Search

Objective: To measure the proportion of women's preferences for CS in hospitals with high caesarean section rates and to identify related factors., Design: A cross-sectional hospital-based postpartum survey was conducted. We used multilevel multivariate logistic regression and probit models to analyse the association between women's caesarean section preferences and maternal characteristics. Probit models take into account selection bias while excluding women who had no preference., Setting: Thirty-two hospitals in Argentina, Thailand, Vietnam and Burkina Faso were selected., Participants: A total of 1,979 post-partum women with no potential medical need for caesarean section were included among a representative sample of women who delivered at each of the participating facilities during the data collection period., Findings: The overall caesarean section rate was 23.3 %. Among women who declared a preference in late pregnancy, 9 % preferred caesarean section, ranging from 1.8 % in Burkina Faso to 17.8 % in Thailand. Primiparous women were more likely to prefer a caesarean section than multiparous women (β=+0.16 [+0.01; +0.31]; p = 0.04). Among women who preferred caesarean section, doctors were frequently cited as the main influencers, and "avoid pain in labour" was the most common perceived benefit of caesarean section., Key Conclusions: Our results suggest that a high proportion of women prefer vaginal birth and highlight that the preference for caesarean section is linked to women's fear of pain and the influence of doctors. These results can inform the development of interventions aimed at supporting women and their preferences, providing them with evidence-based information and changing doctors' behaviour in order to reduce the number of unnecessary caesarean sections., Clinical Trial Registry: The QUALI-DEC trial is registered on the Current Controlled Trials website (https://www.isrctn.com/) under the number ISRCTN67214403., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Improving the understanding of non-clinical factors that lead to the increasing caesarean section (CS) rates in many low- and middle-income countries is currently necessary to meet the challenge of implementing effective interventions in hospitals to reverse the trend. The objective of this study was to study the influence of organizational factors on the CS use in Argentina, Vietnam, Thailand and Burkina Faso., Methods: A cross-sectional hospital-based postpartum survey was conducted in 32 hospitals (8 per country). We selected women with no potential medical need for CS among a random sample of women who delivered at each of the participating facilities during the data collection period. We used multilevel multivariable logistic regression to analyse the association between CS use and organizational factors, adjusted on women's characteristics., Results: A total of 2,092 low-risk women who had given birth in the participating hospitals were included. The overall CS rate was 24.1%, including 4.9% of pre-labour CS and 19.3% of intra-partum CS. Pre-labour CS was significantly associated with a 24-hour anaesthetist dedicated to the delivery ward (ORa = 3.70 [1.41; 9.72]) and with the possibility to have an individual room during labour and delivery (ORa = 0.28 [0.09; 0.87]). Intra-partum CS was significantly associated with a higher bed occupancy level (ORa = 1.45 [1.09; 1.93]): intrapartum CS rate would increase of 6.3% points if the average number of births per delivery bed per day increased by 10%., Conclusion: Our results suggest that organisational norms and convenience associated with inadequate use of favourable resources, as well as the lack of privacy favouring women's preference for CS, and the excessive workload of healthcare providers drive the CS overuse in these hospitals. It is also crucial to enhance human and physical resources in delivery rooms and the organisation of intrapartum care to improve the birth experience and the working environment for those providing care., Trial Registration: The QUALI-DEC trial is registered on the Current Controlled Trials website ( https://www.isrctn.com/ ) under the number ISRCTN67214403., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: While cesarean sections (CSs) are a life-saving intervention, an increasing number are performed without medical reasons in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Unnecessary CS diverts scarce resources and thereby reduces access to healthcare for women in need. Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand, and Vietnam are committed to reducing unnecessary CS, but many individual and organizational factors in healthcare facilities obstruct this aim. Nonclinical interventions can overcome these barriers by helping providers improve their practices and supporting women's decision-making regarding childbirth. Existing evidence has shown only a modest effect of single interventions on reducing CS rates, arguably because of the failure to design multifaceted interventions effectively tailored to the context. The aim of this study is to design, adapt, and test a multifaceted intervention for the appropriate use of CS in Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand, and Vietnam., Methods: We designed an intervention (QUALIty DECision-making-QUALI-DEC) with four components: (1) opinion leaders at heathcare facilities to improve adherence to best practices among clinicians, (2) CS audits and feedback to help providers identify potentially avoidable CS, (3) a decision analysis tool to help women make an informed decision on the mode of birth, and (4) companionship to support women during labor. QUALI-DEC will be implemented and evaluated in 32 hospitals (8 sites per country) using a pragmatic hybrid effectiveness-implementation design to test our implementation strategy, and information regarding its impact on relevant maternal and perinatal outcomes will be gathered. The implementation strategy will involve the participation of women, healthcare professionals, and organizations and account for the local environment, needs, resources, and social factors in each country., Discussion: There is urgent need for interventions and implementation strategies to optimize the use of CS while improving health outcomes and satisfaction in LMICs. This can only be achieved by engaging all stakeholders involved in the decision-making process surrounding birth and addressing their needs and concerns. The study will generate robust evidence about the effectiveness and the impact of this multifaceted intervention. It will also assess the acceptability and scalability of the intervention and the capacity for empowerment among women and providers alike., Trial Registration: ISRCTN67214403.

Background: There has been concern about rising rates of caesarean section worldwide. This Article reports the third phase of the WHO global survey, which aimed to estimate the rate of different methods of delivery and to examine the relation between method of delivery and maternal and perinatal outcomes in selected facilities in Africa and Latin America in 2004-05, and in Asia in 2007-08., Methods: Nine countries participated in the Asia global survey: Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam. In each country, the capital city and two other regions or provinces were randomly selected. We studied all women admitted for delivery during 3 months in institutions with 6000 or fewer expected deliveries per year and during 2 months in those with more than 6000 deliveries. We gathered data for institutions to obtain a detailed description of the health facility and its resources for obstetric care. We obtained data from women's medical records to summarise obstetric and perinatal events., Findings: We obtained data for 109 101 of 112 152 deliveries reported in 122 recruited facilities (97% coverage), and analysed 107 950 deliveries. The overall rate of caesarean section was 27.3% (n=29 428) and of operative vaginal delivery was 3.2% (n=3465). Risk of maternal mortality and morbidity index (at least one of: maternal mortality, admission to intensive care unit [ICU], blood transfusion, hysterectomy, or internal iliac artery ligation) was increased for operative vaginal delivery (adjusted odds ratio 2.1, 95% CI 1.7-2.6) and all types of caesarean section (antepartum without indication 2.7, 1.4-5.5; antepartum with indication 10.6, 9.3-12.0; intrapartum without indication 14.2, 9.8-20.7; intrapartum with indication 14.5, 13.2-16.0). For breech presentation, caesarean section, either antepartum (0.2, 0.1-0.3) or intrapartum (0.3, 0.2-0.4), was associated with improved perinatal outcomes, but also with increased risk of stay in neonatal ICU (2.0, 1.1-3.6; and 2.1, 1.2-3.7, respectively)., Interpretation: To improve maternal and perinatal outcomes, caesarean section should be done only when there is a medical indication., Funding: US Agency for International Development (USAID); UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), WHO, Switzerland; Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan; Ministry of Public Health, China; and Indian Council of Medical Research., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess the risks and benefits associated with caesarean delivery compared with vaginal delivery., Design: Prospective cohort study within the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health., Setting: 410 health facilities in 24 areas in eight randomly selected Latin American countries; 123 were randomly selected and 120 participated and provided data, Participants: 106,546 deliveries reported during the three month study period, with data available for 97,095 (91% coverage)., Main Outcome Measures: Maternal, fetal, and neonatal morbidity and mortality associated with intrapartum or elective caesarean delivery, adjusted for clinical, demographic, pregnancy, and institutional characteristics., Results: Women undergoing caesarean delivery had an increased risk of severe maternal morbidity compared with women undergoing vaginal delivery (odds ratio 2.0 (95% confidence interval 1.6 to 2.5) for intrapartum caesarean and 2.3 (1.7 to 3.1) for elective caesarean). The risk of antibiotic treatment after delivery for women having either type of caesarean was five times that of women having vaginal deliveries. With cephalic presentation, there was a trend towards a reduced odds ratio for fetal death with elective caesarean, after adjustment for possible confounding variables and gestational age (0.7, 0.4 to 1.0). With breech presentation, caesarean delivery had a large protective effect for fetal death. With cephalic presentation, however, independent of possible confounding variables and gestational age, intrapartum and elective caesarean increased the risk for a stay of seven or more days in neonatal intensive care (2.1 (1.8 to 2.6) and 1.9 (1.6 to 2.3), respectively) and the risk of neonatal mortality up to hospital discharge (1.7 (1.3 to 2.2) and 1.9 (1.5 to 2.6), respectively), which remained higher even after exclusion of all caesarean deliveries for fetal distress. Such increased risk was not seen for breech presentation. Lack of labour was a risk factor for a stay of seven or more days in neonatal intensive care and neonatal mortality up to hospital discharge for babies delivered by elective caesarean delivery, but rupturing of membranes may be protective., Conclusions: Caesarean delivery independently reduces overall risk in breech presentations and risk of intrapartum fetal death in cephalic presentations but increases the risk of severe maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality in cephalic presentations.

Background: Caesarean delivery rates continue to increase worldwide. Our aim was to assess the association between caesarean delivery and pregnancy outcome at the institutional level, adjusting for the pregnant population and institutional characteristics., Methods: For the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health, we assessed a multistage stratified sample, comprising 24 geographic regions in eight countries in Latin America. We obtained individual data for all women admitted for delivery over 3 months to 120 institutions randomly selected from of 410 identified institutions. We also obtained institutional-level data., Findings: We obtained data for 97,095 of 106,546 deliveries (91% coverage). The median rate of caesarean delivery was 33% (quartile range 24-43), with the highest rates of caesarean delivery noted in private hospitals (51%, 43-57). Institution-specific rates of caesarean delivery were affected by primiparity, previous caesarean delivery, and institutional complexity. Rate of caesarean delivery was positively associated with postpartum antibiotic treatment and severe maternal morbidity and mortality, even after adjustment for risk factors. Increase in the rate of caesarean delivery was associated with an increase in fetal mortality rates and higher numbers of babies admitted to intensive care for 7 days or longer even after adjustment for preterm delivery. Rates of preterm delivery and neonatal mortality both rose at rates of caesarean delivery of between 10% and 20%., Interpretation: High rates of caesarean delivery do not necessarily indicate better perinatal care and can be associated with harm.

Background: Latin America has a high rate of caesarean sections. We tested the hypothesis that a hospital policy of mandatory second opinion, based on the best existing scientific evidence, reduces the hospital caesarean section rate by 25%, without increasing maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality., Methods: 36 hospitals in Argentina (18), Brazil (eight), Cuba (four), Guatemala (two), and Mexico (four), were randomly assigned to intervention or control in a matched pair design. All physicians in the intervention hospitals deciding a non-emergency caesarean section had to follow a policy of mandatory second opinion. The primary outcome was the overall caesarean section rate in the hospitals after a 6-month implementation period. We also assessed women's satisfaction with labour and delivery care and physicians'acceptance of the second opinion policy., Findings: A total of 34 hospitals attending 149?276 deliveries were randomised and completed the protocol. The mandatory second opinion policy was associated with a small but significant reduction in rates of caesarean section (relative rate reduction 7.3%; 95% CI 0.2-14.5), mostly in intrapartum sections (12.6%; 0.6-24.7). Other maternal and neonatal outcomes and women's perceptions and satisfaction with the process of care were similarly distributed between the groups., Interpretation: In hospitals applying this policy of second opinion, 22 intrapartum caesarean sections could be prevented per 1000 deliveries, without affecting maternal or perinatal morbidity, and without affecting mothers' satisfaction with the care process.

The project 'Quality Decision-making by women and providers' (QUALI-DEC) combines four non-clinical interventions to promote informed decision-making surrounding mode of birth, improve women's birth experiences, and reduce caesarean sections among low-risk women. QUALI-DEC is currently being implemented in 32 healthcare facilities across Argentina, Burkina Faso, Thailand, and Viet Nam. In this paper, we detail implementation processes and the planned process evaluation, which aims to assess how and for whom QUALI-DEC worked, the mechanisms of change and their interactions with context and setting; adaptations to intervention and implementation strategies, feasibility of scaling-up, and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. We developed a project theory of change illustrating how QUALI-DEC might lead to impact. The theory of change, together with on the ground observations of implementation processes, guided the process evaluation strategy including what research questions and perspectives to prioritise. Main data sources will include: 1) regular monitoring visits in healthcare facilities, 2) quantitative process and output indicators, 3) a before and after cross-sectional survey among post-partum women, 4) qualitative interviews with all opinion leaders, and 5) qualitative interviews with postpartum women and health workers in two healthcare facilities per country, as part of a case study approach. We foresee that the QUALI-DEC process evaluation will generate valuable information that will improve interpretation of the effectiveness evaluation. At the policy level, we anticipate that important lessons and methodological insights will be drawn, with application to other settings and stakeholders looking to implement complex interventions aiming to improve maternal and newborn health and wellbeing. Trial registration: ISRCTN67214403. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Caesarean section rates continue to increase worldwide with uncertain medical consequences. Auditing and analysing caesarean section rates and other perinatal outcomes in a reliable and continuous manner is critical for understanding reasons caesarean section changes over time. Methods: We analyzed data on 97,095 women delivering in 120 facilities in 8 countries, collected as part of the 2004-2005 Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health in Latin America. The objective of this analysis was to test if the "10-group" or "Robson" classification could help identify which groups of women are contributing most to the high caesarean section rates in Latin America, and if it could provide information useful for health care providers in monitoring and planning effective actions to reduce these rates. Results: The overall rate of caesarean section was 35.4%. Women with single cephalic pregnancy at term without previous caesarean section who entered into labour spontaneously (groups I and 3) represented 60% of the total obstetric population. Although women with a term singleton cephalic pregnancy with a previous caesarean section (group 5) represented only 11.4% of the obstetric population, this group was the largest contributor to the overall caesarean section rate (26.7% of all the caesarean sections). The second and third largest contributors to the overall caesarean section rate were nulliparous women with single cephalic pregnancy at term either in spontaneous labour (group I) or induced or delivered by caesarean section before labour (group 2), which were responsible for 18.3% and 15.3% of all caesarean deliveries, respectively. Conclusion: The 10-group classification could be easily applied to a multicountry dataset without problems of inconsistencies or misclassification. Specific groups of women were clearly identified as the main contributors to the overall caesarean section rate. This classification could help health care providers to plan practical and effective actions targeting specific groups of women to improve maternal and perinatal care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To assess the frequency of elective induction of labour and its determinants in selected Latin America countries; quantify success in attaining vaginal delivery, and compare rates of caesarean and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes after elective induction versus spontaneous labour in low-risk pregnancies. Methods Of 37 444 deliveries in women with low-risk pregnancies, 1847 (4.9%) were electively induced. The factors associated with adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes among cases of spontaneous and induced onset of labour were compared. Odds ratios for factors potentially associated with adverse outcomes were calculated, as were the relative risks of having an adverse maternal or perinatal outcome (both with their 95% confidence intervals). Adjustment using multiple logistic regression models followed these analyses. Findings Of 11 077 cases of induced labour, 1847 (16.7%) were elective. Elective inductions occurred in 4.9% of women with low-risk pregnancies (37 444). Oxytocin was the most common method used (83% of cases), either alone or combined with another. Of induced deliveries, 88.2% were vaginal. The most common maternal adverse events were: (i) a higher postpartum need for uterotonic drugs, (ii) a nearly threefold risk of admission to the intensive care unit; (iii) a fivefold risk of postpartum hysterectomy, and (iv) an increased need for anaesthesia/analgesia. Perinatal outcomes were satisfactory except for a 22% higher risk of delayed breastfeeding (i.e. initiation between 1 hour and 7 days postpartum). Conclusion Caution is mandatory when indicating elective labour induction because the increased risk of maternal and perinatal adverse outcomes is not outweighed by clear benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]