IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v27y2018i4p675-689.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Promoting normal birth and reducing caesarean section rates: An evaluation of the Rapid Improvement Programme

Author

Listed:
  • Graham Cookson
  • Ioannis Laliotis

Abstract

This paper evaluates the impact of the 2008 Rapid Improvement Programme that aimed at promoting normal birth and reducing caesarean section rates in the English National Health Service. Using Hospital Episode Statistics maternity records for the period 2001–2013, a panel data analysis was performed to determine whether the implementation of the programme reduced caesarean sections rates in participating hospitals. The results obtained using either the unadjusted sample of hospitals or a trimmed sample determined by a propensity score matching approach indicate that the impact of the programme was small. More specifically there were 2.3 to 3.4 fewer caesarean deliveries in participating hospitals, on average, during the postprogramme period offering a limited scope for cost reduction. This result mainly comes from the reduction in the number of emergency caesareans as no significant effect was uncovered for planned caesarean deliveries.

Suggested Citation

  • Graham Cookson & Ioannis Laliotis, 2018. "Promoting normal birth and reducing caesarean section rates: An evaluation of the Rapid Improvement Programme," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 675-689, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:27:y:2018:i:4:p:675-689
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.3624
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3624
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.3624?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ashenfelter, Orley C, 1978. "Estimating the Effect of Training Programs on Earnings," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 60(1), pages 47-57, February.
    2. Stephen Machin & Olivier Marie, 2011. "Crime And Police Resources: The Street Crime Initiative," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 678-701, August.
    3. Zack Cooper & Stephen Gibbons & Simon Jones & Alistair McGuire, 2011. "Does Hospital Competition Save Lives? Evidence From The English NHS Patient Choice Reforms," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(554), pages 228-260, August.
    4. Francome, Colin & Savage, Wendy, 1993. "Caesarean section in Britain and the United States 12% or 24%: Is either the right rate?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1199-1218, November.
    5. Lefevre, M., 2014. "Physician induced demand for C-sections: does the convenience incentive matter?," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 14/08, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    6. J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006. "The Log of Gravity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
    7. Ashenfelter, Orley & Card, David, 1985. "Using the Longitudinal Structure of Earnings to Estimate the Effect of Training Programs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(4), pages 648-660, November.
    8. David H. Autor, 2003. "Outsourcing at Will: The Contribution of Unjust Dismissal Doctrine to the Growth of Employment Outsourcing," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 1-42, January.
    9. Shearer, Elizabeth L., 1993. "Cesarean section: Medical benefits and costs," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1223-1231, November.
    10. Jonathan Gruber & Maria Owings, 1996. "Physician Financial Incentives and Cesarean Section Delivery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 99-123, Spring.
    11. Grant, Darren, 2009. "Physician financial incentives and cesarean delivery: New conclusions from the healthcare cost and utilization project," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 244-250, January.
    12. Halvorsen, Robert & Palmquist, Raymond, 1980. "The Interpretation of Dummy Variables in Semilogarithmic Equations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 474-475, June.
    13. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra Todd, 1998. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 65(2), pages 261-294.
    14. Gruber, Jon & Kim, John & Mayzlin, Dina, 1999. "Physician fees and procedure intensity: the case of cesarean delivery," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 473-490, August.
    15. Dubay, Lisa & Kaestner, Robert & Waidmann, Timothy, 1999. "The impact of malpractice fears on cesarean section rates," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 491-522, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Betcherman, Gordon & Giannakopoulos, Nicholas & Laliotis, Ioannis & Pantelaiou, Ioanna & Testaverde, Mauro & Tzimas, Giannis, 2020. "Reacting quickly and protecting jobs: The short-term impacts of the COVID-19 lockdown on the Greek labor market," GLO Discussion Paper Series 613, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    2. Recio Alcaide, Adela & Arranz, José M., 2022. "An impact evaluation of the strategy for normal birth care on caesarean section rates and perinatal mortality in Spain," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 24-34.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jensen, Vibeke Myrup & Wüst, Miriam, 2015. "Can Caesarean section improve child and maternal health? The case of breech babies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 289-302.
    2. Sara Allin & Michael Baker & Maripier Isabelle & Mark Stabile, 2015. "Accounting for the Rise in C-sections: Evidence from Population Level Data," NBER Working Papers 21022, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Grant, Darren, 2022. "The “Quiet Revolution” and the cesarean section in the United States," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    4. Véra Zabrodina & Mark Dusheiko & Karine Moschetti, 2020. "A moneymaking scan: Dual reimbursement systems and supplier‐induced demand for diagnostic imaging," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(12), pages 1566-1585, December.
    5. Aleksandr Proshin & Alexandre Cazenave-Lacroutz & Zeynep Or & Lise Rochaix, 2018. "Impact of Diagnosis Related Group Refinement on the Choice Between Scheduled Caesarean Section and Normal Delivery: Recent Evidence from France," PSE Working Papers halshs-01812107, HAL.
    6. De Luca, Giacomo & Lisi, Domenico & Martorana, Marco & Siciliani, Luigi, 2021. "Does higher Institutional Quality improve the Appropriateness of Healthcare Provision?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    7. Sofia Amaral-Garcia & Paola Bertoli & Veronica Grembi, 2015. "Does Experience Rating Improve Obstetric Practices? Evidence From Geographical Discontinuities in Italy," CEIS Research Paper 342, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 08 May 2015.
    8. Barili, Emilia & Bertoli, Paola & Grembi, Veronica, 2021. "Fee equalization and appropriate health care," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    9. Janet Currie & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2017. "Diagnosing Expertise: Human Capital, Decision Making, and Performance among Physicians," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(1), pages 1-43.
    10. Francese, Maura & Piacenza, Massimiliano & Romanelli, Marzia & Turati, Gilberto, 2014. "Understanding inappropriateness in health spending: The role of regional policies and institutions in caesarean deliveries," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 262-277.
    11. Carine Milcent & Saad Zbiri, 2022. "Supplementary private health insurance: The impact of physician financial incentives on medical practice," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 57-72, January.
    12. Alex Proshin & Alexandre Cazenave‐Lacroutz & Lise Rochaix, 2023. "Impact of tariff refinement on the choice between scheduled C‐section and normal delivery: Evidence from France," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(7), pages 1397-1433, July.
    13. Stephen Machin & Olivier Marie, 2011. "Crime And Police Resources: The Street Crime Initiative," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 678-701, August.
    14. Mano, Yukichi & Akoten, John & Yoshino, Yutaka & Sonobe, Tetsushi, 2014. "Teaching KAIZEN to small business owners: An experiment in a metalworking cluster in Nairobi," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 25-42.
    15. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    16. Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra E., 2007. "Implementing Nonparametric and Semiparametric Estimators," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 6, chapter 74, Elsevier.
    17. David Card & Jochen Kluve & Andrea Weber, 2010. "Active Labour Market Policy Evaluations: A Meta-Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(548), pages 452-477, November.
    18. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    19. Peter R. Mueser & Kenneth R. Troske & Alexey Gorislavsky, 2007. "Using State Administrative Data to Measure Program Performance," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(4), pages 761-783, November.
    20. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1999. "The Pre-Program Earnings Dip and the Determinants of Participation in a Social Program: Implications for Simple Program Evaluation Strategies," NBER Working Papers 6983, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:27:y:2018:i:4:p:675-689. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.