Cargando…
Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis
OBJECTIVE: Financial incentives may encourage private for-profit providers to perform more caesarean section (CS) than non-profit hospitals. We therefore sought to determine the association of for-profit status of hospital and odds of CS. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: ME...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5318567/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28213600 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013670 |
_version_ | 1782509217145421824 |
---|---|
author | Hoxha, Ilir Syrogiannouli, Lamprini Luta, Xhyljeta Tal, Kali Goodman, David C da Costa, Bruno R Jüni, Peter |
author_facet | Hoxha, Ilir Syrogiannouli, Lamprini Luta, Xhyljeta Tal, Kali Goodman, David C da Costa, Bruno R Jüni, Peter |
author_sort | Hoxha, Ilir |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Financial incentives may encourage private for-profit providers to perform more caesarean section (CS) than non-profit hospitals. We therefore sought to determine the association of for-profit status of hospital and odds of CS. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from the first year of records through February 2016. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: To be eligible, studies had to report data to allow the calculation of ORs of CS comparing private for-profit hospitals with public or private non-profit hospitals in a specific geographic area. OUTCOMES: The prespecified primary outcome was the adjusted OR of births delivered by CS in private for-profit hospitals as compared with public or private non-profit hospitals; the prespecified secondary outcome was the crude OR of CS in private for-profit hospitals as compared with public or private non-profit hospitals. RESULTS: 15 articles describing 17 separate studies in 4.1 million women were included. In a meta-analysis of 11 studies, the adjusted odds of delivery by CS was 1.41 higher in for-profit hospitals as compared with non-profit hospitals (95% CI 1.24 to 1.60) with no relevant heterogeneity between studies (τ(2)≤0.037). Findings were robust across subgroups of studies in stratified analyses. The meta-analysis of crude estimates from 16 studies revealed a somewhat more pronounced association (pooled OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.27) with moderate-to-high heterogeneity between studies (τ(2)≥0.179). CONCLUSIONS: CS are more likely to be performed by for-profit hospitals as compared with non-profit hospitals. This holds true regardless of women's risk and contextual factors such as country, year or study design. Since financial incentives are likely to play an important role, we recommend examination of incentive structures of for-profit hospitals to identify strategies that encourage appropriate provision of CS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5318567 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53185672017-02-27 Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis Hoxha, Ilir Syrogiannouli, Lamprini Luta, Xhyljeta Tal, Kali Goodman, David C da Costa, Bruno R Jüni, Peter BMJ Open Health Services Research OBJECTIVE: Financial incentives may encourage private for-profit providers to perform more caesarean section (CS) than non-profit hospitals. We therefore sought to determine the association of for-profit status of hospital and odds of CS. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from the first year of records through February 2016. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: To be eligible, studies had to report data to allow the calculation of ORs of CS comparing private for-profit hospitals with public or private non-profit hospitals in a specific geographic area. OUTCOMES: The prespecified primary outcome was the adjusted OR of births delivered by CS in private for-profit hospitals as compared with public or private non-profit hospitals; the prespecified secondary outcome was the crude OR of CS in private for-profit hospitals as compared with public or private non-profit hospitals. RESULTS: 15 articles describing 17 separate studies in 4.1 million women were included. In a meta-analysis of 11 studies, the adjusted odds of delivery by CS was 1.41 higher in for-profit hospitals as compared with non-profit hospitals (95% CI 1.24 to 1.60) with no relevant heterogeneity between studies (τ(2)≤0.037). Findings were robust across subgroups of studies in stratified analyses. The meta-analysis of crude estimates from 16 studies revealed a somewhat more pronounced association (pooled OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.27) with moderate-to-high heterogeneity between studies (τ(2)≥0.179). CONCLUSIONS: CS are more likely to be performed by for-profit hospitals as compared with non-profit hospitals. This holds true regardless of women's risk and contextual factors such as country, year or study design. Since financial incentives are likely to play an important role, we recommend examination of incentive structures of for-profit hospitals to identify strategies that encourage appropriate provision of CS. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-02-17 /pmc/articles/PMC5318567/ /pubmed/28213600 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013670 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Health Services Research Hoxha, Ilir Syrogiannouli, Lamprini Luta, Xhyljeta Tal, Kali Goodman, David C da Costa, Bruno R Jüni, Peter Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Health Services Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5318567/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28213600 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013670 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hoxhailir caesareansectionsandforprofitstatusofhospitalssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT syrogiannoulilamprini caesareansectionsandforprofitstatusofhospitalssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT lutaxhyljeta caesareansectionsandforprofitstatusofhospitalssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT talkali caesareansectionsandforprofitstatusofhospitalssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT goodmandavidc caesareansectionsandforprofitstatusofhospitalssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT dacostabrunor caesareansectionsandforprofitstatusofhospitalssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT junipeter caesareansectionsandforprofitstatusofhospitalssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |