DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20220930
Published: 2022-03-25

A review of caesarean section rates in India: causes for increased prevalence and suggestions for a rational approach

Patricia Christina Balla, Samson Sanjeeva Rao Nallapu

Abstract


An increasing Caesarian Section (CS) rate places a clinical and economic burden on health care services of the country. When balancing an optimal CS rate, maternal and pediatric outcomes of pregnancy such as maternal morbidity and birth complications should be considered. A CS can be a life-saving intervention when medically indicated, but this procedure can also lead to short-term and long-term health effects for women and children. For society, a caesarean section is more costly than a vaginal delivery. The increased rate of CS can be attributed to medical and non-medical factors like increases in maternal age and body mass index as well as changes in obstetric practice and technology. The WHO has recommended the Robson 10 Group classification as a global standard tool for monitoring CS. This system classifies CS into 10 mutually exclusive groups based on the parity, gestational age at admission, onset of labour, fetal presentation and number of fetuses. The WHO also emphasises that the focus should be to provide caesarean sections to all women in need rather than striving to achieve any specific rate at the population level. It also encourages a shift in the focus from optimal caesarean section rates to more practical proposals which are amenable to action. In the private healthcare setup, commitment to improvement and strategies such as full time availability of obstetricians, better midwife support and regular audits will help move towards an acceptable CS rate. In conclusion, the onus must not be on just reducing CS rates but on scientific methods of deciding when a woman needs the surgery and to ensure safe healthcare environments for the same. Training in obstetrics for specialists must not neglect appropriate procedures like instrumentation.


Keywords


Caesarian section, CS rates, Medical factors, Non-medical factors, Optimal rates

Full Text:

PDF

References


Cesarean Section - A Brief History Part 1. Available at: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/ cesarean/ part1.html. Accessed on 20 December 2021.

Todman D, A history of caesarean section: from ancient world to the modern era. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;47(5):357-61.

Singh P, Hashmi G, Swain PK. High prevalence of cesarean section births in private sector health facilities- analysis of district level household survey-4 (DLHS-4) of India. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):613.

Kumar P, Dhillon P. Household- and community-level determinants of low-risk Caesarean deliveries among women in India. J Biosoc Sci. 2021;53(1):55-70.

Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;15(1):179-94.

The Federation of Obstetric & Gynecological Societies of India. Available at: https://www.fogsi.org/fogsi-cesarean-rates-jdt/. Accessed on 20 December 2021.

Belizán JM, Minckas N, McClure EM, Saleem S, Moore JL, Goudar SS et al. An approach to identify a minimum and rational proportion of caesarean sections in resource-poor settings: a global network study, Lancet Glob Health. 2018;6:e894-901.

Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, Ye J, Mikolajczyk R, Deneux-Tharaux C et al. What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies. Reprod Health. 2015;12:57.

Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L, Mola G, Visser G, Homer C, et al. Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children. The Lancet. 2018;392:1349-57.

Keag OE, Norman JE, Stock SJ. Long-term risks and benefits associated with cesarean delivery for mother, baby, and subsequent pregnancies: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2018;15(1):e1002494.

Wolf JH. Risk and Reputation: Obstetricians, Cesareans, and Consent. J Hist Med Allied Sci. 2018;73(1):7-28.

Tollanes MC, Increased rate of Caesarean sections--causes and consequences, Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2009;129(13):1329-31.

WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates. Available at: WHO_ RHR_ 15.02_ eng .pdf; jsessionid =7653D2B16C0FF71F488A3C79FFC5172C?sequence=1. Accessed on 20 December 2021.

WHO 2015, WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates World Health Organization Department of Reproductive Health and Research 1211 Geneva 27. Available at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/161442/WHO_RHR_15.02_eng.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed on 20 December 2021.

WHO recommendations non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections. Available at: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/infographic-unnecessary-caesarean-section.pdf. Accessed on 20 December 2021.

Pai M, Unnecessary Medical Interventions: Caesarean Sections as a Case Study. Economic and Political Weekly. 2000; 35(31):2755-61.

WHO recommendations non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections. Available at: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/infographic-unnecessary-caesarean-section.pdf. Accessed on 20 December 2021.

Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;15(1):179-94.

Silva CHM, Laranjeira CLS, Use of the Robson Classification System for the Improvement and Adequacy of the Ways of Delivery in Maternities and Hospitals. An Opportunity to Reduce Unnecessary Cesarean Rates. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet .2018;40(07):377-8.

Betrán AP, Zhang J, Torloni MR, Gülmezoglu AM. Determination of a single, universal threshold for caesarean section rate is not the way forward, Evid Based Med. 2016;21(6):237.

Bhartia A, Dhar RSG, Bhartia S. Reducing caesarean section rate in an urban hospital serving women attending privately in India – a quality improvement initiative. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020:556.

Smith V, Gallagher L, Carroll M, Hannon K, Begley C. Antenatal and intrapartum interventions for reducing caesarean section, promoting vaginal birth, and reducing fear of childbirth: An overview of systematic reviews. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(10):e0224313.

Manjulatha VR, Anitha GS, Shivalingaiah N. Partogram: clinical study to assess the role of Partogram in primigravidae in labor, Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016;5(4):1014-25.

Oladapo OT, Souza JP, Fawole B, Mugerwa K, Perdoná G, Alves D et al. Progression of the first stage of spontaneous labour: A prospective cohort study in two sub-Saharan African countries, PLoS Med. 2018;15(1):e1002492.

Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstetric Care Consensus No. 1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:693-711.

Oladapo OT, Souza JP, Bohren MA. WHO Better Outcomes in Labour Difficulty (BOLD) project: innovating to improve quality of care around the time of childbirth. Reprod Health. 2015;12:48.