Maternal hospital charges associated with trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section

Jeffrey D. Traynor, Alan M Peaceman*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Although cesarean section is known to be associated with higher hospital charges than vaginal delivery, cost comparisons require further investigation. This study compared maternal hospital charges of women with one previous cesarean section undergoing a trial of labor with the charges of women who underwent an elective repeat cesarean section. Hospital charges for the trial of labor group were also compared with charges of women with a previous vaginal delivery but no previous cesarean section. Methods: A retrospective analysis of three primiparous privately insured patient groups who gave birth from July 1992 to October 1993 was conducted. Hospital charges for 50 primiparas with previous cesarean births who underwent a trial of labor were compared with those of 50 contemporaneous primiparas who underwent elective repeat cesarean section, and with those of 50 primiparas without a past history of cesarean birth. Results: Trial of labor was associated with a mean maternal hospital charge of $5820 ± $1609 compared with $6785 ± $771 for elective repeat cesarean section (p < 0.001). Trial of labor was also associated with a decreased length of stay when compared with elective cesarean section (2.48 ± 0.88 days vs 3.62 ± 0.57 days, p < 0.001). The difference in charges between these two groups was primarily due to charges associated with length of stay and the operating room, but was partly offset by charges associated with labor. The group of women without a past history of cesarean birth had a mean maternal hospital charge of $4685 ± $966 and a mean length of stay of 1.96 ± 0.63 days. Conclusions: Trial of labor is associated with an overall 14 percent reduction in maternal hospital charges and a 31 percent reduction in length of stay compared with elective repeat cesarean section. (BIRTH 25:2 June 1998).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)81-84
Number of pages4
JournalBirth
Volume25
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1998

Fingerprint

Repeat Cesarean Section
Trial of Labor
Hospital Charges
Mothers
Cesarean Section
Length of Stay
Reproductive History
Parturition
Operating Rooms
Costs and Cost Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

@article{d3691aa811bc4a64ac5e43dfadcb7eb2,
title = "Maternal hospital charges associated with trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section",
abstract = "Background: Although cesarean section is known to be associated with higher hospital charges than vaginal delivery, cost comparisons require further investigation. This study compared maternal hospital charges of women with one previous cesarean section undergoing a trial of labor with the charges of women who underwent an elective repeat cesarean section. Hospital charges for the trial of labor group were also compared with charges of women with a previous vaginal delivery but no previous cesarean section. Methods: A retrospective analysis of three primiparous privately insured patient groups who gave birth from July 1992 to October 1993 was conducted. Hospital charges for 50 primiparas with previous cesarean births who underwent a trial of labor were compared with those of 50 contemporaneous primiparas who underwent elective repeat cesarean section, and with those of 50 primiparas without a past history of cesarean birth. Results: Trial of labor was associated with a mean maternal hospital charge of $5820 ± $1609 compared with $6785 ± $771 for elective repeat cesarean section (p < 0.001). Trial of labor was also associated with a decreased length of stay when compared with elective cesarean section (2.48 ± 0.88 days vs 3.62 ± 0.57 days, p < 0.001). The difference in charges between these two groups was primarily due to charges associated with length of stay and the operating room, but was partly offset by charges associated with labor. The group of women without a past history of cesarean birth had a mean maternal hospital charge of $4685 ± $966 and a mean length of stay of 1.96 ± 0.63 days. Conclusions: Trial of labor is associated with an overall 14 percent reduction in maternal hospital charges and a 31 percent reduction in length of stay compared with elective repeat cesarean section. (BIRTH 25:2 June 1998).",
author = "Traynor, {Jeffrey D.} and Peaceman, {Alan M}",
year = "1998",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1046/j.1523-536x.1998.00081.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "81--84",
journal = "Birth",
issn = "0730-7659",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

Maternal hospital charges associated with trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section. / Traynor, Jeffrey D.; Peaceman, Alan M.

In: Birth, Vol. 25, No. 2, 01.01.1998, p. 81-84.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Maternal hospital charges associated with trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section

AU - Traynor, Jeffrey D.

AU - Peaceman, Alan M

PY - 1998/1/1

Y1 - 1998/1/1

N2 - Background: Although cesarean section is known to be associated with higher hospital charges than vaginal delivery, cost comparisons require further investigation. This study compared maternal hospital charges of women with one previous cesarean section undergoing a trial of labor with the charges of women who underwent an elective repeat cesarean section. Hospital charges for the trial of labor group were also compared with charges of women with a previous vaginal delivery but no previous cesarean section. Methods: A retrospective analysis of three primiparous privately insured patient groups who gave birth from July 1992 to October 1993 was conducted. Hospital charges for 50 primiparas with previous cesarean births who underwent a trial of labor were compared with those of 50 contemporaneous primiparas who underwent elective repeat cesarean section, and with those of 50 primiparas without a past history of cesarean birth. Results: Trial of labor was associated with a mean maternal hospital charge of $5820 ± $1609 compared with $6785 ± $771 for elective repeat cesarean section (p < 0.001). Trial of labor was also associated with a decreased length of stay when compared with elective cesarean section (2.48 ± 0.88 days vs 3.62 ± 0.57 days, p < 0.001). The difference in charges between these two groups was primarily due to charges associated with length of stay and the operating room, but was partly offset by charges associated with labor. The group of women without a past history of cesarean birth had a mean maternal hospital charge of $4685 ± $966 and a mean length of stay of 1.96 ± 0.63 days. Conclusions: Trial of labor is associated with an overall 14 percent reduction in maternal hospital charges and a 31 percent reduction in length of stay compared with elective repeat cesarean section. (BIRTH 25:2 June 1998).

AB - Background: Although cesarean section is known to be associated with higher hospital charges than vaginal delivery, cost comparisons require further investigation. This study compared maternal hospital charges of women with one previous cesarean section undergoing a trial of labor with the charges of women who underwent an elective repeat cesarean section. Hospital charges for the trial of labor group were also compared with charges of women with a previous vaginal delivery but no previous cesarean section. Methods: A retrospective analysis of three primiparous privately insured patient groups who gave birth from July 1992 to October 1993 was conducted. Hospital charges for 50 primiparas with previous cesarean births who underwent a trial of labor were compared with those of 50 contemporaneous primiparas who underwent elective repeat cesarean section, and with those of 50 primiparas without a past history of cesarean birth. Results: Trial of labor was associated with a mean maternal hospital charge of $5820 ± $1609 compared with $6785 ± $771 for elective repeat cesarean section (p < 0.001). Trial of labor was also associated with a decreased length of stay when compared with elective cesarean section (2.48 ± 0.88 days vs 3.62 ± 0.57 days, p < 0.001). The difference in charges between these two groups was primarily due to charges associated with length of stay and the operating room, but was partly offset by charges associated with labor. The group of women without a past history of cesarean birth had a mean maternal hospital charge of $4685 ± $966 and a mean length of stay of 1.96 ± 0.63 days. Conclusions: Trial of labor is associated with an overall 14 percent reduction in maternal hospital charges and a 31 percent reduction in length of stay compared with elective repeat cesarean section. (BIRTH 25:2 June 1998).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032084717&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032084717&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1046/j.1523-536x.1998.00081.x

DO - 10.1046/j.1523-536x.1998.00081.x

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 81

EP - 84

JO - Birth

JF - Birth

SN - 0730-7659

IS - 2

ER -