Florida legislation implemented in the fall of 1992, unique in the nation, mandated that practice guidelines regarding cesarean section deliveries be disseminated to obstetric physicians. The law also required that peer review boards at hospitals be established to review cesarean deliveries and that the exact dates of implementation of the guidelines be reported to a state agency. To determine the impact of the legislation, we conducted a retrospective analysis of 366,246 total live births occurring in Florida hospitals during 1992 and 1993, before and after formal hospital certification of the implementation of the guidelines. Changes in primary and repeat cesarean rates were analyzed for 108 independent groups of births, controlling for the mother's age, race, payment source, and the timing of the implementation of the guidelines at hospitals. The guideline certification program did not accelerate the consistent but gradual downward trend in cesarean births which had already been evident in the three prior years. The data do suggest that the guideline program may have affected repeat cesareans more than primary cesareans, especially in the first quarter of 1993, immediately after the hospital certification period. Reductions in repeat cesareans involved both Medicaid and commercially insured births, whereas reductions in primary cesareans were found almost exclusively within commercially insured mothers, where the existing rates are highest. Although births with a prior cesarean represent only 12.5% of all births, significant decreases in repeat cesareans were found in groups representing 72.6% of this population. By comparison, significant decreases in primary cesareans were found in groups representing only 36.5% of the births without a prior cesarean. The date of guideline implementation reported by hospitals was not related to any systematic change in observed cesarean section rates. We concluded that the mere dissemination of practice guidelines by a state agency may not achieve either the magnitude or the specificity of the results desired without an explicit and thorough guideline implementation program. Blunt legislative mandates may be ineffective when multiple initiatives are already achieving desired outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective -To provide a statewide trend analysis of all hospital malpractice claims, payment amounts, and their distribution by location of the event within hospitals. J O U R N A L O F H E A L T H C A R E R I S K M A N A G E M E N T occurred in only two counties, Dade(Miami) and Broward (Ft. Lauderdale).Within the hospital, the patient room and the operating room accounted for 54 percent of the total claims, although the average award for each site was relatively small, $97,802 and $1 17,899, respectively. Claim events occurring in the labor and delivery room had the highest average payment ($469,128) resulting in 26 percent of the total payments, while representing just under 9 percent of total claims paid. Critical care had the second highest average award ($444,900), followed by the nursery ($316,412), the recovery room ($279,235), and the emergency department ($156,154).Eighty-eight percent of the claims were ultimately settled by the parties, and just under 12 percent were resolved at trial. If the case went to court, defendant hospitals were three times more likely to prevail than the plaintiff, but, if they lost, they paid an average award four times greater than that paid in a settled claim.Conclusion -While hospital malpractice claim frequency is decreasing in Florida, the factors responsible for this trend and its relationship to the quality of care require additional research.