Caesarean delivery in Andalusia, Spain. Relationship with social, clinical and health services factors (2007-2009);Frecuencia de la Cesárea en Andalucía. Relación con factores sociales, clínicos y de los servicion saniarios (2007-2009)

Revista Espanola de Salud Publica

Volumn 85, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 205-215

  Márquez Calderón, Soledad ^a   Ruiz Ramos, Miguel ^a   Juárez, Sol ^b   López, Julián Librero ^c  

^a JUNTA DE ANDALUCÍA   (Spain)

^b CSIC Instituto de Economia Geografia y Demografia IEGD   (Spain)

^c Centro Superior de Investigación en Salud Pública de Valencia   (Spain)

Author keywords

Access and evaluation; Cesarean section; Health care quality; Health social inequalities

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; BIRTH CERTIFICATE; CESAREAN SECTION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE DISPARITY; HUMAN; LABOR COMPLICATION; MALE; NEWBORN; PREGNANCY; RISK; SPAIN; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS; TIME;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; BIRTH CERTIFICATES; CESAREAN SECTION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HEALTHCARE DISPARITIES; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; OBSTETRIC LABOR COMPLICATIONS; ODDS RATIO; PREGNANCY; SPAIN; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 80052019614     PISSN: 11355727     EISSN: 16969820     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/S1135-57272011000200008     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Porreco RP, Thorp JA. The cesarean birth epidemics: Trends, causes, and solutions. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175:369-74. (Pubitemid 26390994)
2. Martínez-Frías ML, Bermejo E, Rodríguez-Pinilla E, Dequino G, Grupo Periférico del ECEMC. Evolución secular y por autonomías de la frecuencia de tratamien tos de fertilidad, partos múltiples y cesáreas en España. Med Clin (Barc). 2005;124:132-9.
3. Librero J, Peiró S, Márquez-Calderón S. Inter-hospi tal variations in caesarean sections. A risk adjusted comparison in the Valencia public hospitals. J Epide miol Community Health. 2000;54:631-6. (Pubitemid 30460020)
4. Villalbí JR, Navarro A, Plaséncia A. Variabilidad en la práctica de cesáreas. Gac Sanit. 1995;9:140-1.
5. Béhague DP, Victora CG, Barros FC. Consumer demand for caesarean sections in Brazil: informed deci sion making, patient choice, or social inequality? A population based birth cohort study linking ethnogra phic and epidemiological methods. BMJ. 2002;324:942-7.
6. Minkoff H, Powderly KR, Chervenak F, McCullough LB. Ethical dimensions of elective primary caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:387-92.
7. Fontoura Freitas P, Drachler ML, Leite JC, Marshall T. Inequalities in caesarean delivery rates by ethnicity and hospital accessibility in Brazil. Int J Gynecol Obs tet. 2009;107:198-201.
8. Salvador J, Cano-Serral G, Rodríguez-Sanz M, Lla donosa A, Borrell C. Inequalities in caesarean section: influence of the type of maternity care and social class in an area with a national health system. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2009;63:259-61.
9. World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2:436-7.
10. Grupo de Trabajo de la Sociedad Española de Epide miología. La medición de la clase social en ciencias de la salud. Barcelona: SG Editores, 1995.
11. Bragg F, Cromwell DA, Edozien LC, Gurol-Urganci I, Mahmood TA, Templeton A, et al. Variation in rates of caesarean section among English NHS trusts after accounting for maternal and clinical risk: cross sectio nal study. BMJ. 2010;341:c5065 doi:10.1136/bmj.c5065.
12. Río I, Castelló A, Jané M, Prats R, Barona C, Más R, et al. Calidad de los datos utilizados para el cálculo de indicadores de salud reproductiva y perinatal en pobla ción autóctona e inmigrante. Gac Sanit. 2010;24:172-7.
13. Márquez Calderón S, Villegas Portero R, Aguado Romeo MJ. La utilización de los servicios sanitarios en Andalucía: ¿perpetuación o corrección de las desigual dades? En: Escolar Pujolar A. Primer Informe sobre Desigualdades y Salud en Andalucía. Puerto Real: Aso ciación para la Defensa de la Sanidad Pública de Anda lucía, 2008. Páginas: 145-66.
14. NIH State-of-the-Science Conference Statement on caesarean delivery on maternal request. NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2006;23:1-29.
15. Bettiol H, Barbieri MA, Moura da Silva AA, Rona RJ. Consumer demand for caesarean sections in Brazil. Demand is affected by mothers' perception of good health care (letter). BMJ. 2002;325:336.
16. Río I, Castelló A, Barona C, Jané M, Más R, Reba gliato M, et al. Caesarean section rates in immigrant and native women in Spain: the importance of geographical origin and type of hospital for delivery. Eur J Public Health. 2010;20:524-9.
17. Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA, Bing-Shun W, Thomas J, Van Look P, et al. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, xregional and national estimates. Pae diatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21:98-113.
18. Aelvoet W, Windey F, Molenberghs G, Verstraelen H, Van Reempts P, Foidart JM. Screening for inter-hos pital differences in caesarean section rates in low-risk deliveries using administrative data: An initiative to improve the quality of care. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8:3 doi:10.1186/1472-6963-8-3. (Pubitemid 351389087)