首页> 外文期刊>BMC Health Services Research >Risk adjustment for inter-hospital comparison of primary cesarean section rates: need, validity and parsimony
【24h】

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

机译:院内比较原发性剖宫产率的风险调整:需要,有效性和简约

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

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.
机译:背景剖宫产率经常被用作产科医院护理质量的指标。假定较低的比率在发达国家反映出更适当的临床实践和总体上较好的表现。因此,通常根据剖腹产率对医院进行排名。这项研究的目的是评估是否需要对母亲和胎儿的临床和社会人口统计学变量进行调整,以进行院内比较剖宫产(c-section)率的必要性,并评估是否基于有限的风险调整模型可以识别和使用多个变量。方法将2003年至2004年意大利艾米利亚—罗马涅地区(Emilia-Romagna Region)(意大利)的29家医院出​​院的未剖腹产劳动妇女的出院摘要与新生儿出院摘要联系起来。采用两种logistic回归模型估算出经调整的剖宫产手术率。完整的模型,包括通过反向过程选择的潜在混杂因素; 2)简化模型,仅包括通过“估计变化”过程识别的实际混杂因素。根据OR对医院排名进行了检查。结果完整模型中包括24个剖腹产危险因素,而简约模型中包括了7个因素(婚姻状况,产妇年龄,婴儿体重,费托贝维奇失调,子痫或先兆子痫,前置胎盘/胎盘早剥,胎位不正/错位)。使用来自两个模型的调整后OR的医院排名与使用原始OR所获得的医院排名不同。两种模型的排名之间的相关性是0.92。粗略的OR小于两个模型所调整的OR,而简约OR则产生了更精确的估计。结论风险调整是比较医院剖宫产率的必要措施,它显示了排名的差异并突出了某些医院的不当之处。通过仅针对实际混杂因素进行调整,可以获得有效且更精确的估计。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号