People's Journal of Scientific Research
Published December 1, 2016 | Version v1
Journal article Open

Maternal Risk Factors of Caesarean Delivery in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Central India: A Case Control Study

Authors/Creators

  • 1. Department of Community Medicine, NKP Salve Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Nagpur

Description

One of the most alarming features of modern obstetrics is the relentless increase in c-section rates. Medical, institutional, legal, psychological and socio-demographic factors play a contributing role. Although c-sections can be lifesaving, c-section rates above the WHO recommended 15% raises global concern.India is also not excluded from this trend. It is time to realize that c-sections not only put both the mother and child at risk, but also pose huge economic burden compared to normal vaginal delivery. This study was designed to identify the maternal risk factors associated with csections. A hospital based case control design was approached. 360 mothers, all consenting 180 consecutive mothers who had c-section in singleton pregnancies and 180 mothers with singleton spontaneous vaginal deliveries were selected from postnatal ward. Data was collected using a pre-tested questionnaire. Out of the 11 variables examined, 7 were found statistically significant. Mothers who had a previous c-section, pre/post term pregnancy and BMI >23 kg/m2 had the highest significant proportion rates. Univariate analysis for risk calculation was done by odds ratio and their 95% Confidence Intervals was done by using Epi Info software. Analyses have revealed several important associations between maternal risk factors and c-section. Most of these factors are modifiable, and if targeted early can reduce the chances of csection significantly.

Files

18-23.pdf

Files (37.1 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:d52639a2c5d1d254d6aa2a7bb9995571
37.1 kB Preview Download

Additional details

References

  • 1. Gibbons L, Belizán JM, Lauer JA, Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. The global numbers and costs of additionally needed and unnecessary caesarean sections performed per year: overuse as a barrier to universal coverage. World health report 2010;30:1-31.
  • 2. Moore B. Appropriate technology for birth. The Lancet 1985;326(8458):787
  • 3. Sreevidya S, Sathiyasekaran BW. High caesarean rates in Madras (India): a population based cross sectional study. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 2003;110(2):106-11.
  • 4. Ajeet S, Nandkishore K. The boom in unnecessary caesarean surgeries is jeopardizing women's health. Health Care for Women International 2013; 34:513- 521.
  • 5. Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gülmezoglu AM, Souza JP, Taneepanichskul S, Ruyan P, Attygalle DE, Shrestha N, Mori R, Hinh ND, Bang HT. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007–08. The Lancet 2010;375(9713):490-9.
  • 6. WHO EC. Appropriate body-mass index for Asian populations and its implications for policy and intervention strategies. Lancet (London, England) 2004;363(9403):157.
  • 7. Dudala SR, Reddy KA, Prabhu GR. Prasad's socioeconomic status classification-An update for 2014. Int J Res Health Sci 2014;2(3):875-8.
  • 8. Najmi RS, Rehan N. Prevalence and determinants of caesarean section in a teaching hospital of Pakistan. J ObstetGynaecol J Inst Obstet Gynaecol 2000;20(5): 479–83.
  • 9. Webster LA, Daling JR, McFarlane C, Ashley D, Warren CW. Prevalence and determinants of caesarean section in Jamaica. J Biosoc Sci. 1992;24(4):515–25.
  • 10. Rahman M, Shariff AA, Shafie A, Saaid R, Tahir RM. Determinants of Caesarean Risk Factor in Northern Region of Bangladesh: A Multivariate Analysis. Iran J Public Health. 2014;43(1):16–27.
  • 11. Leone T, Padmadas SS, Matthews Z. Community factors affecting rising caesarean section rates in developing countries: an analysis of six countries. SocSci Med 1982. 2008 ;67(8):1236–46.
  • 12. Mishra US, Ramanathan M. Delivery-related complications and determinants of caesarean section rates in India. Health Policy Plan. 2002 ;17(1):90–8.
  • 13. Al Busaidi I, Al-Farsi Y, Ganguly S, Gowri V. Obstetric and non-obstetric risk factors for cesarean section in Oman. Oman Med J. 2012 ;27(6):478–81.
  • 14. Patel RR. Prenatal risk factors for Caesarean section. Analyses of the ALSPAC cohort of 12 944 women in England. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2005;34(2):353–67
  • 15. Rageth JC, Juzi C, Grossenbacher H. Delivery after previous cesarean: a risk evaluation. Swiss Working Group of Obstetric and Gynecologic Institutions. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;93(3):332–7.
  • 16. Daltveit AK, Tollånes MC, Pihlstrøm H, Irgens LM. Cesarean Delivery and Subsequent Pregnancies: Obstetrics &Gynecology 2008;111(6):1327–34.
  • 17. LaCoursiere DY, Bloebaum L, Duncan JD, Varner MW. Population-based trends and correlates of maternal overweight and obesity, Utah 1991-2001. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2005;192(3):832–9.
  • 18. Weiss JL, Malone FD, Emig D, Ball RH, Nyberg DA, Comstock CH, et al. Obesity, obstetric complications and cesarean delivery rate–a population-based screening study. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2004;190(4):1091–7.
  • 19. Verma A, Shrimali L. Maternal Body Mass Index and Pregnancy Outcome. J Clin Diagn Res 2012 ;6(9): 1531–3.
  • 20. Bhattacharya S, Campbell DM, Liston WA, Bhattacharya S. Effect of Body Mass Index on pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous women delivering singleton babies. BMC Public Health. 2007 Jul 24;7(1):168
  • 21. Bettegowda VR, Dias T, Davidoff MJ, Damus K, Callaghan WM, Petrini JR. The Relationship Between Cesarean Delivery and Gestational Age Among US Singleton Births. Clinics in Perinatology. 2008 Jun;35(2):309–23.
  • 22. Kirchengast S, Hartmann B. Short stature is associated with an increased risk of caesarean deliveries in low risk population. ActaMedicaLituanica. 2007;14(1): 200.
  • 23. Sheiner E, Levy A, Katz M, Mazor M. Short stature--an independent risk factor for Cesarean delivery. Eur J Obstet GynecolReprod Biol. 2005;120(2):175–8.
  • 24. Kara F, Yesildaglar N, Uygur D. Maternal height as a risk factor for Caesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2005;271(4):336–7.
  • 25. Khawaja M, Jurdi R, Kabakian-Khasholian T. Rising trends in cesarean section rates in Egypt. Birth Berkeley Calif 2004 31(1):12–6.
  • 26. Parazzini F, Pirotta N, La Vecchia C, Fedele L. Determinants of caesarean section rates in Italy. BJOG Int J ObstetGynaecol. 1992;99(3):203–6.
  • 27. Padmadas SS, Kumar S. S, Nair SB, Kumari K.R. A. Caesarean section delivery in Kerala, India: evidence from a National Family Health Survey. SocSci Med 2000;51(4):511–21
  • 28. King DE, Lahiri K. Socioeconomic factors and the odds of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. JAMA 1994;272(7):524–9.
  • 29. Fabri RH, Murta EFC. Socioeconomic factors and cesarean section rates. Int J GynaecolObstet Off Organ Int Fed Gynaecol Obstet 2002;76(1):87–8.
  • 30. Gould JB, Davey B, Stafford RS. Socioeconomic differences in rates of cesarean section. N Engl J Med 1989;321(4):233–9