Cargando…

Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony

BACKGROUND: Cesarean section rates is often used as an indicator of quality of care in maternity hospitals. The assumption is that lower rates reflect in developed countries more appropriate clinical practice and general better performances. Hospitals are thus often ranked on the basis of caesarean...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fantini, Maria P, Stivanello, Elisa, Frammartino, Brunella, Barone, Anna P, Fusco, Danilo, Dallolio, Laura, Cacciari, Paolo, Perucci, Carlo A
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1590020/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16911770
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-6-100
_version_ 1782130359978164224
author Fantini, Maria P
Stivanello, Elisa
Frammartino, Brunella
Barone, Anna P
Fusco, Danilo
Dallolio, Laura
Cacciari, Paolo
Perucci, Carlo A
author_facet Fantini, Maria P
Stivanello, Elisa
Frammartino, Brunella
Barone, Anna P
Fusco, Danilo
Dallolio, Laura
Cacciari, Paolo
Perucci, Carlo A
author_sort Fantini, Maria P
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cesarean section rates is often used as an indicator of quality of care in maternity hospitals. The assumption is that lower rates reflect in developed countries more appropriate clinical practice and general better performances. Hospitals are thus often ranked on the basis of caesarean section rates. The aim of this study is to assess whether the adjustment for clinical and sociodemographic variables of the mother and the fetus is necessary for inter-hospital comparisons of cesarean section (c-section) rates and to assess whether a risk adjustment model based on a limited number of variables could be identified and used. METHODS: Discharge abstracts of labouring women without prior cesarean were linked with abstracts of newborns discharged from 29 hospitals of the Emilia-Romagna Region (Italy) from 2003 to 2004. Adjusted ORs of cesarean by hospital were estimated by using two logistic regression models: 1) a full model including the potential confounders selected by a backward procedure; 2) a parsimonious model including only actual confounders identified by the "change-in-estimate" procedure. Hospital rankings, based on ORs were examined. RESULTS: 24 risk factors for c-section were included in the full model and 7 (marital status, maternal age, infant weight, fetopelvic disproportion, eclampsia or pre-eclampsia, placenta previa/abruptio placentae, malposition/malpresentation) in the parsimonious model. Hospital ranking using the adjusted ORs from both models was different from that obtained using the crude ORs. The correlation between the rankings of the two models was 0.92. The crude ORs were smaller than ORs adjusted by both models, with the parsimonious ones producing more precise estimates. CONCLUSION: Risk adjustment is necessary to compare hospital c-section rates, it shows differences in rankings and highlights inappropriateness of some hospitals. By adjusting for only actual confounders valid and more precise estimates could be obtained.
format Text
id pubmed-1590020
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-15900202006-10-05 Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony Fantini, Maria P Stivanello, Elisa Frammartino, Brunella Barone, Anna P Fusco, Danilo Dallolio, Laura Cacciari, Paolo Perucci, Carlo A BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Cesarean section rates is often used as an indicator of quality of care in maternity hospitals. The assumption is that lower rates reflect in developed countries more appropriate clinical practice and general better performances. Hospitals are thus often ranked on the basis of caesarean section rates. The aim of this study is to assess whether the adjustment for clinical and sociodemographic variables of the mother and the fetus is necessary for inter-hospital comparisons of cesarean section (c-section) rates and to assess whether a risk adjustment model based on a limited number of variables could be identified and used. METHODS: Discharge abstracts of labouring women without prior cesarean were linked with abstracts of newborns discharged from 29 hospitals of the Emilia-Romagna Region (Italy) from 2003 to 2004. Adjusted ORs of cesarean by hospital were estimated by using two logistic regression models: 1) a full model including the potential confounders selected by a backward procedure; 2) a parsimonious model including only actual confounders identified by the "change-in-estimate" procedure. Hospital rankings, based on ORs were examined. RESULTS: 24 risk factors for c-section were included in the full model and 7 (marital status, maternal age, infant weight, fetopelvic disproportion, eclampsia or pre-eclampsia, placenta previa/abruptio placentae, malposition/malpresentation) in the parsimonious model. Hospital ranking using the adjusted ORs from both models was different from that obtained using the crude ORs. The correlation between the rankings of the two models was 0.92. The crude ORs were smaller than ORs adjusted by both models, with the parsimonious ones producing more precise estimates. CONCLUSION: Risk adjustment is necessary to compare hospital c-section rates, it shows differences in rankings and highlights inappropriateness of some hospitals. By adjusting for only actual confounders valid and more precise estimates could be obtained. BioMed Central 2006-08-15 /pmc/articles/PMC1590020/ /pubmed/16911770 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-6-100 Text en Copyright © 2006 Fantini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Fantini, Maria P
Stivanello, Elisa
Frammartino, Brunella
Barone, Anna P
Fusco, Danilo
Dallolio, Laura
Cacciari, Paolo
Perucci, Carlo A
Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony
title Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony
title_full Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony
title_fullStr Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony
title_full_unstemmed Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony
title_short Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony
title_sort risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1590020/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16911770
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-6-100
work_keys_str_mv AT fantinimariap riskadjustmentforinterhospitalcomparisonofprimarycesareansectionratesneedvalidityandparsimony
AT stivanelloelisa riskadjustmentforinterhospitalcomparisonofprimarycesareansectionratesneedvalidityandparsimony
AT frammartinobrunella riskadjustmentforinterhospitalcomparisonofprimarycesareansectionratesneedvalidityandparsimony
AT baroneannap riskadjustmentforinterhospitalcomparisonofprimarycesareansectionratesneedvalidityandparsimony
AT fuscodanilo riskadjustmentforinterhospitalcomparisonofprimarycesareansectionratesneedvalidityandparsimony
AT dalloliolaura riskadjustmentforinterhospitalcomparisonofprimarycesareansectionratesneedvalidityandparsimony
AT cacciaripaolo riskadjustmentforinterhospitalcomparisonofprimarycesareansectionratesneedvalidityandparsimony
AT peruccicarloa riskadjustmentforinterhospitalcomparisonofprimarycesareansectionratesneedvalidityandparsimony