Get access

HOSPITAL SETTING FOR BIRTH AND USE OF MEDICAL PROCEDURES IN LOW-RISK WOMEN

Authors

  • Leah L. Albers CNM, DrPH,

    Corresponding author
      c/o College of Nursing, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131.
    Search for more papers by this author
    • Leah L. Albers, CNM, DrPH, received her nursing degrees from Vanderbilt University (1971 and 1974). She studied nurse-midwifery at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (1977). She practiced for 11 years, most of which in rural Chatham County, North Carolina. She completed the Dr.P.H. at the University of North Carolina School of Public Health (1990), and has recently taken a position in nurse-midwifery education at the College of Nursing, University of New Mexico.

  • David A. Savitz PhD

    Search for more papers by this author
    • David A. Savitz, PhD, received a B.A. in psychology (Brandeis, 1975), the M.S. in preventive medicine (Ohio State University, 1978), and a Ph.D. in epidemiology (University of Pittsburg, 1982). He has been on the faculty of the Department of Epidemiology at the University of North Carolina School of Public Health since 1986, where he is currently an associate professor. He has conducted numerous studies on a variety of reproductive health topics, such as stillbirth, preterm delivery, maternal occupational exposures, and cervical cancer.


c/o College of Nursing, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131.

ABSTRACT

This study examined the use of selected medical procedures in low-risk women during childbirth. Data from the 1980 National Natality Survey merged with an American Hospital Association annual survey for the same year were used to assess the frequency with which low-risk women in the United States received certain childbirth procedures and to determine whether their use varied by the hospital setting for birth. Stratified analysis was used to assess the relation of hospital level for delivery with the use of electronic fetal monitoring, labor induction, and primary cesarean delivery in low-risk women, with control for potential confounding factors. As the level of available perinatal technology increased, the use of these procedures increased. Results of the study suggest that low-risk women may have received excess interventions and confirm the need for further examination of care procedures for this group.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary