What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies

Reproductive Health

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Betran, Ana Pilar ^a   Torloni, Maria Regina ^b   Zhang, Jun ^c   Ye, Jiangfeng ^c   Mikolajczyk, Rafael ^d,e   Deneux Tharaux, Catherine ^f   Oladapo, Olufemi Taiwo ^a   Souza, João Paulo ^g   Tunçalp, Özge ^a   Vogel, Joshua Peter ^a   Gülmezoglu, Ahmet Metin ^a  

^a UNICEF   (United States)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^c SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (China)

^d HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR INFECTION RESEARCH   (Germany)

^e HANNOVER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Germany)

^f PARIS DESCARTES UNIVERSITY   (France)

^g UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Caesarean section; Maternal mortality; Newborn mortality; Population; Rates; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

CESAREAN SECTION; HUMAN; INFANT MORTALITY; MORBIDITY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; REVIEW; SOCIOECONOMICS; STILLBIRTH; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; INFANT; MATERNAL MORTALITY; MORTALITY; NEWBORN; PREGNANCY; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

CESAREAN SECTION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT MORTALITY; INFANT, NEWBORN; MATERNAL MORTALITY; MORBIDITY; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 84936884475     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17424755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12978-015-0043-6     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2(8452):436-7.
2. Betran AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA, Bing-shun W, Thomas J, Van Look P, et al. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21:98-113.
3. Gibbons L, Belizan JM, Lauer JA, Betran AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. Inequities in the use of cesarean section deliveries in the world. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(4):331. e1-19.
4. Ye J, Betran AP, Vela MG, Souza JP, Zhang J. Searching for the Optimal Rate of Medically Necessary Cesarean Delivery. Birth. 2014;41(3):237-43.
5. Vogel JP, Betran AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, et al. Use of the Robson classification to assess caesarean section trends in 21 countries: a secondary analysis of two WHO multicountry surveys. The Lancet Global health. 2015;3(5):e260-70.
6. Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gulmezoglu AM, Souza JP, Taneepanichskul S, Ruyan P, et al. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-08. Lancet. 2010;375:490-9.
7. What is the right number of caesarean sections? Lancet. 1997;349:815-6.
8. Souza JP, Gulmezoglu A, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Carroli G, Fawole B, et al. Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse short-term maternal outcomes: the 2004-2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health. BMC Med. 2010;8:71.
9. Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A. Unforeseen consequences of the increasing rate of cesarean deliveries: early placenta accreta and cesarean scar pregnancy. A review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(1):14-29.
10. Marshall NE, Fu R, Guise JM. Impact of multiple cesarean deliveries on maternal morbidity: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205(3):262. e1-8.
11. WHO, UNFPA, UNICEF AMDD. Monitoring emergency obstetric care: a handbook. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2009.
12. Althabe F, Sosa C, Belizan JM, Gibbons L, Jacquerioz F, Bergel E. Cesarean section rates and maternal and neonatal mortality in low-, medium-, and high-income countries: an ecological study. Birth. 2006;33(4):270-7.
13. Volpe FM. Correlation of Cesarean rates to maternal and infant mortality rates: an ecologic study of official international data. Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health. 2011;29(5):303-8.
14. Zizza A, Tinelli A, Malvasi A, Barbone E, Stark M, De Donno A, et al. Caesarean section in the world: a new ecological approach. J Prev Med Hyg. 2011;52(4):161-73.
15. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.
16. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology. A proposal for reporting. JAMA. 2000;283:2008-12.
17. Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Modern epidemiology. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1998.
18. Dufault B, Klar N. The quality of modern cross-sectional ecologic studies: a bibliometric review. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;174(10):1101-7.
19. Jurdi R, Khawaja M. Caesarean section rates in the Arab region: a cross-national study. Health Policy Plan. 2004;19(2):101-10.
20. McClure EM, Goldenberg RL, Bann CM. Maternal mortality, stillbirth and measures of obstetric care in developing and developed countries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007;96(2):139-46.
21. Silva AA, Silva LM, Barbieri MA, Bettiol H, Carvalho LM, Ribeiro VS, et al. The epidemiologic paradox of low birth weight in Brazil. Rev Saude Publica. 2010;44(5):767-75.
22. Brazilian Ministry of Health. Sistema de Informações de Nacidos Vivos - SINASC. 2011.
23. Cevallos M, Poole C, von Elm E, Altman D, Strobe EM. Response to Rezaeian: Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) extension for ecological studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(7):837-8.
24. Rezaeian M. A call for revising the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology statement to include ecologic studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(7):836-7.
25. WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, The World Bank and the United Nations Population Division. Trends in Maternal Mortality: 1990 to 2013. Estimates by WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, The World Bank and the United Nations Population Division. 2014.
26. WHO. World Health Statistics 2014. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.
27. Stanton CK, Dubourg D, De Brouwere V, Pujades M, Ronsmans C. Reliability of data on caesarean sections in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83(6):449-55.
28. Souza JP, al e. C-Model: a global reference for caesarean section rates. BJOG (in press). 2015.
29. Torloni MR, Betran AP, Souza JP, Widmer M, Allen T, Gulmezoglu M, et al. Classifications for cesarean section: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2011;6(1):e14566.
30. Betran AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, Gulmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. A Systematic Review of the Robson Classification for Caesarean Section: What Works, Doesn't Work and How to Improve It. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e97769.
31. Robson M, Hartigan L, Murphy M. Methods of achieving and maintaining an appropriate caesarean section rate. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;27:297-308.