Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Health Services Research logoLink to Health Services Research
. 1991 Aug;26(3):325–337.

The cesarean birth rate: influence of hospital teaching status.

D M Oleske 1, G L Glandon 1, G J Giacomelli 1, S F Hohmann 1
PMCID: PMC1069828  PMID: 1869443

Abstract

Knowledge of how cesarean birth rates vary by hospital characteristics may aid in understanding and perhaps modifying some of the structural and process components of newborn delivery services to decrease the necessity of birth by cesarean procedure. To examine the influence of select hospital characteristics, data on hospital newborn deliveries in Illinois for 1986 among women 10-50 years of age inclusive (N = 130,249) were obtained from computerized hospital discharge abstract files. Characteristics of the hospitals were obtained from the annual American Hospital Association survey. Adjusting for mother's age at delivery; presence of pregnancy, labor, and delivery complications; expected primary payer; and size of hospital, women delivering in hospitals with teaching status were less likely (odds ratio = 0.76, p less than .001, 95 percent CL: 0.73, 0.79) to have a primary cesarean birth than women delivering in hospitals without this designation. A significantly lower cesarean birth rate in teaching hospitals was also observed in women of all age groups, in Medicaid and non-Medicaid women, and for most categories of delivery complications. These data suggest the need to identify the programmatic, technologic, and manpower functions associated with hospital teaching status that could decrease the likelihood of a primary cesarean delivery. The study also suggests that changes aimed at the manner of diagnosis, monitoring, and/or management of pregnancy/delivery complications may reduce the cesarean birth rate because of large differences in the primary cesarean birth rate found between teaching and other hospitals for most categories of newborn delivery complications.

Full text

PDF
325

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Anderson G. M., Lomas J. Determinants of the increasing cesarean birth rate. Ontario data 1979 to 1982. N Engl J Med. 1984 Oct 4;311(14):887–892. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198410043111405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Goldfarb M. G., Coffey R. M. Case-mix differences between teaching and nonteaching hospitals. Inquiry. 1987 Spring;24(1):68–84. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Goyert G. L., Bottoms S. F., Treadwell M. C., Nehra P. C. The physician factor in cesarean birth rates. N Engl J Med. 1989 Mar 16;320(11):706–709. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198903163201106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hage M. L., Helms M. J., Hammond W. E., Hammond C. B. Changing rates of cesarean delivery: the Duke experience, 1978-1986. Obstet Gynecol. 1988 Jul;72(1):98–101. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hartz A. J., Krakauer H., Kuhn E. M., Young M., Jacobsen S. J., Gay G., Muenz L., Katzoff M., Bailey R. C., Rimm A. A. Hospital characteristics and mortality rates. N Engl J Med. 1989 Dec 21;321(25):1720–1725. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198912213212506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Kelly J. V. Characteristics of COTH member, other teaching, and non-teaching hospitals, 1987. Acad Med. 1989 Nov;64(11):692–693. doi: 10.1097/00001888-198911000-00024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Kelly J. V., Hellinger F. J. Physician and hospital factors associated with mortality of surgical patients. Med Care. 1986 Sep;24(9):785–800. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198609000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. McCusker J., Harris D. R., Hosmer D. W., Jr Association of electronic fetal monitoring during labor with cesarean section rate and with neonatal morbidity and mortality. Am J Public Health. 1988 Sep;78(9):1170–1174. doi: 10.2105/ajph.78.9.1170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Myers S. A., Gleicher N. A successful program to lower cesarean-section rates. N Engl J Med. 1988 Dec 8;319(23):1511–1516. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198812083192304. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Notzon F. C., Placek P. J., Taffel S. M. Comparisons of national cesarean-section rates. N Engl J Med. 1987 Feb 12;316(7):386–389. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198702123160706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Phillips R. N., Thornton J., Gleicher N. Physician bias in cesarean sections. JAMA. 1982 Sep 3;248(9):1082–1084. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Placek P. J., Taffel S. M., Moien M. 1986 C-sections rise; VBACs inch upward. Am J Public Health. 1988 May;78(5):562–563. doi: 10.2105/ajph.78.5.562. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Placek P. J., Taffel S. M. Trends in cesarean section rates for the United States, 1970--78. Public Health Rep. 1980 Nov-Dec;95(6):540–548. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Shiono P. H., Fielden J. G., McNellis D., Rhoads G. G., Pearse W. H. Recent trends in cesarean birth and trial of labor rates in the United States. JAMA. 1987 Jan 23;257(4):494–497. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Shiono P. H., McNellis D., Rhoads G. G. Reasons for the rising cesarean delivery rates: 1978-1984. Obstet Gynecol. 1987 May;69(5):696–700. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Shy K. K., Luthy D. A., Bennett F. C., Whitfield M., Larson E. B., van Belle G., Hughes J. P., Wilson J. A., Stenchever M. A. Effects of electronic fetal-heart-rate monitoring, as compared with periodic auscultation, on the neurologic development of premature infants. N Engl J Med. 1990 Mar 1;322(9):588–593. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199003013220904. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Taffel S. M. Cesarean section in America: dramatic trends, 1970 to 1987. Stat Bull Metrop Insur Co. 1989 Oct-Dec;70(4):2–11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Taffel S. M., Placek P. J., Liss T. Trends in the United States cesarean section rate and reasons for the 1980-85 rise. Am J Public Health. 1987 Aug;77(8):955–959. doi: 10.2105/ajph.77.8.955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Taffel S. M., Placek P. J., Moien M. 1988 U.S. cesarean-section rate at 24.7 per 100 births--a plateau? N Engl J Med. 1990 Jul 19;323(3):199–200. doi: 10.1056/nejm199007193230315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Williams R. L., Chen P. M. Controlling the rise in cesarean section rates by the dissemination of information from vital records. Am J Public Health. 1983 Aug;73(8):863–867. doi: 10.2105/ajph.73.8.863. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. de Regt R. H., Minkoff H. L., Feldman J., Schwarz R. H. Relation of private or clinic care to the cesarean birth rate. N Engl J Med. 1986 Sep 4;315(10):619–624. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198609043151005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Health Services Research are provided here courtesy of Health Research & Educational Trust

RESOURCES