» Articles » PMID: 26922481

Variation in Primary Cesarean Delivery Rates by Individual Physician Within a Single-hospital Laborist Model

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2016 Feb 29
PMID 26922481
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Laborist practice models are associated with lower rates of cesarean delivery than individual private practice models in several studies; however, this effect is not uniform. Further exploration of laborist models may help us better understand the observed decrease in rates of cesarean delivery in some hospitals that implement a laborist model.

Objective: Our objective was to evaluate the degree of variation in rates of primary cesarean delivery by individual laborists within a single institution that uses a laborist model. In addition, we sought to evaluate whether differences in rates of cesarean delivery resulted in different maternal or short-term neonatal outcomes.

Study Design: At this teaching institution, one laborist (either a generalist or maternal-fetal medicine attending physician) is directly responsible for labor and delivery management during each shift. No patients are followed in a private practice model nor are physicians incentivized to perform deliveries. We retrospectively identified all laborists who delivered nulliparous, term women with cephalic singletons at this institution from 2007 to 2014. Overall and individual primary cesarean delivery rates were reported as percentages with exact Pearson 95% confidence intervals. Laborists were grouped by tertile as having low, medium, or high rates of cesarean delivery. Characteristics of the women delivered, indications for cesarean delivery, and short-term neonatal outcomes were compared between these groups. A binomial regression model of cesarean delivery was estimated, where the relative rates of each laborist compared with the lowest-unadjusted laborist rate were calculated; a second model was estimated to adjust for patient-level maternal characteristics.

Results: Twenty laborists delivered 2224 nulliparous, term women with cephalic singletons. The overall cesarean delivery rate was 24.1% (95% confidence interval 21.4-26.8). In an unadjusted binomial model, the overall effect of individual laborist was significant (P < .001), and a 2.9-fold (1.5-5.4, P = .001) variation between the cesarean delivery rates of the greatest (35.9%) and lowest (12.5%) physicians was observed. When adjusted for hypertensive disease, gestational age at delivery, race, and maternal age, the physician effect remained overall significant (P = .0265) with the difference between physicians expanding to 3.58 (1.72-7.47, P <. 001). Between groups of laborists with low, medium, and high rates of cesarean delivery, patient demographics and clinical characteristics of the population managed were clinically similar and not different statistically. The primary indication for cesarean delivery did not differ between groups. Similarly there were no differences in short-term neonatal outcomes, including Apgar scores, arterial cord blood pH, or the incidence of neonatal encephalopathy.

Conclusion: The 3-fold variation in cesarean delivery rates between laborists at the same institution without observed differences in patient characteristics or short-term neonatal outcomes draws attention to the impact of individual physician decision-making on cesarean delivery rates even within a laborist care model. Further exploration of the role of individual physician decision-making on cesarean rates may help to better elucidate the effect of the laborist model.

Citing Articles

Application of a specific clinical pathway can affect the choice of trial of labor in patients with a history of cesarean delivery.

Psenkova P, Tedla M, Minarcinova L, Zahumensky J BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024; 24(1):292.

PMID: 38641800 PMC: 11027349. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-024-06429-8.


Hospital-level variation in racial disparities in low-risk nulliparous cesarean delivery rates.

Main E, Chang S, Tucker C, Sakowski C, Leonard S, Rosenstein M Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023; 5(12):101145.

PMID: 37648109 PMC: 10873027. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101145.


Cesarean delivery on maternal request and its influencing factors in Chongqing, China.

Deng R, Tang X, Liu J, Gao Y, Zhong X BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021; 21(1):384.

PMID: 34011289 PMC: 8132350. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-021-03866-7.


Caesarean sections in teaching hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis of hospitals in 22 countries.

Hoxha I, Zhubi E, Grezda K, Kryeziu B, Bunjaku J, Sadiku F BMJ Open. 2021; 11(1):e042076.

PMID: 33509847 PMC: 7845681. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042076.


Cesarean overuse and the culture of care.

White VanGompel E, Perez S, Datta A, Wang C, Cape V, Main E Health Serv Res. 2019; 54(2):417-424.

PMID: 30790273 PMC: 6407356. DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.13123.


References
1.
Li T, Rhoads G, Smulian J, Demissie K, Wartenberg D, Kruse L . Physician cesarean delivery rates and risk-adjusted perinatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 101(6):1204-12. DOI: 10.1016/s0029-7844(03)00175-3. View

2.
Socol M, Garcia P, Peaceman A, Dooley S . Reducing cesarean births at a primarily private university hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993; 168(6 Pt 1):1748-54; discussion 1754-8. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90686-d. View

3.
Harris P, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde J . Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2008; 42(2):377-81. PMC: 2700030. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010. View

4.
. Committee opinion no. 459: the obstetric-gynecologic hospitalist. Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 116(1):237-239. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e8b087. View

5.
Iriye B, Huang W, Condon J, Hancock L, Hancock J, Ghamsary M . Implementation of a laborist program and evaluation of the effect upon cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 209(3):251.e1-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.06.040. View