1
|
Vilkko R, Räisänen S, Gissler M, Stefanovic V, Kalliala I, Heinonen S. Busy day effect on adverse obstetric outcomes using a nationwide ecosystem approach: Cross-sectional register study of 601 247 hospital deliveries. BJOG 2023; 130:1328-1336. [PMID: 37078492 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.17502] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2022] [Revised: 03/20/2023] [Accepted: 03/28/2023] [Indexed: 04/21/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To study the busy day effect on selected neonatal adverse outcomes in different sized delivery hospitals and in the entire nationwide obstetric ecosystem. DESIGN A cross-sectional register study. SETTING The lowest and highest 10% of the daily delivery volume distribution were defined as quiet and busy days, respectively. The days between (80%) were defined as optimal delivery volume days. The differences in the incidence of selected adverse neonatal outcome measures were analysed between busy versus optimal days and quiet versus optimal days at the hospital category and for the entire obstetric ecosystem level. POPULATION A total of 601 247 singleton hospital deliveries between 2006 and 2016, occurred in non-tertiary (C1-C4, stratified by size) and tertiary level (C5) delivery hospitals. METHODS Analyses were performed by the methods of the regression analyses with crude and adjusted odds ratios including 99% CI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Birth asphyxia. RESULTS At the ecosystem level, adjusted odds ratio for birth asphyxia was 0.81 (99% CI 0.76-0.87) on busy versus optimal days. Breakdown to hospital categories show that adjusted odds ratios for asphyxia on busy versus optimal days in non-tertiary hospitals (C3, C4) were 0.25 (99% CI 0.16-0.41) and 0.17 (99% CI 0.13-0.22), respectively, and in tertiary hospitals was 1.20 (99% CI 1.10-1.32). CONCLUSIONS Busy day effect as a stress test caused no extra cases of neonatal adverse outcomes at the ecosystem level. However, in non-tertiary hospitals busy days were associated with a lower and in tertiary hospitals a higher incidence of neonatal adverse outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Riitta Vilkko
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Sari Räisänen
- School of Health, Tampere University of Applied Sciences, Tampere, Finland
| | - Mika Gissler
- Knowledge Brokers, THL Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland
- Region Stockholm, Academic Primary Health Care Centre, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Vedran Stefanovic
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Fetomaternal Medical Centre, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Ilkka Kalliala
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Seppo Heinonen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Walther F, Kuester D, Bieber A, Malzahn J, Rüdiger M, Schmitt J. Are birth outcomes in low risk birth cohorts related to hospital birth volumes? A systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2021; 21:531. [PMID: 34315416 PMCID: PMC8314545 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-021-03988-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2021] [Accepted: 07/02/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background There is convincing evidence that birth in hospitals with high birth volumes increases the chance of healthy survival in high-risk infants. However, it is unclear whether this is true also for low risk infants. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze effects of hospital’s birth volume on mortality, mode of delivery, readmissions, complications and subsequent developmental delays in all births or predefined low risk birth cohorts. The search strategy included EMBASE and Medline supplemented by citing and cited literature of included studies and expert panel highlighting additional literature, published between January/2000 and February/2020. We included studies which were published in English or German language reporting effects of birth volumes on mortality in term or all births in countries with neonatal mortality < 5/1000. We undertook a double-independent title-abstract- and full-text screening and extraction of study characteristics, critical appraisal and outcomes in a qualitative evidence synthesis. Results 13 retrospective studies with mostly acceptable quality were included. Heterogeneous volume-thresholds, risk adjustments, outcomes and populations hindered a meta-analysis. Qualitatively, four of six studies reported significantly higher perinatal mortality in lower birth volume hospitals. Volume-outcome effects on neonatal mortality (n = 7), stillbirths (n = 3), maternal mortality (n = 1), caesarean sections (n = 2), maternal (n = 1) and neonatal complications (n = 1) were inconclusive. Conclusion Analyzed studies indicate higher rates of perinatal mortality for low risk birth in hospitals with low birth volumes. Due to heterogeneity of studies, data synthesis was complicated and a meta-analysis was not possible. Therefore international core outcome sets should be defined and implemented in perinatal registries. Systematic review registration PROSPERO: CRD42018095289 Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-021-03988-y.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Felix Walther
- Center for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany. .,Quality and Medical Risk Management, University Hospital Carl, Gustav Carus, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
| | - Denise Kuester
- Center for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany
| | - Anja Bieber
- Institute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Postfach 302, 06097, Halle, Saale, Germany
| | - Jürgen Malzahn
- Federation of Local Health Insurance Funds, Clinical Care, Rosenthaler Str. 31, 10178, Berlin, Germany
| | - Mario Rüdiger
- Department for Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.,Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Saxony Center for Feto-Neonatal Health, TU Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany
| | - Jochen Schmitt
- Center for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.,Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Saxony Center for Feto-Neonatal Health, TU Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|