Dataset Information

Rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean and quality of maternal and newborn health care in private versus public facilities: Results of the IMAgiNE EURO study in 16 countries.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To explore the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) during the COVID-19 pandemic by facility type among 16 European countries, comparing rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean.

Methods

Women who gave birth in the WHO European Region from March 1, 2020, to February 7, 2022, answered a validated online questionnaire. Rates of instrumental birth, instrumental vaginal birth, and cesarean, and a QMNC index were calculated for births in public versus private facilities.

Results

Responses from 25 206 participants were analyzed. Women giving birth in private compared with public facilities reported significantly more frequent total cesarean (32.5% vs 19.0%; aOR 1.70; 95% CI 1.52-1.90), elective cesarean (17.3% vs 7.8%; aOR 1.90; 95% CI 1.65-2.19), and emergency cesarean before labor (7.4% vs 3.9%; aOR 1.39; 95% CI 1.14-1.70) (P < 0.001 for all comparisons), with analyses by country confirming these results. QMNC index results were heterogeneous across countries and regions in the same country and were largely affected by geographical distribution of regions rather than by type of facility alone.

Conclusion

The study confirms that births in private facilities have higher odds of cesarean. It also suggests that QMNC should be closely monitored in all facilities to achieve high-quality care, independent of facility type or geographical distribution.

Clinicaltrials

Gov identifier

NCT04847336.

SUBMITTER: Lazzerini M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10108180 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean and quality of maternal and newborn health care in private versus public facilities: Results of the IMAgiNE EURO study in 16 countries.

Lazzerini Marzia M Valente Emanuelle Pessa EP Covi Benedetta B Rozée Virginie V Costa Raquel R Otelea Marina Ruxandra MR Abderhalden-Zellweger Alessia A Węgrzynowska Maria M Linden Karolina K Arendt Maryse M Brigidi Serena S Miani Céline C Pumpure Elizabete E Radetic Jelena J Drandic Daniela D Cerimagic Amira A Nedberg Ingvild Hersoug IH Liepinaitienė Alina A Rodrigues Carina C de Labrusse Claire C Baranowska Barbara B Zaigham Mehreen M Castañeda Lara Martín LM Batram-Zantvoort Stephanie S Jakovicka Dārta D Ruzicic Jovana J Juciūtė Simona S Santos Teresa T Gemperle Michael M Tataj-Puzyna Urszula U Elden Helen H Mizgaitienė Marija M Lincetto Ornella O Sacks Emma E Mariani Ilaria I

International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 20221201

<h4>Objective</h4>To explore the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) during the COVID-19 pandemic by facility type among 16 European countries, comparing rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean.<h4>Methods</h4>Women who gave birth in the WHO European Region from March 1, 2020, to February 7, 2022, answered a validated online questionnaire. Rates of instrumental birth, instrumental vaginal birth, and cesarean, and a QMNC index were calculated for births in public versus private f ...[more]

PMID: 36530007

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe rates of cesarean deliveries have more than doubled in India, from 8% of deliveries in 2005 to 17% of deliveries in 2016. The World Health Organization recommends that cesarean deliveries should not exceed 10% to 15% of all deliveries in any country. An understanding of the association of private and public facilities with the increase in cesarean delivery rates in India is needed.ObjectiveTo assess the association of public vs private sector health care facilities with cesarean delivery rates in India and to estimate the potential cost savings if private sector facilities followed World Health Organization recommendation for cesarean deliveries.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used institutional delivery data from the representative National Family Health Survey (NFHS) in India, including data from the NFHS-1 (1992-1993), the NFHS-3 (2005-2006), and the NFHS-4 (2015-2016). The NFHS-3 and NFHS-4 provided data on 22 647 deliveries and 195 366 deliveries, respectively. The NHFS-4 was the first survey to provide data on out-of-pocket expenditures for delivery by facility type, allowing for a comparison of cesarean deliveries and costs between public and private facilities. The primary sample comprised all pregnant women who delivered infants in public and private institutional facilities in India and who were included the NFHS-3 and the NFHS-4; data on pregnant women who were included in the NFHS-1 were used for comparison. The study's findings were analyzed through geographic mapping, data tabulation, funnel plots, multivariate logistic regression analyses, and potential cost-savings scenario analyses. Data were analyzed from June to December 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was the rate of cesarean deliveries by facility type (public vs private) and by participant socioeconomic, demographic, and health characteristics. Secondary outcomes were the potential number of avoidable cesarean deliveries and the potential cost savings if private sector facilities followed the World Health Organization recommendations for cesarean deliveries.ResultsIn the NFHS-3, 22 610 total births occurred at institutional facilities. Of those, 2178 births (15.2%) were cesarean deliveries in public facilities, and 3200 births (27.9%) were cesarean deliveries in private facilities. Of 195 366 total institutional births in the NFHS-4, 15 165 births (11.9%) were cesarean deliveries in public facilities, and 20 506 births (40.9%) were cesarean deliveries in private facilities. The cesarean delivery rate in public health facilities increased from 7.2% in the NFHS-1 to 11.9% in the NFHS-4, whereas in private health facilities, the rate increased from 12.3% to 40.9% during the same period. A substantial increase was found in cesarean delivery rates between the NFHS-3 (2005-2006) and the NFHS-4 (2015-2016), with 22 states exceeding the World Health Organization's upper threshold of 15% in the NFHS-4. The odds ratio for cesarean deliveries in private facilities compared with public facilities increased from 1.62 (95% CI, 1.49-1.76) in the NFHS-3 to 4.17 (95% CI, 4.04-4.30) in the NFHS-4. The number of avoidable cesarean deliveries would have been 1.83 million, with a potential cost savings of $320.60 million, if private sector facilities in India had followed the 15% threshold for cesarean delivery rates recommended by the World Health Organization.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, private sector health facilities were associated with a substantial increase in cesarean deliveries in India. Further research is needed to assess the factors underlying the increase in cesarean deliveries in private sector facilities.

Project description:BackgroundRates of cesarean deliveries have been increasing, and contributes to the rising number of elective cesarean deliveries in subsequent pregnancies with associated maternal and neonatal risks. Multiple guidelines recommend that women be offered a trial of labor after a cesarean (TOLAC). The objective of the study is to systematically review the literature on adjunct clinical interventions that influence vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) rates.MethodsWe searched Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Wiley Cochrane Library, CINAHL via EBSCOhost; and Ovid PsycINFO. Additional studies were identified by searching for clinical trial records, conference proceedings and dissertations. Limits were applied for language (English and French) and year of publication (1985 to present). Two reviewers independently screened comparative studies (randomized or non-randomized controlled trials, and observational designs) according to a priori eligibility criteria: women with prior cesarean sections; any adjunct clinical intervention or exposure intended to increase the VBAC rate; any comparator; and, outcomes reporting changes in TOLAC or VBAC rates. One reviewer extracted data and a second reviewer verified for accuracy. Two reviewers independently conducted methodological quality assessments using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).ResultsTwenty-three studies of overall moderate to good methodological quality examined adjunct clinical interventions affecting TOLAC and/or VBAC rates: system-level interventions (three studies), provider-level interventions (three studies), guidelines or information for providers (seven studies), provider characteristics (four studies), and patient-level interventions (six studies). Provider-level interventions (opinion leader education, laborist, and obstetrician second opinion for cesarean sections) and provider characteristics (midwifery antenatal care, physicians on night float call schedules, and deliveries by family physicians) were associated with increased rates of VBAC. Few studies employing heterogeneous designs, sample sizes, interventions and comparators limited confidence in the effects. Studies of system-level and patient-level interventions, and guidelines/information for providers reported mixed findings.ConclusionsLimited evidence indicates some provider-level interventions and provider characteristics may increase rates of attempted and successful TOLACs and/or VBACs, whereas other adjunct clinical interventions such as system-level interventions, patient-level interventions, and guidelines/information for healthcare providers show mixed findings.

Project description:BackgroundHealth workers' (HWs') perspectives on the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) are not routinely collected. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to document HWs' perspectives on QMNC around childbirth in 12 World Health Organization (WHO) European countries.MethodsHWs involved in maternal/neonatal care for at least one year between March 2020 and March 2023 answered an online validated WHO standards-based questionnaire collecting 40 quality measures for improving QMNC. A QMNC index (score 0-400) was calculated as a synthetic measure.ResultsData from 4143 respondents were analysed. For 39 out of 40 quality measures, at least 20% of HWs reported a 'need for improvement', with large variations across countries. Effective training on healthy women/newborns management (n = 2748, 66.3%), availability of informed consent job aids (n = 2770, 66.9%), and effective training on women/newborns rights (n = 2714, 65.5%) presented the highest proportion of HWs stating 'need for improvement'. Overall, 64.8% (n = 2684) of respondents declared that HWs' numbers were insufficient for appropriate care (66.3% in Portugal and 86.6% in Poland), and 22.4% described staff censorship (16.3% in Germany and 56.7% in Poland). The reported QMNC index was low in all countries (Poland median (MD) = 210.60, interquartile range (IQR) = 155.71, 273.57; Norway MD = 277.86; IQR = 244.32, 308.30). The 'experience of care' domain presented in eight countries had significantly lower scores than the other domains (P < 0.001). Over time, there was a significant monthly linear decrease in the QMNC index (P < 0.001), lacking correlation with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic trends (P > 0.05). Multivariate analyses confirmed large QMNC variation by country. HWs with <10 years of experience, HWs from public facilities, and midwives rated QMNC with significantly lower scores (P < 0.001).ConclusionsHWs from 12 European countries reported significant gaps in QMNC, lacking association with COVID-19 pandemic trends. Routine monitoring of QMNC and tailored actions are needed to improve health services for the benefit of both users and providers.RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04847336.

Project description:BackgroundSignal functions for emergency obstetric and newborn care (EmONC) are the major interventions for averting maternal and neonatal mortalities. Readiness of the facilities is essential to provide all the basic and comprehensive signal functions for EmONC to ensure emergency services from the designated facilities. The study assessed population coverage and availability of EmONC services in public and private facilities in Bangladesh.MethodsAn assessment was conducted in all the public and private facilities providing obstetric care in to in-patients 24 districts. Data were collected on the performance of signal functions for EmONC from the study facilities in the last three months prior to the date of assessment. Trained data-collectors interviewed the facility managers and key service providers, along with review of records, using contextualized tools. Population coverage of signal functions was assessed by estimating the number of facilities providing the signal functions for EmONC compared to the United Nations requirements. Availability was assessed in terms of the proportion of facilities providing the services by type of facilities and by district.ResultsCaesarean section (CS) delivery and blood transfusion (BT) services (the two major components of comprehensive EmONC) were respectively available in 6.4 (0.9 public and 5.5 private) and 5.6 (1.3 public and 4.3 private) facilities per 500,000 population. The signal functions for basic EmONC, except two (parental anticonvulsants and assisted vaginal delivery), were available in a minimum of 5 facilities (public and private sectors combined) per 500,000 population. A major inter-district variation in the availability of signal functions was observed in each public- and private-sector facility. Among the various types of facilities, only the public medical college hospitals had all the signal functions. The situation was poor in other public facilities at the district and sub-district levels as well as in private facilities.ConclusionsIn the public sector, CS delivery and BT services were available in the minimum required number of facilities. However, to ensure basic EmONC services, participation of the private sector is necessary. Public-private partnership should be promoted for nationwide coverage of signal functions for EmONC in Bangladesh.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To systematically review the literature on clinical interventions that influence vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) rates. METHODS:We searched Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Wiley Cochrane Library, CINAHL via EBSCOhost; and Ovid PsycINFO. Additional studies were identified by searching for clinical trial records, conference proceedings and dissertations. Limits were applied for language (English and French) and year of publication (1985 to present). Two reviewers independently screened comparative studies (randomized or non-randomized controlled trials, and observational designs) according to a priori eligibility criteria: women with prior cesarean sections; any clinical intervention or exposure intended to increase the VBAC rate; any comparator; and, outcomes reporting VBAC, uterine rupture and uterine dehiscence rates. One reviewer extracted data and a second reviewer verified for accuracy. Meta-analysis was conducted using Mantel-Haenszel (random effects model) relative risks (VBAC rate) and risk differences (uterine rupture and dehiscence). Two reviewers independently conducted methodological quality assessments using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). RESULTS:Twenty-nine studies (six trials and 23 cohorts) examined different clinical interventions affecting rates of vaginal deliveries among women with a prior cesarean delivery (CD). Methodological quality was good overall for the trials; however, concerns among the cohort studies regarding selection bias, comparability of groups and outcome measurement resulted in higher risk of bias. Interventions for labor induction, with or without cervical ripening, included pharmacologic (oxytocin, prostaglandins, misoprostol, mifepristone, epidural analgesia), non-pharmacologic (membrane sweep, amniotomy, balloon devices), and combined (pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic). Single studies with small sample sizes and event rates contributed to most comparisons, with no clear differences between groups on rates of VBAC, uterine rupture and uterine dehiscence. CONCLUSIONS:This systematic review evaluated clinical interventions directed at increasing the rate of vaginal delivery among women with a prior CD and found low to very low certainty in the body of evidence for cervical ripening and/or labor induction techniques. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to inform optimal clinical interventions among women attempting a trial of labor after a prior CD.

Project description:BackgroundIncreasing cesarean section (CS) rates are a global concern because they are related to higher maternal and neonatal complication rates and do not provide positive childbirth experiences. In 2019, Brazil ranked second globally, given its overall CS rate of 57%. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), populational CS rates of 10-15% are associated with decreased maternal, neonatal, and infant mortality rates. This study aimed to investigate whether multidisciplinary care following evidence-based protocols associated with a high motivation of both women and professionals for a vaginal birth leads to less overuse of CS in a Brazilian private practice (PP).MethodsThis cross-sectional study evaluated CS rates by Robson group for women who sought vaginal birth in a private practice in Brazil comparing with Swedish data. Collaborative care of midwives and obstetricians who adopted evidence-based guidelines was offered. CS rates, overall and by Robson group, contribution of each Robson group to the overall CS rate, clinical and nonclinical interventions, vaginal birth, pre-labor CS, and intrapartum CS proportions were estimated. The expected CS rate was calculated using the World Health Organization C-model tool. The analysis used Microsoft Excel and R Studio (version 1.2.1335. 2009-2019).ResultsThe PP overall CS rate was 15.1% (95%CI, 13.4-17.1%) versus the 19.8% (95%CI, 14.8-24.7%) rate expected by the WHO C-model tool. The population included 43.7% women in Robson Group 1 (nulliparous, single, cephalic, at term, spontaneous labor), 11.4% in Group 2 (nulliparous, single, cephalic, at term, induced labor or CS before labor), and 14.9% in Group 5 (multiparous women with previous CS), the greatest contributors to higher CS rates (75.4% of them). The Swedish overall CS rate was 17.9% (95%CI, 17.6-18.1%) in a population of 27% women in Robson Group 1, 10.7% in Group 2, and 9.2% in Group 5.ConclusionsMultidisciplinary care following evidence-based protocols, associated with high motivation of both women and professionals for vaginal birth, may lead to a significant and safe reduction of CS rates even in contexts such as Brazil, with high medicalization of obstetric care and excess CS.

Dataset Information

Rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean and quality of maternal and newborn health care in private versus public facilities: Results of the IMAgiNE EURO study in 16 countries.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Clinicaltrials

Gov identifier

Publications

Rates of instrumental vaginal birth and cesarean and quality of maternal and newborn health care in private versus public facilities: Results of the IMAgiNE EURO study in 16 countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets