Medically Unnecessary Procedures Drive Rising Childbirth Costs, Report Says
Main Category: Pregnancy / ObstetricsAlso Included In: Nursing / Midwifery
Article Date: 10 Oct 2008 - 9:00 PDT
|
|
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
4.41 (17 votes) |
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
5 (1 votes) |
| Article Opinions: | 2 posts |
Childbirth is the top reason for hospitalization in the U.S., but there is a lack of scientific evidence that many costly, high-tech procedures used in maternity care are beneficial for most women, according to a report released on Wednesday by a group of research and advocacy organizations, USA Today reports. The Milbank Memorial Fund, the Reforming States Group and Childbirth Connection released the report, titled "Evidence-Based Maternity Care: What It Is and What It Can Achieve."
The report found that U.S. hospital charges for maternal and newborn care increased from $79 billion in 2005 to $86 billion in 2006. The report states that reducing use of expensive maternity techniques -- such as caesarean sections -- and increasing low-cost approaches -- such as childbirth assistants -- would not only lower medical costs but also would improve women's and infants' health. More than $2.5 billion is spent annually on unnecessary c-sections, which now make up almost one-third of all deliveries, the report said. The average hospital charge for an uncomplicated vaginal birth in 2005 was $7,000, compared with $16,000 for a complicated c-section, according to Maureen Corry, executive director of Childbirth Connection and a co-author of the report.
Douglas Laube -- a former president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and a reviewer of the report -- said "very significant external forces," including "economic incentives" for hospitals and physicians to use certain procedures, contribute to the overuse of expensive medical technology in maternity care. Some physicians also order unnecessary tests and procedures to protect against malpractice suits, Laube said (Rubin [1], USA Today, 10/8).
Recommendations
USA Today also included a list of recommendations from family practice doctor Valerie King of the Oregon Health & Sciences University on ways to reduce costs and improve outcomes in maternal care. The recommendations include reducing c-section rates, increasing the use of doulas and better educating women about the risks and benefits of procedures (Rubin [2], USA Today, 10/8).
Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.
© 2008 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.
Visit our pregnancy / obstetrics section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
13 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/125020.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/125020.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (2)
Cesarean Cost Estimate Is Flawed And PVD Cost Is Understated
posted by Pauline McDonagh Hull on 10 Oct 2008 at 5:30 pmMaureen Corry's comparison of $7,000 versus $16,000 delivery costs is fundamentally flawed. To do a true comparison of delivery costs, we must measure the cost of all planned vaginal delivery (PVD) outcomes (which include expensive emergency procedures) with planned cesarean delivery outcomes.
In addition, long-term costs associated with each must be factored in (e.g. pelvic floor repair, PTSD, repeat cesarean surgery), not forgetting the litigation costs involved when an 'uncomplicated' vaginal delivery becomes complicated, and it is decided that appropriate or timely action was not taken.
Advocates of reducing the cesarean rate to levels recommended by the WHO back in 1985 rarely look at the whole financial picture because it does not complement their argument.
Editor, http://www.electivecesarean.com
Finally ACOG Speaks Truth
posted by Susan Nalbach on 12 Oct 2008 at 6:52 pmAs many new mothers are facing unneccessary cesarean sections, they need to know what is the cause. Is it medically indicated or malpractice indicated? Is there going to be true informed consent? Are the risks of major abdominal surgery fully and totally explained? The risk of MRSA, PPD, PTSD,the risk of not being able to find a care provider for future pregnancies? If an OB is so worried about the malpractice suit and that defines his or her protocol, perhaps a new career decision should be in order. At least to spare millions of unsuspecting women of unneccessary surgery.
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.




