Identifying individual hospital levels of maternal care using administrative data.


Journal

BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 Jun 2021
Historique:
received: 04 01 2021
accepted: 10 05 2021
entrez: 2 6 2021
pubmed: 3 6 2021
medline: 4 6 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The goal of regionalized perinatal care, specifically levels of maternal care, is to improve maternal outcomes through risk-appropriate obstetric care. Studies of levels of maternal care are limited by current approaches to identify a hospital's level of care, often relying on hospital self-reported data, which is expensive and challenging to collect and validate. The study objective was to develop an empiric approach to determine a hospital's level of maternal care using administrative data reflective of the patient care provided and apply this approach to describe the levels of maternal care available over time. Retrospective cohort study of mother-infant dyads who delivered in California, Missouri, and Pennsylvania hospitals from 2000 to 2009. Linked mother-infant administrative records with an infant born at 24-44 weeks' gestation and a birth weight of 400-8000 g were included. Using the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine descriptions of levels of maternal care, four levels were classified based on the appropriate location of care for patients with specific medical or pregnancy conditions. Individual hospitals were assigned a level of maternal care annually based on the volume of patients who delivered reflective of the four classified levels as determined by International Classification of Diseases and Current Procedural Terminology. Based on the included 6,895,000 mother-infant dyads, the obstetric hospital levels of maternal care I, II, III and IV were identified. High-risk patients more frequently delivered in hospitals with higher level maternal care, accounting for 8.9, 10.9, 13.8, and 16.9% of deliveries in level I, II, III and IV hospitals, respectively. The total number of obstetric hospitals decreased over the study period, while the proportion of hospitals with high-level (level III or IV) maternal care increased. High-level hospitals were located in more densely populated areas. Identification of the level of maternal care, independent of hospital self-reported variables, is feasible using administrative data. This empiric approach, which accounts for changes in hospitals over time, is a valuable framework for perinatal researchers and other stakeholders to inexpensively identify measurable benefits of levels of maternal care and characterize where specific patient populations receive care.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The goal of regionalized perinatal care, specifically levels of maternal care, is to improve maternal outcomes through risk-appropriate obstetric care. Studies of levels of maternal care are limited by current approaches to identify a hospital's level of care, often relying on hospital self-reported data, which is expensive and challenging to collect and validate. The study objective was to develop an empiric approach to determine a hospital's level of maternal care using administrative data reflective of the patient care provided and apply this approach to describe the levels of maternal care available over time.
METHODS METHODS
Retrospective cohort study of mother-infant dyads who delivered in California, Missouri, and Pennsylvania hospitals from 2000 to 2009. Linked mother-infant administrative records with an infant born at 24-44 weeks' gestation and a birth weight of 400-8000 g were included. Using the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine descriptions of levels of maternal care, four levels were classified based on the appropriate location of care for patients with specific medical or pregnancy conditions. Individual hospitals were assigned a level of maternal care annually based on the volume of patients who delivered reflective of the four classified levels as determined by International Classification of Diseases and Current Procedural Terminology.
RESULTS RESULTS
Based on the included 6,895,000 mother-infant dyads, the obstetric hospital levels of maternal care I, II, III and IV were identified. High-risk patients more frequently delivered in hospitals with higher level maternal care, accounting for 8.9, 10.9, 13.8, and 16.9% of deliveries in level I, II, III and IV hospitals, respectively. The total number of obstetric hospitals decreased over the study period, while the proportion of hospitals with high-level (level III or IV) maternal care increased. High-level hospitals were located in more densely populated areas.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Identification of the level of maternal care, independent of hospital self-reported variables, is feasible using administrative data. This empiric approach, which accounts for changes in hospitals over time, is a valuable framework for perinatal researchers and other stakeholders to inexpensively identify measurable benefits of levels of maternal care and characterize where specific patient populations receive care.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34074286
doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06516-y
pii: 10.1186/s12913-021-06516-y
pmc: PMC8171026
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

538

Subventions

Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : R01 HD084819
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : T32 HD007440
Pays : United States

Références

Pediatrics. 2002 May;109(5):745-51
pubmed: 11986431
Comput Biomed Res. 1997 Aug;30(4):290-305
pubmed: 9339323
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Dec;132(6):1401-1406
pubmed: 30399104
N Engl J Med. 2007 May 24;356(21):2165-75
pubmed: 17522400
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 May;184(6):1302-7
pubmed: 11349206
J Perinatol. 2016 Jul;36(7):510-5
pubmed: 26890556
JAMA. 2018 Mar 27;319(12):1239-1247
pubmed: 29522161
Womens Health Issues. 2019 May - Jun;29(3):252-258
pubmed: 30935820
N Engl J Med. 1982 Jul 15;307(3):149-55
pubmed: 7088051
Health Serv Res. 2016 Aug;51(4):1546-60
pubmed: 26806952
J Community Health. 2003 Oct;28(5):335-46
pubmed: 14535599
Pediatrics. 2007 Jan;119(1):e257-63
pubmed: 17200251
JAMA. 2003 Mar 26;289(12):1515-22
pubmed: 12672768
Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Aug;134(2):e41-e55
pubmed: 31348224
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2017 Dec;26(12):1265-1269
pubmed: 29240547
Am J Perinatol. 2019 May;36(6):653-658
pubmed: 30336499
Health Serv Res. 2000 Oct;35(4):869-83
pubmed: 11055453
Health Serv Res. 2013 Apr;48(2 Pt 1):455-75
pubmed: 22881056
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Dec;183(6):1504-11
pubmed: 11120519
Pediatrics. 2012 Aug;130(2):270-8
pubmed: 22778301
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Feb;125(2):502-515
pubmed: 25611640
Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Sep;134(3):545-552
pubmed: 31403590
Biom J. 2005 Aug;47(4):458-72
pubmed: 16161804
Am J Public Health. 1998 May;88(5):813-6
pubmed: 9585754
Semin Perinatol. 2017 Oct;41(6):332-337
pubmed: 28823579

Auteurs

Sara C Handley (SC)

Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and the Perelman School of Medicine-University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. handleys@email.chop.edu.
Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. handleys@email.chop.edu.

Molly Passarella (M)

Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and the Perelman School of Medicine-University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Sindhu K Srinivas (SK)

Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
The Maternal and Child Health Research Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and the Perelman School of Medicine-University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Scott A Lorch (SA)

Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and the Perelman School of Medicine-University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH