Literature DB >> 23756274

Preventable obstetrical interventions: how many caesarean sections can be prevented in Canada?

Michel Rossignol1, Jean-Marie Moutquin2, Faiza Boughrassa3, Marie-Josée Bédard4, Nils Chaillet5, Christiane Charest6, Luisa Ciofani7, Maxine Dumas-Pilon8, Guy-Paul Gagné9, Andrée Gagnon10, Raymonde Gagnon11, Vyta Senikas12.   

Abstract

Public health authorities have been alarmed by the progressive rise in rates of Caesarean section in Canada, approaching one birth in three in several provinces. We aimed therefore to consider what were preventable obstetrical interventions in women with a low-risk pregnancy and to propose an analytic framework for the reduction of the rate of CS. We obtained statistical variations of CS rates over time, across regions, and within professional practices from MED-ÉCHO, the Quebec hospitalization database, from 1969 to 2009. Data were extracted from a recent systematic review of the cascade of obstetrical interventions to calculate the population-attributable fractions for each intervention associated with an increased probability of CS. We thereby identified expectant management (as an alternative to labour induction) and planned vaginal birth after CS as the leading strategies for potentially reducing rates of CS in women at low risk. For vaginal birth after CS, an increase to its 1995 level could lower the current CS rate of 23.2% (2009 to 2010) to 21.0%. Other alternatives to obstetrical interventions with a potential for lowering CS rates included non-pharmacological pain control methods (such as continuous support during childbirth) in addition to usual care, intermittent auscultation of the fetal heart (instead of electronic fetal monitoring), and multidisciplinary internal quality assessment audits. We believe, therefore, that the concept of preventable CS is supported by empirical evidence, and we identified realistic strategies to maintain a CS rate in Quebec near 20%.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Caesarean section; health organization; health services; obstetrical interventions

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23756274     DOI: 10.1016/S1701-2163(15)30934-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Can        ISSN: 1701-2163


  9 in total

1.  Invasive Prenatal Diagnostic Testing Recommendations are Influenced by Maternal Age, Statistical Misconception and Perceived Liability.

Authors:  Talya Miron-Shatz; Sivan R Rapaport; Naama Srebnik; Yaniv Hanoch; Jonina Rabinowitz; Glen M Doniger; Linda Levi; Jonathan J Rolison; Avi Tsafrir
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  International comparison of common risk factors of preterm birth between the U.S. and Canada, using PRAMS and MES (2005-2006).

Authors:  Joshua V Garn; Tharsiya Nagulesapillai; Amy Metcalfe; Suzanne Tough; Michael R Kramer
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2015-04

Review 3.  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 4.  Clinician-centred interventions to increase vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC): a systematic review.

Authors:  Ingela Lundgren; Valerie Smith; Christina Nilsson; Katri Vehvilainen-Julkunen; Jane Nicoletti; Declan Devane; Annette Bernloehr; Evelien van Limbeek; Joan Lalor; Cecily Begley
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Factors obstetricians, family physicians and midwives consider when counselling women about a trial of labour after caesarean and planned repeat caesarean: a qualitative descriptive study.

Authors:  Christine Kurtz Landy; Wendy Sword; Jackie Cramp Kathnelson; Sarah McDonald; Anne Biringer; Maureen Heaman; Pam Angle
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-06-18       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  Caesarean section in uninsured women in the USA: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ilir Hoxha; Medina Braha; Lamprini Syrogiannouli; David C Goodman; Peter Jüni
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-03-03       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  OptiBIRTH: a cluster randomised trial of a complex intervention to increase vaginal birth after caesarean section.

Authors:  Mike Clarke; Declan Devane; Mechthild M Gross; Sandra Morano; Ingela Lundgren; Marlene Sinclair; Koen Putman; Beverley Beech; Katri Vehviläinen-Julkunen; Marianne Nieuwenhuijze; Hugh Wiseman; Valerie Smith; Deirdre Daly; Gerard Savage; John Newell; Andrew Simpkin; Susanne Grylka-Baeschlin; Patricia Healy; Jane Nicoletti; Joan Lalor; Margaret Carroll; Evelien van Limbeek; Christina Nilsson; Janine Stockdale; Maaike Fobelets; Cecily Begley
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-03-06       Impact factor: 3.007

8.  Obstetric interventions in two groups of hospitals in Catalonia: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Ramón Escuriet; María Pueyo; Herminia Biescas; Cristina Colls; Isabel Espiga; Joanna White; Xavi Espada; Josep Fusté; Vicente Ortún
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Evaluation of quality improvement for cesarean sections caesarean section programmes through mixed methods.

Authors:  Clara Bermúdez-Tamayo; Mira Johri; Francisco Jose Perez-Ramos; Gracia Maroto-Navarro; Africa Caño-Aguilar; Leticia Garcia-Mochon; Longinos Aceituno; François Audibert; Nils Chaillet
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 7.327

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.