The effect of health maintenance organization vs commercial insurance status on obstetrical management and outcome

Mary E. Aitken, Craig Warden, Cathy W. Critchlow

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare obstetrical management and birth outcomes between patients with health maintenance organization (HMO) insurance and those with private commercial insurance. Design: Retrospective, population-based cohort study. Setting: King County, Washington Patients: Among newborns delivered in 1992 and 1993, a random sample of 4000 birth records listing HMO insurance for prenatal care was compared with a random sample of 4000 birth records listing private commercial insurance as the primary coverage. Main Outcome Measures: Use of ultrasonography and amniocentesis; rate of primary cesarean section performed; adequacy of prenatal care; incidence of maternal medical complications, low birth weight and congenital malformations; and length of hospital stay. Results: Women covered by HMO compared with commercial insurance were more likely to undergo ultrasonography (relative risk [RR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.4). Inadequate prenatal care was less frequent among HMO-insured patients (RR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7), as was the incidence of birth weight below 2500 g (RR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9). No differences in rates of cesarean section and congenital anomalies were observed. Among women without obstetrical risk factors. HMO-insured mothers were at an increased risk of labor and delivery complications (RR, 1.4: 95% CI. 1.3-1.5): their infants were at an increased risk of infant distress (RR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5-2.2). Conclusions: Patients with HMO insurance have improved access to prenatal care and screening when compared with privately insured patients. The reasons for increased risks of abnormal maternal and infant outcomes observed among a subset of HMO-insured patients are unclear. A study with more detailed prospective data collection is warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1104-1108
Number of pages5
JournalArchives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine
Volume151
Issue number11
StatePublished - 1997

Fingerprint

Insurance Coverage
Health Maintenance Organizations
Insurance
Prenatal Care
Confidence Intervals
Birth Certificates
Mothers
Cesarean Section
Ultrasonography
Length of Stay
Obstetric Labor Complications
Amniocentesis
Incidence
Low Birth Weight Infant
Women's Health
Prenatal Diagnosis
Birth Weight
Cohort Studies
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Parturition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Cite this

The effect of health maintenance organization vs commercial insurance status on obstetrical management and outcome. / Aitken, Mary E.; Warden, Craig; Critchlow, Cathy W.

In: Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Vol. 151, No. 11, 1997, p. 1104-1108.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{77cb4ac2932f40b3960566528e60deef,
title = "The effect of health maintenance organization vs commercial insurance status on obstetrical management and outcome",
abstract = "Objective: To compare obstetrical management and birth outcomes between patients with health maintenance organization (HMO) insurance and those with private commercial insurance. Design: Retrospective, population-based cohort study. Setting: King County, Washington Patients: Among newborns delivered in 1992 and 1993, a random sample of 4000 birth records listing HMO insurance for prenatal care was compared with a random sample of 4000 birth records listing private commercial insurance as the primary coverage. Main Outcome Measures: Use of ultrasonography and amniocentesis; rate of primary cesarean section performed; adequacy of prenatal care; incidence of maternal medical complications, low birth weight and congenital malformations; and length of hospital stay. Results: Women covered by HMO compared with commercial insurance were more likely to undergo ultrasonography (relative risk [RR], 1.4; 95{\%} confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.4). Inadequate prenatal care was less frequent among HMO-insured patients (RR, 0.6; 95{\%} CI, 0.5-0.7), as was the incidence of birth weight below 2500 g (RR, 0.7; 95{\%} CI, 0.6-0.9). No differences in rates of cesarean section and congenital anomalies were observed. Among women without obstetrical risk factors. HMO-insured mothers were at an increased risk of labor and delivery complications (RR, 1.4: 95{\%} CI. 1.3-1.5): their infants were at an increased risk of infant distress (RR, 1.8; 95{\%} CI, 1.5-2.2). Conclusions: Patients with HMO insurance have improved access to prenatal care and screening when compared with privately insured patients. The reasons for increased risks of abnormal maternal and infant outcomes observed among a subset of HMO-insured patients are unclear. A study with more detailed prospective data collection is warranted.",
author = "Aitken, {Mary E.} and Craig Warden and Critchlow, {Cathy W.}",
year = "1997",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "151",
pages = "1104--1108",
journal = "JAMA Pediatrics",
issn = "2168-6203",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effect of health maintenance organization vs commercial insurance status on obstetrical management and outcome

AU - Aitken, Mary E.

AU - Warden, Craig

AU - Critchlow, Cathy W.

PY - 1997

Y1 - 1997

N2 - Objective: To compare obstetrical management and birth outcomes between patients with health maintenance organization (HMO) insurance and those with private commercial insurance. Design: Retrospective, population-based cohort study. Setting: King County, Washington Patients: Among newborns delivered in 1992 and 1993, a random sample of 4000 birth records listing HMO insurance for prenatal care was compared with a random sample of 4000 birth records listing private commercial insurance as the primary coverage. Main Outcome Measures: Use of ultrasonography and amniocentesis; rate of primary cesarean section performed; adequacy of prenatal care; incidence of maternal medical complications, low birth weight and congenital malformations; and length of hospital stay. Results: Women covered by HMO compared with commercial insurance were more likely to undergo ultrasonography (relative risk [RR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.4). Inadequate prenatal care was less frequent among HMO-insured patients (RR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7), as was the incidence of birth weight below 2500 g (RR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9). No differences in rates of cesarean section and congenital anomalies were observed. Among women without obstetrical risk factors. HMO-insured mothers were at an increased risk of labor and delivery complications (RR, 1.4: 95% CI. 1.3-1.5): their infants were at an increased risk of infant distress (RR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5-2.2). Conclusions: Patients with HMO insurance have improved access to prenatal care and screening when compared with privately insured patients. The reasons for increased risks of abnormal maternal and infant outcomes observed among a subset of HMO-insured patients are unclear. A study with more detailed prospective data collection is warranted.

AB - Objective: To compare obstetrical management and birth outcomes between patients with health maintenance organization (HMO) insurance and those with private commercial insurance. Design: Retrospective, population-based cohort study. Setting: King County, Washington Patients: Among newborns delivered in 1992 and 1993, a random sample of 4000 birth records listing HMO insurance for prenatal care was compared with a random sample of 4000 birth records listing private commercial insurance as the primary coverage. Main Outcome Measures: Use of ultrasonography and amniocentesis; rate of primary cesarean section performed; adequacy of prenatal care; incidence of maternal medical complications, low birth weight and congenital malformations; and length of hospital stay. Results: Women covered by HMO compared with commercial insurance were more likely to undergo ultrasonography (relative risk [RR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.4). Inadequate prenatal care was less frequent among HMO-insured patients (RR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7), as was the incidence of birth weight below 2500 g (RR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9). No differences in rates of cesarean section and congenital anomalies were observed. Among women without obstetrical risk factors. HMO-insured mothers were at an increased risk of labor and delivery complications (RR, 1.4: 95% CI. 1.3-1.5): their infants were at an increased risk of infant distress (RR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5-2.2). Conclusions: Patients with HMO insurance have improved access to prenatal care and screening when compared with privately insured patients. The reasons for increased risks of abnormal maternal and infant outcomes observed among a subset of HMO-insured patients are unclear. A study with more detailed prospective data collection is warranted.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030733184&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030733184&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 9369871

AN - SCOPUS:0030733184

VL - 151

SP - 1104

EP - 1108

JO - JAMA Pediatrics

JF - JAMA Pediatrics

SN - 2168-6203

IS - 11

ER -