Looking for something? Start here.
Custom Search

 

Want The Unnecesarean in your inbox? Enter your email address:




 

   

« Working to Ban VBAC at Your Hospital? Then Stop Griping About Home Birth | Massachusetts Ten Highest Total Cesarean Rates, 2008 and 2009 »
Tuesday
Dec132011

Minnesota Cesarean Rates by Hospital, 2010

Share 



SOURCE: Minnesota Hospital Assocation

Hospitals with very small numbers in gray.


Edit: 1/20/2012

 


The quality of the rates for this state is lacking. The proportion of cesarean sections was calculated by dividing the sum of cesarean sections with and without complications (MS-DRGs 765-766) by the sum of the only MS-DRGs accessible in the public domain in this state (MS-DRGs 774-775 and 765-766). The denominator should include all deliveries (MS-DRG 765-768 and 774-775).

According the most recent report available online, MS-DRGs 767 and 768 accounted for 3.6% of all deliveries in 2008, meaning that the denominator should be slightly higher and therefore the calculated proportion would be slightly lower.

If hospitals, related associations, state departments of health and/or the federal government agencies do not make facility-level data public, then rates based on inadequate data are the only option for health care consumers and the public.

 

Contact for the additional DRGs to be made public:

info@mnhospitals.org

 

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (8)

Is this something completely voluntary done by the state? Is it possible to petition the hospital associations to release these numbers? Anyone know of a way that has seen some success.

December 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterSarah

No St. Cloud Hospital?

December 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterT

Could you provide a direct link to this information? I searched the Minnesota Hospital Association and could not find it. I also find it odd the St Cloud hospital is not listed.

December 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterK

St Cloud IS on the list. 28.7%

December 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterJ

Thanks! I looked over the list 10 times yesterday and did not see it! And thanks, Jill, for putting this together!l

December 14, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterT

This data is somewhat meaningless. Some of these hospital are connected to NICUs, and attract moms from around the region who are facing preterm or multiple birth. A woman who is 26 weeks pregnant and is experiencing life threatening complications might need a c-section to save her life, and the life of her baby. Big difference between her and a mom who is 37 weeks pregnant and wants a c-section because she is ready to be done!

December 15, 2011 | Unregistered Commenterneonatan RN

neonatan RN - That doesn't necessarily make the information useless. The city (with numerous hospitals) where I'm at has one hospital in particular that is known to be used for high risk, preterm, etc, so people expect that they will have a SOMEWHAT higher cesarean rate (their rate is 52%). But if I'm deciding between the two hospitals that are closest to me (and they are not known for high-risk, etc), this information would be beneficial to know. However, there are also two other hospitals in the area that do a lot of high risk and they don't have as high of a cesarean rate as the first one mentioned (and they are also teaching hospital)! So I would hope that a low risk pregnant mom would not choose 52% c/s rate hospital for a lot of reasons.

December 15, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterNicole

thanks for putting together this information. I wish we could see stuff like this for more states. And I agree that it's not totally useless. Of course you may need more information than this in order to make a choice, but if I have a normal pregnancy, I'm sure going to look for some place that has a lower c-section rate.

December 15, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterTraining doulas
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.