Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section.

BACKGROUND Caesarean section rates are steadily increasing globally. The factors contributing to these observed increases are complex. Non-clinical interventions, those applied independent of patient care in a clinical encounter, may have a role in reducing unnecessary caesarean sections. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean sections. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register (29 March 2010), the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Specialised Register (29 March 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2); MEDLINE (1950 to March 2010); EMBASE (1947 to March 2010) and CINAHL (1982 to March 2010). SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental studies, controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) with at least two intervention and control sites, and interrupted time series analyses (ITS) where the intervention time was clearly defined and there were at least three data points before and three after the intervention. Studies evaluated non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section rates. Participants included pregnant women and their families, healthcare providers who work with expectant mothers, communities and advocacy groups. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Three review authors independently assessed the quality and abstracted data of all eligible studies using a standardised data extraction form, modified from the Cochrane EPOC checklists. We contacted study authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS We included 16 studies in this review.Six studies specifically targeted pregnant women. Two RCTs were shown to be effective in reducing caesarean section rates: a nurse-led relaxation training programme for women with a fear or anxiety of childbirth and birth preparation sessions. However, both RCTs were small in size and targeted younger mothers with their first pregnancies. There is insufficient evidence that prenatal education and support programmes, computer patient decision-aids, decision-aid booklets and intensive group therapy are effective.Ten studies targeted health professionals. Three of these studies were effective in reducing caesarean section rates. A cluster-RCT of guideline implementation with mandatory second opinion resulted in a small, statistically significant reduction in total caesarean section rates (adjusted risk difference (RD) -1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8 to -0.1); this reduction was predominately in intrapartum sections. An ITS study of mandatory second opinion and peer review feedback at department meetings found statistically significant results at 48 months for reducing repeat caesarean section rates (change in level was -6.4%; 95% CI -9.7% to -3.1% and change in slope -1.14%; 95% CI -1.9% to -0.3%) but not for total caesarean section rates. A cluster-RCT of guideline implementation with support from local opinion leaders increased the proportion of women with a previous caesarean section being offered a trial of labour (absolute difference 16.8%) and the number who had a vaginal birth (VBAC rates) (absolute difference 13.5%). The P values are, however, not reported due to unit of analysis errors. There was insufficient evidence that audit and feedback, training of public health nurses, insurance reform, external peer review and legislative changes are effective. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Implementation of guidelines with mandatory second opinion can lead to a small reduction in caesarean section rates, predominately in intrapartum sections. Peer review, including pre-caesarean consultation, mandatory secondary opinion and postcaesarean surveillance can lead to a reduction in repeat caesarean section rates. Guidelines disseminated with endorsement and support from local opinion leaders may increase the proportion of women with previous caesarean sections being offered a trial of labour in certain settings. Nurse-led relaxation classes and birth preparation classes may reduce caesarean section rates in low-risk pregnancies.

[1]  D. Turnbull,et al.  Strategies to address global cesarean section rates: a review of the evidence. , 2002, Birth.

[2]  E. Blix,et al.  Is the operative delivery rate in low-risk women dependent on the level of birth care? A randomised controlled trial , 2011, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[3]  F. Notzon,et al.  Comparisons of national cesarean-section rates , 1987 .

[4]  F Mosteller,et al.  Some Statistical Methods for Combining Experimental Results , 1990, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[5]  J. Marks,et al.  Increased cesarean section rates and emerging patterns of health insurance in Shanghai, China. , 1998, American journal of public health.

[6]  R. Santerre The Effect of the ACOG Guideline on Vaginal Births after Cesarean , 1996, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[7]  J. van Dillen,et al.  Introducing caesarean section audit in a regional teaching hospital in The Netherlands. , 2008, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[8]  Jane M. Young,et al.  Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[9]  Arpit Misra Impact of the HealthChoice Program on Cesarean Section and Vaginal Birth after C-Section Deliveries: A Retrospective Analysis , 2008, Maternal and Child Health Journal.

[10]  S. Cnattingius,et al.  Cesarean section delivery in the 1980s: international comparison by indication. , 1994, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[11]  Robson,et al.  Classification of caesarean sections , 2001 .

[12]  C. Victora,et al.  Beware: unnecessary caesarean sections may be hazardous , 2006, The Lancet.

[13]  Ian W. Ricketts,et al.  Two decision aids for mode of delivery among women with previous caesarean section: randomised controlled trial , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  Miranda Mugford,et al.  Birth Counts: Statistics of Pregnancy and Childbirth , 1984 .

[15]  J. Raven,et al.  Impact of Financial and Educational Interventions on Maternity Care: Results of Cluster Randomized Trials in Rural China, CHIMACA , 2013, Maternal and Child Health Journal.

[16]  M. Dhanjal,et al.  Multiple repeat caesarean section in the UK: incidence and consequences to mother and child. A national, prospective, cohort study , 2013, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[17]  U. Waldenström,et al.  Effects of natural childbirth preparation versus standard antenatal education on epidural rates, experience of childbirth and parental stress in mothers and fathers: a randomised controlled multicentre trial , 2009, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[18]  J. Ho,et al.  Influence of a targeted educational intervention on evidence-based practice in two Malaysian maternity units: the SEA ORCHID project in Malaysia. , 2011, The Medical journal of Malaysia.

[19]  Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists , 1948 .

[20]  Sanjay Saint,et al.  Use of critical pathways to improve efficiency: a cautionary tale. , 2003, The American journal of managed care.

[21]  E. Hodnett,et al.  Alternative versus conventional institutional settings for birth. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[22]  S. Reeves,et al.  Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes (update). , 2013, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[23]  K. Gregory,et al.  Using the continuous quality improvement process to safely lower the cesarean section rate. , 1999, The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement.

[24]  K. Hsu,et al.  Factors affecting Taiwanese women's choice of Cesarean section. , 2008, Social science & medicine.

[25]  N. R. van den Broek,et al.  Effect of audit and feedback on the availability, utilisation and quality of emergency obstetric care in three districts in Malawi. , 2008, Women and birth : journal of the Australian College of Midwives.

[26]  Sudha Xirasagar,et al.  Institutional Factors in Cesarean Delivery Rates: Policy and Research Implications , 2004, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[27]  Chang-yup Kim,et al.  Are league tables controlling epidemic of caesarean sections in South Korea? , 2005, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[28]  U. Waldenström,et al.  Psychoprophylaxis during labor: associations with labor‐related outcomes and experience of childbirth , 2010, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[29]  G. Kenney,et al.  The impact of Medicaid managed care on pregnant women in Ohio: a cohort analysis. , 2004, Health services research.

[30]  Andrew D Oxman,et al.  SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 9: Assessing the applicability of the findings of a systematic review , 2009, Health research policy and systems.

[31]  D. Tancredi,et al.  Information Dissemination and the Cesarean Birth Rate: The Illinois Experience , 1992, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[32]  F. Barros,et al.  Rates and implications of caesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study. , 1999, BMJ.

[33]  Y. Chong,et al.  Safer childbirth: avoiding medical interventions for non-medical reasons , 2010, The Lancet.

[34]  J. C. Lo,et al.  Financial incentives do not always work: an example of cesarean sections in Taiwan. , 2008, Health policy.

[35]  Thomas D. Y. Fok,et al.  Equalizing Physician Fees had Little Effect on Cesarean Rates , 1996, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[36]  Yoon Kim,et al.  Effect of repeated public releases on cesarean section rates. , 2011, Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi.

[37]  A. Baradaran,et al.  Effect of a Participatory Intervention to Reduce the Number of Unnecessary Cesarean Sections Performed in Shahrekord of Iran , 2006 .

[38]  X. Muylder,et al.  Caesarian sections in developing countries: some considerations , 1993 .

[39]  O. Rivière,et al.  Estimation of an expected caesarean section rate taking into account the case mix of a maternity hospital. Analysis from the AUDIPOG Sentinelle Network (France) , 2001, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[40]  S. Barber Mexico's conditional cash transfer programme increases cesarean section rates among the rural poor. , 2010, European journal of public health.

[41]  S. Mayor Caesarean section rate in England reaches 22% , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[42]  P. A. Poma Effect of Departmental Policies on Cesarean Delivery Rates: A Community Hospital Experience , 1998, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[43]  Ben Moore,et al.  APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY FOR BIRTH , 1985, The Lancet.

[44]  Alejandro Arrieta,et al.  Health reform and cesarean sections in the private sector: The experience of Peru. , 2011, Health policy.

[45]  Sandra West,et al.  Making choices for childbirth: a randomized controlled trial of a decision-aid for informed birth after cesarean. , 2005, Birth.

[46]  M. Morgan,et al.  Decreasing the cesarean section rate in a private hospital: success without mandated clinical changes. , 1996, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[47]  A. Donner,et al.  Mandatory second opinion to reduce rates of unnecessary caesarean sections in Latin America: a cluster randomised controlled trial , 2004, The Lancet.

[48]  C. Sakala Midwifery care and out-of-hospital birth settings: how do they reduce unnecessary cesarean section births? , 1993, Social science & medicine.

[49]  A. Kazemnejad,et al.  Does Relaxation Education in Anxious Primigravid Iranian Women Influence Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes?: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 2006, The Journal of perinatal & neonatal nursing.

[50]  E. Hodnett,et al.  Continuous support for women during childbirth. , 2008, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[51]  K. Salmela‐Aro,et al.  Obstetric outcome after intervention for severe fear of childbirth in nulliparous women – randomised trial , 2013, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[52]  E. Main,et al.  Reducing cesarean birth rates with data-driven quality improvement activities. , 1999, Pediatrics.

[53]  P. Lumbiganon,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 , 2010, BMC medicine.

[54]  R. Alaghehbandan,et al.  Evaluation of the impact of birth preparation courses on the health of the mother and the newborn. , 2005, American journal of perinatology.

[55]  W. Steinmann,et al.  Unnecessary cesarean delivery in Louisiana: an analysis of birth certificate data. , 2004, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[56]  E. Hemminki,et al.  Special features of health services and register based trials – experiences from a randomized trial of childbirth classes , 2008, BMC health services research.

[57]  J. Studnicki,et al.  The Impact of Legislatively Imposed Practice Guidelines on Cesarean Section Rates: The Florida Experience , 1997, American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality.

[58]  J. Sterne,et al.  Methods for evaluating area-wide and organisation-based interventions in health and health care: a systematic review. , 1999, Health technology assessment.

[59]  E. Hodnett,et al.  Randomized controlled trial of a prenatal vaginal birth after cesarean section education and support program , 1997 .

[60]  O. Olayemi,et al.  Assessment of the effect of psychosocial support during childbirth in Ibadan, south‐west Nigeria: A randomised controlled trial , 2009, The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology.

[61]  A. Dumont,et al.  Evidence-based strategies for reducing cesarean section rates: a meta-analysis. , 2007, Birth.

[62]  Craig R Ramsay,et al.  INTERRUPTED TIME SERIES DESIGNS IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: LESSONS FROM TWO SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OF BEHAVIOR CHANGE STRATEGIES , 2003, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[63]  A. Tussing,et al.  The Cesarean Decision in New York State, 1986: Economic and Noneconomic Aspects , 1992, Medical care.

[64]  J. Cecatti,et al.  Audit and feedback: Effects on professional obstetrical practice and healthcare outcomes in a university hospital , 2009, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[65]  V. Kazandjian,et al.  Cesarean section rates: effects of participation in a performance measurement project. , 1998, The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement.

[66]  P. Bailey,et al.  Promoting accountability in obstetric care: Use of criteria-based audit in Viet Nam , 2010, Global public health.

[67]  I. Timor-Tritsch,et al.  Unforeseen consequences of the increasing rate of cesarean deliveries: early placenta accreta and cesarean scar pregnancy. A review. , 2012, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[68]  A. Rimm,et al.  Comparison of cesarean section rates in fee-for-service versus managed care patients in the Ohio Medicaid population, 1992-1997. , 2001, The American journal of managed care.

[69]  R. Fu,et al.  Impact of multiple cesarean deliveries on maternal morbidity: a systematic review. , 2011, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[70]  T. Lau,et al.  Impact of first childbirth on changes in women's preference for mode of delivery: follow-up of a longitudinal observational study. , 2008, Birth.

[71]  Y. Y. Law,et al.  A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Midwife‐Managed Care and Obstetrician‐Managed Care for Women Assessed to Be at Low Risk in the Initial Intrapartum Period , 1999, The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research.

[72]  M. Robson,et al.  Using the medical audit cycle to reduce cesarean section rates. , 1996, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[73]  W. Wu,et al.  Cesarean delivery in Shantou, China: a retrospective analysis of 1922 women. , 2000, Birth.

[74]  A. Kazemnejad,et al.  A randomized controlled trial of the effects of applied relaxation training on reducing anxiety and perceived stress in pregnant women. , 2005, Journal of midwifery & women's health.

[75]  L. D. Saunders,et al.  Reducing the cesarean section rate in a rural community hospital. , 1991, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[76]  S. Pinjaroen,et al.  Clinical practice guideline for cesarean section due to cephalopelvic disproportion. , 2006, Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet.

[77]  A. Montgomery Bmc Pregnancy and Childbirth Induction of Labour versus Expectant Monitoring in Women with Pregnancy Induced Hypertension or Mild Preeclampsia at Term: the Hypitat Trial , 2022 .

[78]  I D Graham,et al.  The Ottawa patient decision aids. , 1999, Effective clinical practice : ECP.

[79]  P. Elferink-Stinkens,et al.  Randomised clinical trial on the effect of the Dutch obstetric peer review system. , 2002, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[80]  C. Campillo,et al.  Effectiveness of a multifaceted strategy to improve the appropriateness of cesarean sections , 2009, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[81]  J. Belizán,et al.  Medical audit using the Ten Group Classification System and its impact on the cesarean section rate. , 2011, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[82]  A. Peaceman,et al.  Reducing cesarean births at a primarily private university hospital. , 1993, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[83]  R. Paul,et al.  The Role of Selection Bias in Comparing Cesarean Birth Rates Between Physician and Midwifery Management , 1992, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[84]  N. Bickell,et al.  Effect of External Peer Review on Cesarean Delivery Rates: A Statewide Program , 1996, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[85]  J. Boyle Obstetrics and Gynaecology , 1945, Irish medical journal.

[86]  A. Rimm,et al.  Estimating the proportion of unnecessary Cesarean sections in Ohio using birth certificate data. , 1998, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[87]  H. Abenhaim,et al.  Effect of fear of litigation on obstetric care: a nationwide analysis on obstetric practice. , 2011, American journal of perinatology.

[88]  Lars-Göran Öst Applied Relaxation: Description of an Effective Coping Technique , 1988 .

[89]  O. Olsen,et al.  Planned hospital birth versus planned home birth. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[90]  Dina Mayzlin,et al.  Physician Fees and Procedure Intensity: the Case of Cesarean Delivery , 1998, Journal of health economics.

[91]  A. Kiwanuka,et al.  Influence of audit and feedback on use of caesarean section in a geographically-defined population. , 1993, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[92]  N. Gleicher,et al.  The Mount Sinai cesarean section reduction program: an update after 6 years. , 1993, Social science & medicine.

[93]  W R RUSSELL,et al.  Connexions and functions of frontal lobes. , 1947, Lancet.

[94]  C. Homer,et al.  Non-clinical interventions that increase the uptake and success of vaginal birth after caesarean section: a systematic review. , 2011, Journal of advanced nursing.

[95]  S. Reeves,et al.  Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. , 2008, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[96]  D. Luthy,et al.  Physician contribution to a cesarean delivery risk model. , 2003, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[97]  Eugene Vayda,et al.  Opinion leaders vs audit and feedback to implement practice guidelines. Delivery after previous cesarean section. , 1991, JAMA.

[98]  H. Brown Physician demand for leisure: implications for cesarean section rates. , 1996, Journal of health economics.

[99]  Yi-Jen Chen,et al.  Effect of peer review and trial of labor on lowering cesarean section rates. , 2004, Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA.

[100]  M. Rezaeian,et al.  A survey on the effects of husbands’ education of pregnant women on knowledge, attitude, and reducing elective cesarean section , 2013, Journal of education and health promotion.

[101]  S. Murray Relation between private health insurance and high rates of caesarean section in Chile: qualitative and quantitative study , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[102]  J. C. Lo,et al.  Patients' attitudes vs. physicians' determination: implications for cesarean sections. , 2003, Social science & medicine.

[103]  Sangil Lee,et al.  Effects of the DRG-based prospective payment system operated by the voluntarily participating providers on the cesarean section rates in Korea. , 2007, Health policy.

[104]  C. Homer,et al.  Clinical interventions that increase the uptake and success of vaginal birth after caesarean section: a systematic review. , 2011, Journal of advanced nursing.

[105]  Rashonda M Lewis,et al.  Future Research Needs for Strategies To Reduce Cesarean Birth in Low-Risk Women , 2012 .

[106]  G. Zanetta,et al.  Changes in cesarean delivery in an Italian university hospital, 1982-1996: a comparison with the national trend. , 1999, Birth.

[107]  Liang Guohua,et al.  Practice audits to reduce caesareans in a tertiary referral hospital in south-western China. , 2012, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[108]  K. Salmela‐Aro,et al.  A Randomized Controlled Trial of Intervention in Fear of Childbirth , 2001, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[109]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  GrADe : what is “ quality of evidence ” and why is it important to clinicians ? rATING quALITY of evIDeNCe AND STreNGTH of reCommeNDATIoNS , 2022 .