Primary Cesarean Delivery among Uncomplicated Term Nulliparous Parturients: The Influence of Group Practice Within a Community Hospital

ABSTRACT

In a community hospital, the rate of cesarean delivery varied significantly for uncomplicated nulliparous patients managed by four practice groups, although the rate of shoulder dystocia did not. Among four practice groups in a single center, our objective was to discern the rate of cesarean delivery (CD) among uncomplicated, term nulliparous parturients, and the likelihood of shoulder dystocia and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The inclusion criteria for this retrospective study were uncomplicated nullipara ≥ 37 weeks. Multivariable models were used for analysis. Over 2 years, 1217 women met the inclusion criteria. The overall rate of primary CD was 21%, with rates of 15%, 24%, 17%, and 32% for the four groups. After controlling for confounding variables, the rate of primary CD was significantly higher for group 2 (odd ratio [OR] 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17, 2.42) and 4 (OR 1.83; 95% CI, 1.25, 2.68) versus groups 1 and 3 combined. Shoulder dystocia and admission to NICU did not vary between groups. Among uncomplicated term nulliparous patients, the rate of primary CD varied significantly by practice groups, without an effect on rate of shoulder dystocia or NICU admission.

KEYWORDS

Nulliparous - primary cesarean delivery - shoulder dystocia - neonatal intensive care unit

REFERENCES

• 1 Visco A G, Viswanathan M, Lohr K N et al.. Cesarean delivery on maternal request.  Obstet Gynecol. 2006;  108 1517-1529
• 2 Menacker F, Declercq E, Macdorman M F et al.. Cesarean delivery: background, trends, and epidemiology.  Semin Perinatol. 2006;  30 235-241
• 3 Turnquest Wells M A. Cesarean section.  Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2002;  57(7) 409-412
• 4 Wax J R, Cartin A, Pinette M G, Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean: an evidence-based review.  Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2004;  59(8) 601-616
• 5 Wagner M. Choosing cesarean section.  Lancet. 2000;  356 1677-1680
• 6 Getahun D, Oyelese Y, Salihu H M, Ananth C V. Previous cesarean delivery and risks of placenta previa and placental abruption.  Obstet Gynecol. 2006;  107 771-778
• 7 Clark S L, Xu W, Porter T F, Love D. Institutional influences on the primary cesarean section rate in Utah, 1992 to 1995.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;  179 841-845
• 8 Fischer A, LaCoursiere D Y, Barnard P, Bloebaum L, Varner M. Differences between hospitals in cesarean rates for term primigravidas with cephalic presentation.  Obstet Gynecol. 2005;  105 816-821
• 9 Elliott J P, Russell M M, Dickason L A. The labor-adjusted cesarean section rate-a more informative method than the cesarean section “rate” for assessing a practitioner's labor and delivery skills.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;  177 139-143
• 10 Poma P A. Effect of departmental policies on cesarean delivery rates: a community hospital experience.  Obstet Gynecol. 1998;  91 1013-1018
• 11 Tussing A D, Wojtowycz M A. Malpractice, defensive medicine, and obstetric behavior.  Med Care. 1997;  35 172-191
• 12 Alexander G R, Himes J H, Kaufman R B, Mor J, Kogan M. A United States national reference for fetal growth.  Obstet Gynecol. 1996;  87 163-168
• 13 DeMott R K, Sandmire H F. The Green Bay Cesarean Section Study. 1. The physician factor as a determinant of cesarean birth rates.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;  162 1593-1602