-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: Within or outside the standard of care - Long From: Griffiths Malcolm (Malcolm.Griffiths@ldh-tr.anglox.nhs.uk) Tue May 29 07:27:55 2001 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Dr Don Miller: "Re: 66% Induction Rate" Previous message: Griffiths Malcolm: "Re: Within or outside the standard of care - Long" Received: (from nobody@localhost) by mail.medispecialty.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA01253 for OB-GYN-L@OBGYN.NET; Tue, 29 May 2001 07:27:54 -0500 Message-Id: <200105291227.HAA01253@mail.medispecialty.com> Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 07:27:54 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: postmaster@medispecialty.com Reply-To: evsono@pipeline.com From: evsono@pipeline.com (art fougner, md) To: OB-GYN-L@OBGYN.NET In-Reply-To: <p3a6htgp6stddd7mts6hieq9gsajnm4l9g@4ax.com> X-Original-Sender: user-2inig4e.dialup.mindspring.com @ 165.121.64.142 Subject: Re: Within or outside the standard of care - Long how is a c/section rate a better endpoint than induction rate? agree with perinatal morbidity/mortality. in queens ny presently, customer satifaction = no lawsuit and participation in her managed cost plan. art At Tue, 29 May 2001, Paul Prior MD wrote: > >On Mon, 28 May 2001 22:32:38 -0500, mark decker <mdecker@nconnect.net> >wrote: > >>i am starting to do more work in an l & d where one lone ob - so far - has >>a 66% induction rate this year - >>decreased fetal movement and the like >> >>i am going to ask for prospective induction reviews and not point him out >>specifically - the ends is best achieved without acrimony - >>a better rate - better indications for this moment in time and beyond - >> >>and i am digging into "average" or usual induction rates - >>i suspect 15% and no more than 20% would be closer to the right number - >>and likely more like 10% >> >>anyone have data on a low risk population "normal" induction rate? > >You may be in trouble there, I think I read somewhere that the overall >induction rate in the USA was heading towards 40-50%. Can't remember >the source, but I remember I was shocked how high the number was. > >But you know what, perinatal mortality/morbidity/c/s rates and patient >"satisfaction" are probably better endpoints than induction rates, >don't you agree? > >-- >Paul Prior MD They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little >Coshocton, OH temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. >Solo Practice - Benjamin Franklin, 1759. >OB/GYN, FACOG > -- art fougner, md A series of 1000 cases begins with but a single anecdote. Next message: Dr Don Miller: "Re: 66% Induction Rate" Previous message: Griffiths Malcolm: "Re: Within or outside the standard of care - Long"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Dec 2 04:50:23 2009

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.