pqcnc sivb ls1 aggregate baseline data
Post on 09-Apr-2018
217 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
1/17
PQCNC Support for Birth InitiativeAggregate baseline data
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
2/17
JCAHO rate = C/S rate for all NTSV admissions (includes scheduled C/S)
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
3/17
FacilityJoint CommissionRate
110 27.03%120 25.00%200 10.53%210 18.42%270 28.21%300 19.51%320 37.14%330 14.29%350 24.00%380 54.55%390 23.08%392 34.78%
FacilityJoint CommissionRate
400 16.00%420 34.51%430 33.75%500 24.00%510 21.43%530 30.23%540 34.21%550 6.25%640 21.74%650 35.90%660 24.68%680 39.39%
All Facilities November 2010 "Joint Commission" Rate
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
4/17
NTSV vaginal birth rateAggregate: 75.23% overall, 80.23% no risk factors, 61.69% with risk
Facility VBRoverall
VBR noriskfactors
1+ riskfactors
110 79.22% 80.60% 70.00%
200 81.82% 82.50% 80.00%
210 77.50% 73.30% 80.00%270 76.92% 83.08% 46.15%
300 68.24% 79.03% 39.13%
320 73.08% 81.82% 45.16%
330 86.71% 91.67% 50.00%
350 66.67% 72.09% 50.00%
390 82.00% 87.18% 63.64%
391 80.00% 85.00% 70.00%
392 74.07% 78.18% 56.00%
400 75.56% 81.08% 50.00%
Facility VBRoverall
VBR noriskfactors
1+ riskfactors
420 74.23% 80.45% 60.66%
430 73.29% 78.95% 53.13%
490 91.30% 94.12% 83.33%500 80.95% 78.82% 90.00%
510 86.36% 88.24% 80.00%
530 74.39% 80.65% 55.00%
540 69.62% 70.83% 67.74%
550 93.75% 93.33% 100%
640 70.83% 71.05% 70.00%
650 73.42% 80.70% 54.55%
660 78.23% 85.53% 66.67%
680 76.81% 81.63% 65.00%
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
5/17
Frequency of maternal risk factors
Diabetes IUGR Maternalage >35
Hypertensivedisease
Macrosomia(EFW >4000g)
Obesity
100 46 74 231 18 184
5.0% 2.3% 3.7% 11.6% 0.9% 9.2%
n=1998
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
6/17
Baseline Data: Vaginal Birth Rate by Cervical Dilation andLabor Status at Admission
Type of Labor
Numberof
patientswith nocervical
exam atadmissionprovided
Percentwho
delivered
vaginally
Numberof
patientsadmitted
with a
cervicaldilation of
0-3cm
Percentwho
delivered
vaginally
Numberof
patientsadmitted
with a
cervicaldilation of
4+cm
Percentwho
delivered
vaginally
Totalnumber of
patients
Total whodeliveredvaginally
Induction
of labor7 42.86% 927 64.83% 47 70.21% 981 64.93%
Spontaneous labor
1 100.00% 469 82.73% 487 88.71% 957 85.79%
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
7/17
Labor patientsDilation at admission 0cm 1cm 2cm 3cm
Number 14 88 140 231
Percent of laborpatients
1.5% 9.2% 14.6% 24.0%
Aggregate Frequency of Cervical Dilation< 4cm among Patients in laborat Admission
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
1
%age of pts in labor at 0cm
%age of pts in labor at 1cm
%age of pts in labor at 2cm%age of pts in labor at 3cm
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
8/17
Aggregate frequency of cervical dilations admittedNOT in labor and with intact membranes
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
Of pts not in labor, notruptured, number and
percent that were 0-1cm
Of pts not in labor, notruptured, number and
percent that were 2-3cm
Of pts not in labor, notruptured, number and
percent that were 4-5cm
Cesarean Deliveries
Vaginal Deliveries
# pts not in labor with intactmembranes at admission
Not in labor, intactmembranes, cervicaldilation at admission
0-1cm
Not in labor, intactmembranes, cervicaldilation at admission
2-3cm
Not in labor, intactmembranes, cervicaldilation at admission
4-5cm
766 491 233 37
64.1% 30.4% 4.8%
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
9/17
Aggregate Mode of Delivery By Use of Cervical Ripening Among Patients Admitted for Induction of Labor01/01/2010 - 12/31/2010
Cervical Ripening TotalCesarean Section
CountCesarean Section
RateVaginal Delivery
CountVaginal Delivery
Rate
Cervical Ripening
Not Used551 171 31.03% 380 68.97%
Cervical RipeningUsed
430 173 40.23% 257 59.77%
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
10/17
Aggregate Mode of Delivery by Top 5 Cervical Ripening Methods01/01/2010 - 12/31/2010
Method Cesarean Section Vaginal DeliveryFrequency of
UsageVaginal Birth Rate for this
Method
Cervidil 16.52% 26.02% 42.53% 61.17%
Cytotec 9.95% 15.16% 25.11% 60.36%
Foley Bulb 7.47% 9.95% 17.42% 57.14%
Foley Bulb+Cervidil 0.68% 1.81% 2.49% 72.73%
Foley Bulb+Cytotec 1.81% 3.17% 4.98% 63.64%
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
11/17
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
12/17
Aggregate Primary Indication for C-section01/01/2010 - 12/31/2010
Indication
Chorioamnionitis 0.42%
Malpresentation 1.04%
(No indication) 1.67%Failed operative vaginal delivery 1.67%
Presumed cephalopelvic disproportion 4.38%
Other 5.00%
Failure to descend (2nd stage C/S) 14.38%
Nonreassuring fetal status 31.46%
Failure to progress (1st stage C/S) 40.00%
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
13/17
Aggregate IUPC Use Among Failure to Progress Cesareans01/01/2010 - 12/31/2010
IUPC Used IUPC Count IUPC Rate
(No answer) 10 5.21%
No 68 35.42%
Yes 114 59.38%
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
14/17
Aggregate Frequency of Adequate Uterine ContractionsPrior to FTP C-section (primary indication)
# MVUs reached 2002hrs
# MVUs DID NOT reach 2002hrs
No answer
42 64 936.5% 55.7% 7.8%
# MVUs reached200 2hrs
# MVUs DID NOTreach 200 2hrsNo answer
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
15/17
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
16/17
How many women in NC go into spontaneous labor?Data from PQCNC 39 Weeks Project
Hospital Induction rateJune 2010
Scheduled C/S rateJune 2010
Total ScheduledJune 2010
A* 22.2% 12.1% 34.2%
B 45.5% 27.3% 72.8%
C 30.2% 13.9% 44.1%D 21.3% 16.9% 38.2%
E 29.9% 22.4% 52.3%
F 54.5% 9.1% 63.6%
G 22.7% 16.5% 39.2%
H* 12.6% 21.2% 33.8%
I 35.5% 34.0% 69.5%
J* 18.0% 10.3% 28.3%
-
8/7/2019 PQCNC SIVB LS1 Aggregate Baseline Data
17/17
Understanding your data
If something doesnt look right, consideryour sample size was it too small?
Sample should be a minimum of 40 NTSVpatients admitted for intended vaginal birth
Sample should be consecutive patients
top related