The impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in term, non–low-birthweight pregnancies

Objective The impact of hospital obstetric volume specifically on maternal outcomes remains under studied. We examined the impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in low-risk women who delivered non–low-birthweight infants at term. Study Design We conducted a retrospective cohort st...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2015-03, Vol.212 (3), p.380.e1-380.e9
Hauptverfasser: Snowden, Jonathan M., PhD, Cheng, Yvonne W., MD, PhD, Emeis, Cathy L., CNM, PhD, Caughey, Aaron B., MD, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 380.e9
container_issue 3
container_start_page 380.e1
container_title American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
container_volume 212
creator Snowden, Jonathan M., PhD
Cheng, Yvonne W., MD, PhD
Emeis, Cathy L., CNM, PhD
Caughey, Aaron B., MD, PhD
description Objective The impact of hospital obstetric volume specifically on maternal outcomes remains under studied. We examined the impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in low-risk women who delivered non–low-birthweight infants at term. Study Design We conducted a retrospective cohort study of term singleton, non–low-birthweight live births from 2007-2008 in California. Deliveries were categorized by hospital obstetric volume categories and separately for nonrural hospitals (category 1: 50-1199 deliveries per year; category 2: 1200-2399; category 3: 2400-3599, and category 4: ≥3600) and rural hospitals (category R1: 50-599 births per year; category R2: 600-1699; category R3: ≥1700). Maternal outcomes were compared with the use of the chi-square test and multivariable logistic regression. Results There were 736,643 births in 267 hospitals that met study criteria. After adjustment for confounders, there were higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage in the lowest-volume rural hospitals (category R1 adjusted odds ratio, 3.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.51–6.23). Rates of chorioamnionitis, endometritis, severe perineal lacerations, and wound infection did not differ between volume categories. Longer lengths of stay were observed after maternal complications (eg, chorioamnionitis) in the lowest-volume hospitals (16.9% prolonged length of stay in category 1 hospitals vs 10.5% in category 4 hospitals; adjusted odds ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.01–3.61). Conclusion After confounder adjustment, few maternal outcomes differed by hospital obstetric volume. However, elevated odds of postpartum hemorrhage in low-volume rural hospitals raises the possibility that maternal outcomes may differ by hospital volume and geography. Further research is needed on maternal outcomes in hospitals of different obstetric volumes.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.026
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4346499</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0002937814009685</els_id><sourcerecordid>1660426717</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-2886af705cc79e2c5dfd92fd67fcdbc10286335ed67171faae18757e328243273</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9ks1u1TAQhSMEopfCC7BAXrIgwXYS_0ioUlVRQKrEgrK2fJ1J4pDYwXZu1R3vwBv2SUh0SwUsWFmeOXPGnm-y7CXBBcGEvR0KPfiuoJhUBZYFpuxRtiNY8pwJJh5nO4wxzWXJxUn2LMZhu1JJn2YntKas5CXdZd11D8hOszYJ-Rb1Ps426RH5fUyQgjXo4MdlAuQdmnSC4LbkkoyfICLr0Bqa3iDn3d2Pn6O_yfc2pP4GbNcnNAfonHbGQnyePWn1GOHF_Xmafb18f33xMb_6_OHTxflVbmqBU06FYLrluDaGS6CmbtpG0rZhvDXN3hBMBSvLGtYA4aTVGojgNYeSClqVlJen2dnRd172EzQGXAp6VHOwkw63ymur_s4426vOH1RVVqyScjV4fW8Q_PcFYlKTjQbGUTvwS1SEMVzRrf0qpUepCT7GAO1DG4LVRkgNaiOkNkIKS7USWote_fnAh5LfSFbBu6MA1jEdLAQV1wE6A40NYJJqvP2__9k_5Wa0zho9foNbiINfNoTrP1SkCqsv21JsK0IqjCUTdfkLOiG6sw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1660426717</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in term, non–low-birthweight pregnancies</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Snowden, Jonathan M., PhD ; Cheng, Yvonne W., MD, PhD ; Emeis, Cathy L., CNM, PhD ; Caughey, Aaron B., MD, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Snowden, Jonathan M., PhD ; Cheng, Yvonne W., MD, PhD ; Emeis, Cathy L., CNM, PhD ; Caughey, Aaron B., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Objective The impact of hospital obstetric volume specifically on maternal outcomes remains under studied. We examined the impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in low-risk women who delivered non–low-birthweight infants at term. Study Design We conducted a retrospective cohort study of term singleton, non–low-birthweight live births from 2007-2008 in California. Deliveries were categorized by hospital obstetric volume categories and separately for nonrural hospitals (category 1: 50-1199 deliveries per year; category 2: 1200-2399; category 3: 2400-3599, and category 4: ≥3600) and rural hospitals (category R1: 50-599 births per year; category R2: 600-1699; category R3: ≥1700). Maternal outcomes were compared with the use of the chi-square test and multivariable logistic regression. Results There were 736,643 births in 267 hospitals that met study criteria. After adjustment for confounders, there were higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage in the lowest-volume rural hospitals (category R1 adjusted odds ratio, 3.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.51–6.23). Rates of chorioamnionitis, endometritis, severe perineal lacerations, and wound infection did not differ between volume categories. Longer lengths of stay were observed after maternal complications (eg, chorioamnionitis) in the lowest-volume hospitals (16.9% prolonged length of stay in category 1 hospitals vs 10.5% in category 4 hospitals; adjusted odds ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.01–3.61). Conclusion After confounder adjustment, few maternal outcomes differed by hospital obstetric volume. However, elevated odds of postpartum hemorrhage in low-volume rural hospitals raises the possibility that maternal outcomes may differ by hospital volume and geography. Further research is needed on maternal outcomes in hospitals of different obstetric volumes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-9378</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6868</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.026</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25263732</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Birth Weight ; California - epidemiology ; Cohort Studies ; Female ; Hospitals, High-Volume ; Hospitals, Low-Volume ; Hospitals, Rural ; Hospitals, Urban ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Logistic Models ; maternal complication ; Multivariate Analysis ; Obstetric Labor Complications - epidemiology ; Obstetric Labor Complications - etiology ; obstetric volume ; obstetrics ; Obstetrics and Gynecology ; Pregnancy ; quality ; Quality Assurance, Health Care ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Term Birth</subject><ispartof>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2015-03, Vol.212 (3), p.380.e1-380.e9</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2015 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-2886af705cc79e2c5dfd92fd67fcdbc10286335ed67171faae18757e328243273</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-2886af705cc79e2c5dfd92fd67fcdbc10286335ed67171faae18757e328243273</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.026$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25263732$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Snowden, Jonathan M., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Yvonne W., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Emeis, Cathy L., CNM, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caughey, Aaron B., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>The impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in term, non–low-birthweight pregnancies</title><title>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology</title><addtitle>Am J Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>Objective The impact of hospital obstetric volume specifically on maternal outcomes remains under studied. We examined the impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in low-risk women who delivered non–low-birthweight infants at term. Study Design We conducted a retrospective cohort study of term singleton, non–low-birthweight live births from 2007-2008 in California. Deliveries were categorized by hospital obstetric volume categories and separately for nonrural hospitals (category 1: 50-1199 deliveries per year; category 2: 1200-2399; category 3: 2400-3599, and category 4: ≥3600) and rural hospitals (category R1: 50-599 births per year; category R2: 600-1699; category R3: ≥1700). Maternal outcomes were compared with the use of the chi-square test and multivariable logistic regression. Results There were 736,643 births in 267 hospitals that met study criteria. After adjustment for confounders, there were higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage in the lowest-volume rural hospitals (category R1 adjusted odds ratio, 3.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.51–6.23). Rates of chorioamnionitis, endometritis, severe perineal lacerations, and wound infection did not differ between volume categories. Longer lengths of stay were observed after maternal complications (eg, chorioamnionitis) in the lowest-volume hospitals (16.9% prolonged length of stay in category 1 hospitals vs 10.5% in category 4 hospitals; adjusted odds ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.01–3.61). Conclusion After confounder adjustment, few maternal outcomes differed by hospital obstetric volume. However, elevated odds of postpartum hemorrhage in low-volume rural hospitals raises the possibility that maternal outcomes may differ by hospital volume and geography. Further research is needed on maternal outcomes in hospitals of different obstetric volumes.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Birth Weight</subject><subject>California - epidemiology</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hospitals, High-Volume</subject><subject>Hospitals, Low-Volume</subject><subject>Hospitals, Rural</subject><subject>Hospitals, Urban</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Logistic Models</subject><subject>maternal complication</subject><subject>Multivariate Analysis</subject><subject>Obstetric Labor Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Obstetric Labor Complications - etiology</subject><subject>obstetric volume</subject><subject>obstetrics</subject><subject>Obstetrics and Gynecology</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>quality</subject><subject>Quality Assurance, Health Care</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Term Birth</subject><issn>0002-9378</issn><issn>1097-6868</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9ks1u1TAQhSMEopfCC7BAXrIgwXYS_0ioUlVRQKrEgrK2fJ1J4pDYwXZu1R3vwBv2SUh0SwUsWFmeOXPGnm-y7CXBBcGEvR0KPfiuoJhUBZYFpuxRtiNY8pwJJh5nO4wxzWXJxUn2LMZhu1JJn2YntKas5CXdZd11D8hOszYJ-Rb1Ps426RH5fUyQgjXo4MdlAuQdmnSC4LbkkoyfICLr0Bqa3iDn3d2Pn6O_yfc2pP4GbNcnNAfonHbGQnyePWn1GOHF_Xmafb18f33xMb_6_OHTxflVbmqBU06FYLrluDaGS6CmbtpG0rZhvDXN3hBMBSvLGtYA4aTVGojgNYeSClqVlJen2dnRd172EzQGXAp6VHOwkw63ymur_s4426vOH1RVVqyScjV4fW8Q_PcFYlKTjQbGUTvwS1SEMVzRrf0qpUepCT7GAO1DG4LVRkgNaiOkNkIKS7USWote_fnAh5LfSFbBu6MA1jEdLAQV1wE6A40NYJJqvP2__9k_5Wa0zho9foNbiINfNoTrP1SkCqsv21JsK0IqjCUTdfkLOiG6sw</recordid><startdate>20150301</startdate><enddate>20150301</enddate><creator>Snowden, Jonathan M., PhD</creator><creator>Cheng, Yvonne W., MD, PhD</creator><creator>Emeis, Cathy L., CNM, PhD</creator><creator>Caughey, Aaron B., MD, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150301</creationdate><title>The impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in term, non–low-birthweight pregnancies</title><author>Snowden, Jonathan M., PhD ; Cheng, Yvonne W., MD, PhD ; Emeis, Cathy L., CNM, PhD ; Caughey, Aaron B., MD, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-2886af705cc79e2c5dfd92fd67fcdbc10286335ed67171faae18757e328243273</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Birth Weight</topic><topic>California - epidemiology</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hospitals, High-Volume</topic><topic>Hospitals, Low-Volume</topic><topic>Hospitals, Rural</topic><topic>Hospitals, Urban</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Logistic Models</topic><topic>maternal complication</topic><topic>Multivariate Analysis</topic><topic>Obstetric Labor Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Obstetric Labor Complications - etiology</topic><topic>obstetric volume</topic><topic>obstetrics</topic><topic>Obstetrics and Gynecology</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>quality</topic><topic>Quality Assurance, Health Care</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Term Birth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Snowden, Jonathan M., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Yvonne W., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Emeis, Cathy L., CNM, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caughey, Aaron B., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Snowden, Jonathan M., PhD</au><au>Cheng, Yvonne W., MD, PhD</au><au>Emeis, Cathy L., CNM, PhD</au><au>Caughey, Aaron B., MD, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in term, non–low-birthweight pregnancies</atitle><jtitle>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>2015-03-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>212</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>380.e1</spage><epage>380.e9</epage><pages>380.e1-380.e9</pages><issn>0002-9378</issn><eissn>1097-6868</eissn><abstract>Objective The impact of hospital obstetric volume specifically on maternal outcomes remains under studied. We examined the impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in low-risk women who delivered non–low-birthweight infants at term. Study Design We conducted a retrospective cohort study of term singleton, non–low-birthweight live births from 2007-2008 in California. Deliveries were categorized by hospital obstetric volume categories and separately for nonrural hospitals (category 1: 50-1199 deliveries per year; category 2: 1200-2399; category 3: 2400-3599, and category 4: ≥3600) and rural hospitals (category R1: 50-599 births per year; category R2: 600-1699; category R3: ≥1700). Maternal outcomes were compared with the use of the chi-square test and multivariable logistic regression. Results There were 736,643 births in 267 hospitals that met study criteria. After adjustment for confounders, there were higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage in the lowest-volume rural hospitals (category R1 adjusted odds ratio, 3.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.51–6.23). Rates of chorioamnionitis, endometritis, severe perineal lacerations, and wound infection did not differ between volume categories. Longer lengths of stay were observed after maternal complications (eg, chorioamnionitis) in the lowest-volume hospitals (16.9% prolonged length of stay in category 1 hospitals vs 10.5% in category 4 hospitals; adjusted odds ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.01–3.61). Conclusion After confounder adjustment, few maternal outcomes differed by hospital obstetric volume. However, elevated odds of postpartum hemorrhage in low-volume rural hospitals raises the possibility that maternal outcomes may differ by hospital volume and geography. Further research is needed on maternal outcomes in hospitals of different obstetric volumes.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>25263732</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.026</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0002-9378
ispartof American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2015-03, Vol.212 (3), p.380.e1-380.e9
issn 0002-9378
1097-6868
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4346499
source MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)
subjects Adult
Birth Weight
California - epidemiology
Cohort Studies
Female
Hospitals, High-Volume
Hospitals, Low-Volume
Hospitals, Rural
Hospitals, Urban
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Logistic Models
maternal complication
Multivariate Analysis
Obstetric Labor Complications - epidemiology
Obstetric Labor Complications - etiology
obstetric volume
obstetrics
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Pregnancy
quality
Quality Assurance, Health Care
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Term Birth
title The impact of hospital obstetric volume on maternal outcomes in term, non–low-birthweight pregnancies
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T23%3A46%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20impact%20of%20hospital%20obstetric%20volume%20on%20maternal%20outcomes%20in%20term,%20non%E2%80%93low-birthweight%20pregnancies&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20obstetrics%20and%20gynecology&rft.au=Snowden,%20Jonathan%20M.,%20PhD&rft.date=2015-03-01&rft.volume=212&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=380.e1&rft.epage=380.e9&rft.pages=380.e1-380.e9&rft.issn=0002-9378&rft.eissn=1097-6868&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.026&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1660426717%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1660426717&rft_id=info:pmid/25263732&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0002937814009685&rfr_iscdi=true