{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]],"date-time":"2026-10-03T23:53:51Z","timestamp":1791071631852,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":36,"publisher":"BMJ","issue":"9","funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100000024","name":"Canadian Institutes of Health Research","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["MAH\u2013115445"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["MAH\u2013115445"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100000024","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["bmj.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["BMJ Open"],"accepted":{"date-parts":[[2016,8,23]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2016,9]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Objective<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Most literature on length of stay (LOS) for childbirth focuses on \u2018early\u2019 discharge as opposed to \u2018optimal\u2019 time of discharge and has conflicting results due to heterogeneous definitions of \u2018early\u2019 discharge and differing eligibility criteria for these programmes. We aimed to determine the LOS associated with the lowest neonatal readmission rate following childbirth by examining the incidence pattern of neonatal readmission for different LOS using the Kitagawa decomposition.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Design<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Retrospective cohort study using administrative hospitalisation data.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Setting<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Canada (excluding Quebec) from 2003 to 2010.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Patients<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Term, singleton live births without congenital anomalies.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Interventions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>LOS for childbirth.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Main outcome measure<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Neonatal readmissions within 30\u2005days of birth.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>1\u2005875\u2005322 live births were included. Neonatal LOS peaked at day 1 (47.3%) after vaginal birth and day 3 (49.3%) following caesarean section; 4.2% of infants were readmitted following vaginal birth and 2.2% after caesarean section. In 2008\u20132010, most readmissions occurred among infants discharged in the first 2\u2005days (83.8%) following a vaginal birth and among infants discharged in the first 3\u2005days (81.7%) following a caesarean birth. Readmissions increased from 4.1% in 2003\u20132005 to 4.6% in 2008\u20132010 among vaginal births and from 2.0% to 2.4% among caesarean births and occurred mostly due to changes in the day-specific readmission rates and not due to reductions in LOS.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Patterns of readmission suggest that readmission rates are lowest following a 1\u20132-day stay following a vaginal birth and a 2\u20134-day stay following a caesarean birth given the outpatient support in the community.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2016-012007","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2016,9,14]],"date-time":"2016-09-14T20:57:57Z","timestamp":1473886677000},"page":"e012007","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/crossmarkpolicy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":31,"title":["Proportion of neonatal readmission attributed to length of stay for childbirth: a population-based cohort study"],"prefix":"10.1136","volume":"6","author":[{"given":"Amy","family":"Metcalfe","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Matthews","family":"Mathai","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland"},{"name":"Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Shiliang","family":"Liu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Maternal, Child and Youth Health, Surveillance and Epidemiology Division, Centre for Chronic Disease Prevention, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Juan Andres","family":"Leon","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Maternal, Child and Youth Health, Surveillance and Epidemiology Division, Centre for Chronic Disease Prevention, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"K S","family":"Joseph","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"239","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2016,9,14]]},"reference":[{"issue":"17","key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.1","first-page":"335","article-title":"Trends in length of stay for hospital deliveries--United States, 1970\u20131992","volume":"44","author":"Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)","year":"1995","journal-title":"MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"73","DOI":"10.1080\/01443610701814187","article-title":"Factors influencing maternal length of stay after giving birth in a UK hospital and the impact of those factors on bed occupancy","volume":"28","author":"Elattar","year":"2008","journal-title":"J Obstet Gynaecol"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1542\/peds.107.2.400"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"11","DOI":"10.1097\/00005237-199806000-00004","article-title":"Length of stay for uncomplicated vaginal birth: a perinatal continuous quality improvement project","volume":"12","author":"Inturrisi","year":"1998","journal-title":"J Perinat Neonatal Nurs"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"104","DOI":"10.1007\/BF03404581","article-title":"Post-maternity outcomes following health care reform in Alberta: 1992\u20131996","volume":"94","author":"Thompson","year":"2003","journal-title":"Can J Public Health"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/hec.1325"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"377","DOI":"10.2105\/AJPH.88.3.377","article-title":"Hospital- and patient-related characteristics determining maternity length of stay: a hierarchical linear model approach","volume":"88","author":"Leung","year":"1998","journal-title":"Am J Public Health"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.8","first-page":"259","article-title":"Relationships between length of stay and hospital characteristics under the case-payment system in Taiwan: using data for vaginal delivery patients","volume":"26","author":"Lin","year":"2003","journal-title":"Chang Gung Med J"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/archpedi.1997.02170420036006"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/07399330802269451"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.11","first-page":"113","article-title":"Uses and limitations of routine hospital admission\/separation records for perinatal surveillance","volume":"18","author":"Wen","year":"1997","journal-title":"Chronic Dis Can"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1503\/cmaj.121283"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0029-7844(97)85764-X"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0029-7844(96)00267-0"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/archfami.8.3.237"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(98)70268-6"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1542\/peds.104.5.1070"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"46","DOI":"10.1007\/BF03404253","article-title":"Increased neonatal readmission rate associated with decreased length of hospital stay at birth in Canada","volume":"91","author":"Liu","year":"2000","journal-title":"Can J Public Health"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1365-3016.2004.00558.x"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.1997.03550040049036"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1542\/peds.2012-0820"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.22","first-page":"1071","article-title":"Do longer postpartum stays reduce newborn readmissions? Analysis using instrumental variables","volume":"35","author":"Malkin","year":"2000","journal-title":"Health Serv Res"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"357","DOI":"10.1016\/S1701-2163(16)32444-6","article-title":"Postpartum maternal and newborn discharge","volume":"29","author":"Cargill","year":"2007","journal-title":"J Obstet Gynaecol Can"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"277","DOI":"10.1080\/jmf.10.4.277.282-15","article-title":"Early discharge revisited: problems encountered with the home visit follow-up after the liberalization of eligibility criteria","volume":"10","author":"Brumfield","year":"2001","journal-title":"J Matern Fetal Med"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0009922814536924"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1542\/hpeds.2013-0120"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1542\/peds.2014-2388"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.28","unstructured":"Public Health Agency of Canada. Perinatal Health Indicators for Canada 2013: a report of the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System . Ottawa. 2013."},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"22","DOI":"10.1007\/s10995-013-1229-6","article-title":"Maternal, care provider, and institutional-level risk factors for early term elective repeat cesarean delivery: a population-based cohort study","volume":"18","author":"Hutcheon","year":"2014","journal-title":"Matern Child Health J"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"16","DOI":"10.1186\/s12913-015-1214-4","article-title":"Reducing the length of postnatal hospital stay: implications for cost and quality of care","volume":"16","author":"Bowers","year":"2016","journal-title":"BMC Health Serv Res"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1542\/peds.2014-2329"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.32","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"70","DOI":"10.1186\/1824-7288-40-70","article-title":"Individualized follow up programme and early discharge in term neonates","volume":"40","author":"De Carolis","year":"2014","journal-title":"Ital J Pediatr"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.33","first-page":"19","article-title":"Costs of postpartum care: examining associations from the Ontario mother and infant survey","volume":"33","author":"Roberts","year":"2001","journal-title":"Can J Nurs Res"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10995-007-0256-6"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0022-3476(95)70170-2"},{"key":"2025121511310823000_6.9.e012007.36","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"276","DOI":"10.1007\/BF03405016","article-title":"Early discharge of Alberta mothers post-delivery and the relationship to potentially preventable newborn readmissions","volume":"93","author":"Johnson","year":"2002","journal-title":"Can J Public Health"}],"container-title":["BMJ Open"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/syndication.highwire.org\/content\/doi\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2016-012007","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,12,15]],"date-time":"2025-12-15T19:31:16Z","timestamp":1765827076000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmjopen.bmj.com\/lookup\/doi\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2016-012007"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2016,9]]},"references-count":36,"journal-issue":{"issue":"9","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2016,9,14]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2016,9]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1136\/bmjopen-2016-012007"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2016-012007","relation":{},"ISSN":["2044-6055","2044-6055"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2044-6055","type":"print"},{"value":"2044-6055","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2016,9]]}}}