Exploring the influence of medical staffing and birth volume on observed-to-expected cesarean deliveries: a panel data analysis of integrated obstetric and gynecological departments in Germany.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS European Journal of Health Economics Pub Date : 2025-01-21 DOI:10.1007/s10198-024-01749-0
Arno Stöcker, Holger Pfaff, Nadine Scholten, Ludwig Kuntz
{"title":"Exploring the influence of medical staffing and birth volume on observed-to-expected cesarean deliveries: a panel data analysis of integrated obstetric and gynecological departments in Germany.","authors":"Arno Stöcker, Holger Pfaff, Nadine Scholten, Ludwig Kuntz","doi":"10.1007/s10198-024-01749-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Cesarean deliveries account for approximately one-third of all births in Germany, prompting ongoing discussions on cesarean section rates and their connection to medical staffing and birth volume. In Germany, the majority of departments integrate obstetric and gynecological care within a single department.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The analysis utilized quality reports from German hospitals spanning 2015 to 2019. The outcome variable was the annual risk-adjusted cesarean section ratio-a metric comparing expected to observed cesarean sections. Explanatory variables included annual counts of physicians, midwives, and births. To account for case number-related staffing variations, full-time equivalent midwife and physician staff positions were normalized by the number of deliveries. Uni- and multivariate panel models were applied, complemented by multiple instrument variable analyses, including two-stage least square and generalized method of moments models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Incorporating data from 509 integrated obstetric departments and 2089 observations, representing 2,335,839 deliveries with 720,795 cesarean sections (over 60% of all inpatient births in Germany), multivariate model with fixed effects revealed a statistically significant positive association between the number of physicians per birth and the risk-adjusted cesarean section ratio (0.004, p = 0.004). Two-stage least square instrument variable analysis (0.020, p < 0.001) and a system GMM estimator models (0.004, p < 0.001) validated these results, providing compelling evidence for a causal relationship.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study established a robust connection between the number of physicians per birth and the risk-adjusted cesarean section ratio in integrated obstetric and gynecological departments in Germany. While the cause of the effect remains unclear, one possible explanation is a lack of specialization within these departments due to the combined provision of both obstetric and gynecological care.</p>","PeriodicalId":51416,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-024-01749-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Cesarean deliveries account for approximately one-third of all births in Germany, prompting ongoing discussions on cesarean section rates and their connection to medical staffing and birth volume. In Germany, the majority of departments integrate obstetric and gynecological care within a single department.

Methods: The analysis utilized quality reports from German hospitals spanning 2015 to 2019. The outcome variable was the annual risk-adjusted cesarean section ratio-a metric comparing expected to observed cesarean sections. Explanatory variables included annual counts of physicians, midwives, and births. To account for case number-related staffing variations, full-time equivalent midwife and physician staff positions were normalized by the number of deliveries. Uni- and multivariate panel models were applied, complemented by multiple instrument variable analyses, including two-stage least square and generalized method of moments models.

Results: Incorporating data from 509 integrated obstetric departments and 2089 observations, representing 2,335,839 deliveries with 720,795 cesarean sections (over 60% of all inpatient births in Germany), multivariate model with fixed effects revealed a statistically significant positive association between the number of physicians per birth and the risk-adjusted cesarean section ratio (0.004, p = 0.004). Two-stage least square instrument variable analysis (0.020, p < 0.001) and a system GMM estimator models (0.004, p < 0.001) validated these results, providing compelling evidence for a causal relationship.

Conclusion: The study established a robust connection between the number of physicians per birth and the risk-adjusted cesarean section ratio in integrated obstetric and gynecological departments in Germany. While the cause of the effect remains unclear, one possible explanation is a lack of specialization within these departments due to the combined provision of both obstetric and gynecological care.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索医疗人员配备和出生数量对剖宫产观察到的预期分娩的影响:德国综合产科和妇科的小组数据分析。
导言:剖宫产约占德国所有分娩的三分之一,这促使有关剖宫产率及其与医疗人员配备和出生人数之间关系的持续讨论。在德国,大多数部门将产科和妇科护理合并为一个部门。方法:利用2015年至2019年德国医院的质量报告进行分析。结果变量是每年经风险调整的剖宫产率——一个比较预期剖宫产率和实际剖宫产率的指标。解释变量包括医师、助产士和出生人数的年度统计。考虑到与病例数相关的人员配置变化,全职等效助产士和医生职位按分娩次数标准化。采用单变量和多变量面板模型,并辅以多工具变量分析,包括两阶段最小二乘法和广义矩模型方法。结果:纳入509个综合产科部门和2089个观察数据,包括2,335,839例分娩,720,795例剖宫产(超过德国所有住院分娩的60%),固定效应的多变量模型显示,每次分娩的医生数量与风险调整剖宫产率之间存在统计学上显著的正相关(0.004,p = 0.004)。两阶段最小二乘工具变量分析(0.020,p)结论:本研究在德国综合妇产科建立了每次分娩的医生数量与经风险调整的剖宫产率之间的可靠联系。虽然造成这种影响的原因尚不清楚,但一种可能的解释是,由于产科和妇科护理的联合提供,这些部门缺乏专业化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.30%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Health Economics is a journal of Health Economics and associated disciplines. The growing demand for health economics and the introduction of new guidelines in various European countries were the motivation to generate a highly scientific and at the same time practice oriented journal considering the requirements of various health care systems in Europe. The international scientific board of opinion leaders guarantees high-quality, peer-reviewed publications as well as articles for pragmatic approaches in the field of health economics. We intend to cover all aspects of health economics: • Basics of health economic approaches and methods • Pharmacoeconomics • Health Care Systems • Pricing and Reimbursement Systems • Quality-of-Life-Studies The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements. Officially cited as: Eur J Health Econ
期刊最新文献
Changes in disposable income of Polish households and growing trends in alcohol mortality. Explaining variations in government health expenditure: evidence from Canada. The impact of different perspectives on the cost-effectiveness of remote patient monitoring for patients with heart failure in different European countries. Is there a link between health care utilisation and subjective well-being? An exploratory study among older Danes. Costs associated with insufficient physical activity in Germany: cross-sectional results from the baseline examination of the German national cohort (NAKO).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1