51
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Within country inequalities in caesarean section rates: observational study of 72 low and middle income countries

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To provide an update on economic related inequalities in caesarean section rates within countries.

          Design

          Secondary analysis of demographic and health surveys and multiple indicator cluster surveys.

          Setting

          72 low and middle income countries with a survey conducted between 2010 and 2014 for analysis of the latest situation of inequality, and 28 countries with a survey also conducted between 2000 and 2004 for analysis of the change in inequality over time.

          Participants

          Women aged 15-49 years with a live birth during the two or three years preceding the survey.

          Main outcome measures

          Data on caesarean section were disaggregated by asset based household wealth status and presented separately for five subgroups, ranging from the poorest to the richest fifth. Absolute and relative inequalities were measured using difference and ratio measures. The pace of change in the poorest and richest fifths was compared using a measure of excess change.

          Results

          National caesarean section rates ranged from 0.6% in South Sudan to 58.9% in the Dominican Republic. Within countries, caesarean section rates were lowest in the poorest fifth (median 3.7%) and highest in the richest fifth (median 18.4%). 18 out of 72 study countries reported a difference of 20 percentage points or higher between the richest and poorest fifth. The highest caesarean section rates and greatest levels of absolute inequality were observed in countries from the region of the Americas, whereas countries from the African region had low levels of caesarean use and comparatively lower levels of absolute inequality, although relative inequality was quite high in some countries. 26 out of 28 countries reported increases in caesarean section rates over time. Rates tended to increase faster in the richest fifth (median 0.9 percentage points per year) compared with the poorest fifth (median 0.2 percentage points per year), indicating an increase in inequality over time in most of these countries.

          Conclusions

          Substantial within country economic inequalities in caesarean deliveries remain. These inequalities might be due to a combination of inadequate access to emergency obstetric care among the poorest subgroups and high levels of caesarean use without medical indication in the richest subgroups, especially in middle income countries. Country specific strategies should address these inequalities to improve maternal and newborn health.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse short-term maternal outcomes: the 2004-2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health

          Background There is worldwide debate about the appropriateness of caesarean sections performed without medical indications. In this analysis, we aim to further investigate the relationship between caesarean section without medical indication and severe maternal outcomes. Methods This is a multicountry, facility-based survey that used a stratified multistage cluster sampling design to obtain a sample of countries and health institutions worldwide. A total of 24 countries and 373 health facilities participated in this study. Data collection took place during 2004 and 2005 in Africa and the Americas and during 2007 and 2008 in Asia. All women giving birth at the facility during the study period were included and had their medical records reviewed before discharge from the hospital. Univariate and multilevel analysis were performed to study the association between each group's mode of delivery and the severe maternal and perinatal outcome. Results A total of 286,565 deliveries were analysed. The overall caesarean section rate was 25.7% and a total of 1.0 percent of all deliveries were caesarean sections without medical indications, either due to maternal request or in the absence of other recorded indications. Compared to spontaneous vaginal delivery, all other modes of delivery presented an association with the increased risk of death, admission to ICU, blood transfusion and hysterectomy, including antepartum caesarean section without medical indications (Adjusted Odds Ratio (Adj OR), 5.93, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI), 3.88 to 9.05) and intrapartum caesarean section without medical indications (Adj OR, 14.29, 95% CI, 10.91 to 18.72). In addition, this association is stronger in Africa, compared to Asia and Latin America. Conclusions Caesarean sections were associated with an intrinsic risk of increased severe maternal outcomes. We conclude that caesarean sections should be performed when a clear benefit is anticipated, a benefit that might compensate for the higher costs and additional risks associated with this operation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Relationship Between Cesarean Delivery Rate and Maternal and Neonatal Mortality.

            Based on older analyses, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that cesarean delivery rates should not exceed 10 to 15 per 100 live births to optimize maternal and neonatal outcomes.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Association between rates of caesarean section and maternal and neonatal mortality in the 21st century: a worldwide population‐based ecological study with longitudinal data

              Objective Caesarean section was initially performed to save the lives of the mother and/or her baby. Caesarean section rates have risen substantially worldwide over the past decades. In this study, we set out to compile all available caesarean section rates worldwide at the country level, and to identify the appropriate caesarean section rate at the population level associated with the minimal maternal and neonatal mortality. Design Ecological study using longitudinal data. Setting Worldwide country‐level data. Population A total of 159 countries were included in the analyses, representing 98.0% of global live births (2005). Methods Nationally representative caesarean section rates from 2000 to 2012 were compiled. We assessed the relationship between caesarean section rates and mortality outcomes, adjusting for socio‐economic development by means of human development index (HDI) using fractional polynomial regression models. Main outcome measures Maternal mortality ratio and neonatal mortality rate. Results Most countries have experienced increases in caesarean section rate during the study period. In the unadjusted analysis, there was a negative association between caesarean section rates and mortality outcomes for low caesarean section rates, especially among the least developed countries. After adjusting for HDI, this effect was much smaller and was only observed below a caesarean section rate of 5–10%. No important association between the caesarean section rate and maternal and neonatal mortality was observed when the caesarean section rate exceeded 10%. Conclusions Although caesarean section is an effective intervention to save maternal and infant lives, based on the available ecological evidence, caesarean section rates higher than around 10% at the population level are not associated with decreases in maternal and neonatal mortality rates, and thus may not be necessary to achieve the lowest maternal and neonatal mortality. Tweetable abstract The caesarean section rate of around 10% may be the optimal rate to achieve the lowest mortality.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: instructor in obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive biology
                Role: technical officer
                Role: medical officer
                Role: technical officer
                Role: professor
                Role: professor
                Role: professor
                Role: emeritus professor
                Role: health equity monitoring lead
                Journal
                BMJ
                BMJ
                BMJ-UK
                bmj
                The BMJ
                BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
                0959-8138
                1756-1833
                2018
                24 January 2018
                : 360
                : k55
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
                [2 ]Department of Information, Evidence and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, 1211, Switzerland
                [3 ]HRP–UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
                [4 ]International Center for Equity in Health, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil
                [5 ]Countdown to 2030 for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ Health; and Center for Global Public Health, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
                [6 ]Evidence Based Healthcare Post Graduate Program, São Paulo Federal University, São Paulo, Brazil
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: A R Hosseinpoor hosseinpoora@ 123456who.int
                Article
                boaa039166
                10.1136/bmj.k55
                5782376
                29367432
                6d06ee55-db4b-4373-b033-86a2e08d58f6
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution IGO License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/igo/), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction for non-commercial purposes in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 13 December 2017
                Categories
                Research

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article