Obstet Gynecol Sci.  2013 Nov;56(6):362-367. 10.5468/ogs.2013.56.6.362.

Comparison of neonatal outcomes and intrapartum events in full term vaginal deliveries conducted by staff versus resident physicians

• Cha HH
• Choi SJ
• Oh SY
• Roh CR
• Kim JH

• KMID: 1500369
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.2013.56.6.362

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to compare the neonatal outcomes and intrapartum events conducted by staff versus resident physicians in full term vaginal deliveries.
METHODS
We divided study population (n = 5,007) into two groups: staff versus resident physicians. These two groups were sub-divided; faculty versus fellow and senior versus junior resident, respectively. The maternal characteristics, neonatal outcomes including Apgar score, admission to the neonatal intensive care unit and umbilical arterial pH and intrapartum event which was defined as the occurrence of shoulder dystocia and vacuum delivery were also investigated.
RESULTS
There was no difference in neonatal outcomes between two groups. The group delivered by staff had a higher rate of nulliparity, large for gestational age and intrapartum events than the resident physician group. The subgroup analysis revealed a higher rate of vacuum delivery in the group delivered by faculty and senior members than the group delivered by fellows and junior members.
CONCLUSION
There was no significant difference in neonatal outcomes between the two groups; staff versus resident physicians in full term vaginal deliveries in low-risk pregnant women. Also, experienced obstetricians might tend to participate in difficult labors and would prefer applying vacuum compared to the obstetricians with fewer experiences.

Keyword

Neonatal outcome; Resident; Staff; Vacuum delivery; Vaginal delivery

MeSH Terms

Apgar Score
Delivery, Obstetric*
Dystocia
Female
Gestational Age
Humans
Hydrogen-Ion Concentration
Infant, Newborn
Intensive Care, Neonatal
Parity
Pregnancy
Pregnant Women
Shoulder
Vacuum Extraction, Obstetrical

Reference

1. Lim JW. The changing trends in live birth statistics in Korea, 1970 to 2010. Korean J Pediatr. 2011; 54:429–435.

2. Abenhaim HA, Welt M, Sabbah R, Audibert F. Obstetrician or family physician: are vaginal deliveries managed differently? J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2007; 29:801–805.

3. Suzuki S. The attitude of 'low risk' pregnant women in Japan toward midwife-led care during pregnancy and labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012; 25:2141–2142.

4. Janakiraman V, Lazar J, Joynt KE, Jha AK. Hospital volume, provider volume, and complications after childbirth in U.S. hospitals. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 118:521–527.

5. Garcia FA, Miller HB, Huggins GR, Gordon TA. Effect of academic affiliation and obstetric volume on clinical outcome and cost of childbirth. Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 97:567–576.

6. Mayfield JA, Rosenblatt RA, Baldwin LM, Chu J, Logerfo JP. The relation of obstetrical volume and nursery level to perinatal mortality. Am J Public Health. 1990; 80:819–823.

7. Bernitz S, Rolland R, Blix E, Jacobsen M, Sjoborg K, Oian P. Is the operative delivery rate in low-risk women dependent on the level of birth care? A randomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2011; 118:1357–1364.

8. Chauhan SP, Gherman R, Hendrix NW, Bingham JM, Hayes E. Shoulder dystocia: comparison of the ACOG practice bulletin with another national guideline. Am J Perinatol. 2010; 27:129–136.

9. Scheid D, Logue E, Gilchrist VJ, Gillanders WR, Miller RS, Iverson D, et al. Do we practice what we preach? Comparing the patients of faculty and residents. Fam Med. 1995; 27:519–524.

10. Zallman L, Ma J, Xiao L, Lasser KE. Quality of US primary care delivered by resident and staff physicians. J Gen Intern Med. 2010; 25:1193–1197.