9%)在35个评级为“有待改进/不合格”的单位分娩。严重孕产妇发病率在各评级间无差异:分别为1.2%[95%置信区间0.87 - 1.5]、1.3%[1.1 - 1.4]和1.0%[0.87 - 1.1](p = 0.59),严重新生儿发病风险也无差异:分别为4.3%[3.3 - 5.6]、4.0%[3.6 - 4.5]和3.4%[2.9 - 3.9](p = 0.48)。非自然分娩率(分别为48.1%[42.2 - 53.9]、47.9%[46.4 - 49.4]和47.9%[45.1 - 50.8];p = 0.87)和产时剖宫产率(分别为16.8%[14.6 - 19.3]、16.6%[15.8 - 17.3]和15.8%[14.9 - 16.7];p = 0.87)在各评级间均无差异。

结论

国家医疗监管机构公布的产科单位评级与常规收集数据得出的临床结局及实践指标之间不存在关联。迫切需要采取协调一致的行动来改善基于检查得出的产科服务评级。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f6f7/12232518/71e7f1599dea/BJO-132-1285-g003.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验