早期常规引产--对母婴发病率的影响。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ECONOMICS Health economics Pub Date : 2024-07-04 DOI:10.1002/hec.4877
Maria Koch Gregersen
{"title":"早期常规引产--对母婴发病率的影响。","authors":"Maria Koch Gregersen","doi":"10.1002/hec.4877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A growing number of birth interventions had led to a concern for potential health consequences. This study investigates the consequences of earlier routine labor induction. It exploits a natural experiment caused by the introduction of new Danish obstetric guidelines in 2011. Consequently, routine labor induction was moved forward from 14 to 10–13 days past the expected due date (EDD) and extended antenatal surveillance was introduced from 7 days past the EDD. Using administrative data, I find that affected mothers on average had a 9–11 percentage points (32%–38%) higher risk of being induced the following years. Yet, mother and child short- and medium-term morbidity were largely unaffected.</p>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hec.4877","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Earlier routine induction of labor—Consequences on mother and child morbidity\",\"authors\":\"Maria Koch Gregersen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hec.4877\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>A growing number of birth interventions had led to a concern for potential health consequences. This study investigates the consequences of earlier routine labor induction. It exploits a natural experiment caused by the introduction of new Danish obstetric guidelines in 2011. Consequently, routine labor induction was moved forward from 14 to 10–13 days past the expected due date (EDD) and extended antenatal surveillance was introduced from 7 days past the EDD. Using administrative data, I find that affected mothers on average had a 9–11 percentage points (32%–38%) higher risk of being induced the following years. Yet, mother and child short- and medium-term morbidity were largely unaffected.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hec.4877\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.4877\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.4877","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的分娩干预措施引起了人们对潜在健康后果的关注。本研究调查了提前常规引产的后果。该研究利用了 2011 年丹麦新产科指南的出台所引发的自然实验。因此,常规引产从预产期(EDD)后 14 天提前到 10-13 天,产前监测从预产期后 7 天开始延长。利用行政数据,我发现受影响的母亲在随后几年接受引产的风险平均高出 9-11 个百分点(32%-38%)。然而,母婴的短期和中期发病率基本未受影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Earlier routine induction of labor—Consequences on mother and child morbidity

A growing number of birth interventions had led to a concern for potential health consequences. This study investigates the consequences of earlier routine labor induction. It exploits a natural experiment caused by the introduction of new Danish obstetric guidelines in 2011. Consequently, routine labor induction was moved forward from 14 to 10–13 days past the expected due date (EDD) and extended antenatal surveillance was introduced from 7 days past the EDD. Using administrative data, I find that affected mothers on average had a 9–11 percentage points (32%–38%) higher risk of being induced the following years. Yet, mother and child short- and medium-term morbidity were largely unaffected.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health economics
Health economics 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
177
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: This Journal publishes articles on all aspects of health economics: theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy from the economic perspective. Its scope includes the determinants of health and its definition and valuation, as well as the demand for and supply of health care; planning and market mechanisms; micro-economic evaluation of individual procedures and treatments; and evaluation of the performance of health care systems. Contributions should typically be original and innovative. As a rule, the Journal does not include routine applications of cost-effectiveness analysis, discrete choice experiments and costing analyses. Editorials are regular features, these should be concise and topical. Occasionally commissioned reviews are published and special issues bring together contributions on a single topic. Health Economics Letters facilitate rapid exchange of views on topical issues. Contributions related to problems in both developed and developing countries are welcome.
期刊最新文献
The impact of surprise billing laws on emergency services. A welfare analysis of Medicaid and recidivism. The effect of vertical identification card laws on teenage tobacco and alcohol use. How do dental practices respond to changes in scope of practice regulations? Non-classical measurement error in instrumental variables estimation: An application to the medical care costs of obesity.
×
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