Advertisement

Inequities in the use of cesarean section deliveries in the world

Published:March 05, 2012DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.02.026

      Objective

      The purpose of this study was to describe the unequal distribution in the performance of cesarean section delivery (CS) in the world and the resource-use implications of such inequity.

      Study Design

      We obtained data on the number of CSs performed in 137 countries in 2008. The consensus is that countries should achieve a 10% rate of CS; therefore, for countries that are below that rate, we calculated the cost to achieve a 10% rate. For countries with a CS rate of >15%, we calculated the savings that could be made by the achievement of a 15% rate.

      Results

      Fifty-four countries had CS rates of <10%, whereas 69 countries showed rates of >15%. The cost of the global saving by a reduction of CS rates to 15% was estimated to be $2.32 billion (US dollars); the cost to attain a 10% CS rate was $432 million (US dollars).

      Conclusion

      CSs that are potentially medically unjustified appear to command a disproportionate share of global economic resources.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Althabe F.
        • Belizán J.M.
        Caesarean section: the paradox.
        Lancet. 2006; 368: 1472-1473
        • Betrán A.P.
        • Merialdi M.
        • Lauer J.A.
        • et al.
        Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates.
        Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007; 21: 98-113
        • Althabe F.
        • Sosa C.
        • Belizán J.M.
        • 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: 270-277
        • Ronsmans C.
        • Holtz S.
        • Stanton C.
        Socioeconomic differentials in caesarean rates in developing countries: a retrospective analysis.
        Lancet. 2006; 368: 1516-1523
        • Belizán J.M.
        • Althabe F.
        • Cafferata M.L.
        Health consequences of the increasing caesarean section rates.
        Epidemiology. 2007; 18: 485-486
        • Villar J.
        • Valladares E.
        • Wojdyla D.
        • et al.
        Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America.
        Lancet. 2006; 367: 1819-1829
        • Barros F.C.
        • Victora C.G.
        • Barros A.J.
        • et al.
        The challenge of reducing neonatal mortality in middle income countries: findings from three Brazilian birth cohorts in 1982, 1993, and 2004.
        Lancet. 2005; 365: 847-854
        • Hall M.H.
        • Bewley S.
        Maternal mortality and mode of delivery.
        Lancet. 1999; 354: 776
        • Stanton C.
        • Ronsmans C.
        • Baltimore Group on Cesarean
        Recommendations for routine reporting on indications for cesarean delivery in developing countries.
        Birth. 2008; 35: 204-211
        • World Health Organization
        WHO core health indicators; statistical information system.
        (Accessed May 10, 2010)
        • World Health Organization
        WHO European Regional Office health for all database.
        (Accessed May 10, 2010)
        • World Health Organization
        World health report 2005.
        (Accessed May 10, 2010)
      1. Demographic and health surveys.
        (Accessed March 10, 2010)
        • UNICEF
        Basic indicators 2008.
        (Accessed May 10, 2010)
        • World Health Organization
        Appropriate technology for birth.
        Lancet. 1985; 2: 436-437
        • Dumont A.
        • de Bernis L.
        • Bouvier-Colle M.H.
        • Breart G.
        • MOMA study group
        Caesarean section rate for maternal indication in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.
        Lancet. 2001; 358: 1328-1333
        • Ronsmans C.
        • Van Damme W.
        • Filippi V.
        • Pittrof R.
        Need for caesarean sections in west Africa.
        Lancet. 2002; 359: 974
        • De Brouwere V.
        • Dubourg D.
        • Richard F.
        • Van Lerberghe W.
        Need for caesarean sections in West Africa [letter].
        Lancet. 2002; 359: 974-975
        • World Health Organization
        Managing complications in pregnancy and childbirth: a guide for midwives and doctors.
        (Accessed May 10, 2010)
        • World Health Organization
        Pregnancy, childbirth, postpartum and newborn care: a guide for essential practice.
        (Accessed May 10, 2010)
        • Adam T.
        • Evans D.B.
        • Murray C.J.L.
        Econometric estimation of country-specific hospital costs.
        Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2003; 1: 3
        • Johns B.
        • Baltussen R.
        • Hutubessy R.C.W.
        Programme costs in the economic evaluation of health interventions.
        Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2003; 1: 1
        • Johns B.
        • Adam T.
        • Evans D.B.
        Enhancing the comparability of costing methods: cross-country variability in the prices of non-traded inputs to health programmes.
        Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2006; 4: 8
        • Johns B.
        • Baltussen R.
        Accounting for the cost of scaling-up health interventions.
        Health Econ. 2004; 13: 1117-1124
        • Adam T.
        • Evans D.
        Determinants of variation in the cost of inpatient stays versus outpatient visits in hospitals: a multi-country analysis.
        Soc Sci Med. 2006; 63: 1700-1710
        • United Nations
        Member States of the United Nations.
        (Accessed Oct. 31, 2009)
        • Murray C.J.L.
        • Shengelia B.
        • Gupta N.
        • Moussavi S.
        • Tandon A.
        • Thieren M.
        Validity of reported vaccination coverage in 45 countries.
        Lancet. 2003; 362: 1022-1027
        • Bryce J.
        • Requejo J.
        The Countdown 2008 report: tracking progress in maternal, newborn, and child survival.
        UNICEF, NewYork2008
        • Stanton C.K.
        • Dubourg D.
        • De Brouwere V.
        • et al.
        Reliability of data on cesarean sections in developing countries.
        Bull World Health Organ. 2005; 83: 449-455
        • Susser M.
        The logic in ecological: I, the logic of analysis.
        Am J Public Health. 1994; 84: 825-829
        • Greenland S.
        Ecologic versus individual-level sources of bias in ecologic estimates of contextual health effects.
        Int J Epidemiol. 2001; 30: 1343-1350
        • Minkoff H.
        • Chervenak F.A.
        Elective primary cesarean delivery.
        N Engl J Med. 2003; 348: 946-950
        • Belizán J.M.
        • Cafferata M.L.
        • Althabe F.
        • Buekens P.
        Risk of patient choice caesarean.
        Birth. 2006; 33: 167-169
        • Gwatkin D.R.
        • Bhuiya A.
        • Victora G.
        Making health systems more equitable.
        Lancet. 2004; 364: 1273-1280
        • Hart T.J.
        The inverse care law.
        Lancet. 1971; 297: 405-412
        • Frenz P.
        • Vega J.
        Universal health coverage with equity: what we know, don't know and need to know: background paper for the global symposium on health systems research, Montreux, Switzerland, 2010.
        (Accessed March 9, 2012)
        • González-Zapata L.I.
        • Estrada-Restrepo A.
        • Alvarez-Castaño L.S.
        • Alvarez-Dardet C.
        • Serra-Majem L.
        [Excess weight and economic, political, and social factors: an international ecological analysis.
        ] Cad Saude Publica. 2011; 27: 1746-1756
        • Moore S.
        • Hall J.N.
        • Harper S.
        • Lynch J.W.
        Global and national socioeconomic disparities in obesity, overweight, and underweight status.
        J Obes. 2010; (Epub April 1, 2010)

      Linked Article