Literature DB >> 21678348

Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section.

Suthit Khunpradit1, Emma Tavender, Pisake Lumbiganon, Malinee Laopaiboon, Jason Wasiak, Russell L Gruen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section rates are steadily increasing globally. The factors contributing to these observed increases are complex. Non-clinical interventions, those applied independent of patient care in a clinical encounter, may have a role in reducing unnecessary caesarean sections.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean sections. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register (29 March 2010), the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Specialised Register (29 March 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2); MEDLINE (1950 to March 2010); EMBASE (1947 to March 2010) and CINAHL (1982 to March 2010). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental studies, controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) with at least two intervention and control sites, and interrupted time series analyses (ITS) where the intervention time was clearly defined and there were at least three data points before and three after the intervention. Studies evaluated non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section rates. Participants included pregnant women and their families, healthcare providers who work with expectant mothers, communities and advocacy groups. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed the quality and abstracted data of all eligible studies using a standardised data extraction form, modified from the Cochrane EPOC checklists. We contacted study authors for additional information. MAIN
RESULTS: We included 16 studies in this review.Six studies specifically targeted pregnant women. Two RCTs were shown to be effective in reducing caesarean section rates: a nurse-led relaxation training programme for women with a fear or anxiety of childbirth and birth preparation sessions. However, both RCTs were small in size and targeted younger mothers with their first pregnancies. There is insufficient evidence that prenatal education and support programmes, computer patient decision-aids, decision-aid booklets and intensive group therapy are effective.Ten studies targeted health professionals. Three of these studies were effective in reducing caesarean section rates. A cluster-RCT of guideline implementation with mandatory second opinion resulted in a small, statistically significant reduction in total caesarean section rates (adjusted risk difference (RD) -1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8 to -0.1); this reduction was predominately in intrapartum sections. An ITS study of mandatory second opinion and peer review feedback at department meetings found statistically significant results at 48 months for reducing repeat caesarean section rates (change in level was -6.4%; 95% CI -9.7% to -3.1% and change in slope -1.14%; 95% CI -1.9% to -0.3%) but not for total caesarean section rates. A cluster-RCT of guideline implementation with support from local opinion leaders increased the proportion of women with a previous caesarean section being offered a trial of labour (absolute difference 16.8%) and the number who had a vaginal birth (VBAC rates) (absolute difference 13.5%). The P values are, however, not reported due to unit of analysis errors. There was insufficient evidence that audit and feedback, training of public health nurses, insurance reform, external peer review and legislative changes are effective. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of guidelines with mandatory second opinion can lead to a small reduction in caesarean section rates, predominately in intrapartum sections. Peer review, including pre-caesarean consultation, mandatory secondary opinion and postcaesarean surveillance can lead to a reduction in repeat caesarean section rates. Guidelines disseminated with endorsement and support from local opinion leaders may increase the proportion of women with previous caesarean sections being offered a trial of labour in certain settings. Nurse-led relaxation classes and birth preparation classes may reduce caesarean section rates in low-risk pregnancies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21678348     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005528.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  47 in total

1.  Practice audits to reduce caesareans in a tertiary referral hospital in south-western China.

Authors:  Ma Runmei; Lao Terence T; Sun Yonghu; Xiao Hong; Tian Yuqin; Li Bailuan; Yang Minghui; Yang Weihong; Liang Kun; Liang Guohua; Li Hongyu; Geng Li; Ni Renmin; Qi Wenjin; Chen Zhuo; Du Mingyu; Zhu Bei; Xu Jing; Tao Yanping; Zhang Lan; Song Xianyan; Qu Zaiqing; Sun Qian; Yi Xiaoyun; Yu Jihui; Zhang Dandan
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2012-03-13       Impact factor: 9.408

Review 2.  Parturition and the perinatal period: can mode of delivery impact on the future health of the neonate?

Authors:  R M Tribe; P D Taylor; N M Kelly; D Rees; J Sandall; H P Kennedy
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2018-04-15       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Disparities in cesarean delivery by ethnicity and nativity in New York city.

Authors:  T Janevic; E Loftfield; D A Savitz; E Bradley; J Illuzzi; H Lipkind
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2014-01

4.  Improvements in Cesarean Section Techniques: Arad's Obstetrics Department Experience on Adapting the Vejnovic Cesarean Section Technique.

Authors:  Cristian Furau; Gheorghe Furau; Voicu Dascau; Gheorghe Ciobanu; Cristina Onel; Casiana Stanescu
Journal:  Maedica (Buchar)       Date:  2013-09

Review 5.  Strategies for reducing regional variation in the use of surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Bradley N Reames; Sarah P Shubeck; John D Birkmeyer
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 6.  What Are Optimal Cesarean Section Rates in the U.S. and How Do We Get There? A Review of Evidence-Based Recommendations and Interventions.

Authors:  Diana Montoya-Williams; Dominick J Lemas; Lisa Spiryda; Keval Patel; Josef Neu; Tiffany L Carson
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 2.681

Review 7.  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

8.  Increased maternal TSH and decreased maternal FT4 are associated with a higher operative delivery rate in low-risk pregnancies: A prospective cohort study.

Authors:  L Monen; V J Pop; T H Hasaart; H Wijnen; S G Oei; S M Kuppens
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Developing strategies to be added to the protocol for antenatal care: an exercise and birth preparation program.

Authors:  Maria Amélia Miquelutti; José Guilherme Cecatti; Maria Yolanda Makuch
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.365

10.  Study protocol for "Study of Practices Enabling Implementation and Adaptation in the Safety Net (SPREAD-NET)": a pragmatic trial comparing implementation strategies.

Authors:  Rachel Gold; Celine Hollombe; Arwen Bunce; Christine Nelson; James V Davis; Stuart Cowburn; Nancy Perrin; Jennifer DeVoe; Ned Mossman; Bruce Boles; Michael Horberg; James W Dearing; Victoria Jaworski; Deborah Cohen; David Smith
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 7.327

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.