Literature DB >> 15366405

Effect of peer review and trial of labor on lowering cesarean section rates.

Wei-Hsing Liang1, Chiou-Chung Yuan, Jeng-Hsiu Hung, Man-Li Yang, Ming-Jie Yang, Yi-Jen Chen, Tzay-Shing Yang.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In an attempt to lower cesarean section rates, a cesarean surveillance system and a selective trial of labor were introduced in a tertiary hospital in Taiwan.
METHODS: From 1997 to 2000, 2 physicians were appointed as consultants for the pre-cesarean surveillance, and a trial of labor after a cesarean section was employed concurrently. We organized a weekly departmental Cesarean Indication Conference on Mondays. Comparisons of the cesarean rates between 1993-96 and 1997-2000 were made using the chi-square test. Comparisons of the proportion of overall cesarean sections contributed by each indication for both 1993 and 2000 were also made by chi-square test.
RESULTS: A comparison of the 4-year periods before and after 1997 showed that the total cesarean rate had decreased from 37.0 to 30.7% (p < 0.001), primary cesarean rate from 21.3 to 17.8% (p < 0.001), and repeat cesarean rate from 15.7 to 12.9% (p < 0.001). No uterine rupture occurred. Among the 54 indications for primary cesareans, compared between 1993 and 2000, the proportion rates for dystocia, fetal distress, preeclampsia, induction failure, gestational diabetes, and elderly primigravidahad decreased substantially.
CONCLUSIONS: The efficient way to lower the repeat cesarean rate is trial of labor, and the way to reduce the number of primary cesareans is in practicing of the guidelines for various indications. The cesarean surveillance system can solidify these guidelines, leading to a lower cesarean rate and an avoidance of inappropriate indications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15366405

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chin Med Assoc        ISSN: 1726-4901            Impact factor:   2.743


  5 in total

1.  New labor management guidelines and changes in cesarean delivery patterns.

Authors:  Joshua I Rosenbloom; Molly J Stout; Methodius G Tuuli; Candice L Woolfolk; Julia D López; George A Macones; Alison G Cahill
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-10-14       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 2.  Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section.

Authors:  Innie Chen; Newton Opiyo; Emma Tavender; Sameh Mortazhejri; Tamara Rader; Jennifer Petkovic; Sharlini Yogasingam; Monica Taljaard; Sugandha Agarwal; Malinee Laopaiboon; Jason Wasiak; Suthit Khunpradit; Pisake Lumbiganon; Russell L Gruen; Ana Pilar Betran
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-09-28

3.  Opinions and attitudes of obstetricians and midwives in Turkey towards caesarean section and vaginal birth following a previous caesarean section.

Authors:  Sezer Kisa; Adnan Kisa; Mustafa Z Younis
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 1.671

4.  A cluster-randomized field trial to reduce cesarean section rates with a multifaceted intervention in Shanghai, China.

Authors:  Lulu Zhang; Lin Zhang; Meng Li; Jie Xi; Xiaohua Zhang; Zhenni Meng; Ying Wang; Huaping Li; Xiaohua Liu; Feihua Ju; Yuping Lu; Huijun Tang; Xianju Qin; Yanhong Ming; Rong Huang; Guohong Li; Hongying Dai; Rong Zhang; Min Qin; Liping Zhu; Jun Zhang
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2020-02-14       Impact factor: 8.775

5.  Barriers and enablers in the implementation of a program to reduce cesarean deliveries.

Authors:  Clara Bermúdez-Tamayo; Emilia Fernández Ruiz; Guadalupe Pastor Moreno; Gracia Maroto-Navarro; Leticia Garcia-Mochon; Francisco Jose Perez-Ramos; Africa Caño-Aguilar; Maria Del Pilar Velez
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2017-08-29       Impact factor: 3.223

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.