Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cesarean Delivery and Indications Among Nulliparous, Term, Singleton, Vertex Women

Author:

Okwandu Ijeoma C.ORCID,Anderson Meredith,Postlethwaite Debbie,Shirazi Aida,Torrente Sandra

Abstract

Abstract Objective To compare cesarean delivery rates and indications by race/ethnicity among nulliparous women with term, singleton, vertex presentation deliveries. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study of nulliparous women delivering term, singleton, vertex neonates at Kaiser Permanente Northern California from 1/1/2016 to 6/30/2017. Women with cesarean for elective, malpresentation, or previa were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for maternal, neonatal, and facility factors were used to assess the likelihood of cesarean by race/ethnicity. Further modeling was performed to examine odds of cesarean for the indications of failure to progress and fetal intolerance by race/ethnicity. Results The cohort of 16,587 racially/ethnically diverse women meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria consisted of 41.62% White, 27.73% Asian, 22.11% Hispanic, 5.32% Black, and 3.21% multiple race/other women. In adjusted logistic regression models, all race and ethnic categories had higher odds of cesarean deliveries in comparison to White women. Black women had the highest odds of cesarean delivery (adjusted OR [aOR] = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.45–2.06), followed by Asian (aOR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.45–2.06), multiple race/other (aOR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.17–1.80), and Hispanic (aOR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.28–1.59) women. Compared with White women, Asian (aOR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.22–1.74) and Hispanic (aOR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.03–1.52) women had higher odds of failure to progress as the indication. Among women with failure to progress, Black (aOR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.30–0.81), Hispanic (aOR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.53–0.87), and Asian (aOR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.61–0.96) women were less likely than White women to reach 10 cm dilation. Compared with White women, Black women were more likely to have cesarean delivery for fetal intolerance (aOR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.10–2.07). Among women with fetal intolerance of labor, there were no significant differences by race/ethnicity for Apgar score or neonatal intensive care unit admission. Conclusions Race/ethnicity was significantly associated with the odds of cesarean and indication. All other race/ethnicity groups had higher odds of cesarean compared with White women. Compared with White women, Black women had greater odds of fetal intolerance as an indication, while Hispanic and Asian women had greater odds of failure to progress. Maternal, neonate, and facility factors for cesarean delivery did not explain the observed disparities in cesarean delivery rates.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Sociology and Political Science,Anthropology,Health(social science)

Reference34 articles.

1. Pfuntner A, Wier LM, Stocks C. Most frequent procedures performed in U.S. Hospitals, 2010: Statistical Brief #149. 2013 Feb. In: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Statistical Briefs [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2006. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK132428/.

2. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Obstetric Practice. Committee Opinion No. 761. Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:e73–7.

3. Osterman, Michelle. Martin, Joyce. Division of Vital Statistics. Trends in low-risk cesarean delivery in the United States, 1990–2013. National Vital Statistics Reports. Volume 63, Number 6. November 5, 2014. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_06.pdf. Accessed 17 Jul 2017.

4. Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Osterman MJK. Births: preliminary data for 2015. National vital statistics reports; Vol 65 No 3. Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics; 2016.

5. Rosenberg TJ, Garbers S, Lipkind H, Chiasson MA. Maternal obesity and diabetes as risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes: differences among 4 racial/ethnic groups. Am J Public Health. 2005;95(9):1545–51. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2005.065680.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3