Rising Cesarean Rates: Are Primary Sections Overused?
- 3 Downloads
Doubling of C-section rates from year 2000 to 2015 globally was declared an eye-opener on October 13, 2018, in FIGO World Congress. Rapid increase in rates without clear evidence of concomitant decrease in maternal or neonatal morbidity or mortality raises significant concern that cesarean delivery is overused. This review addresses issues related to exponentially rising rates, reasons for it, and strategies to reduce. Previous cesarean delivery has main contribution to rising rates as per evidence from the literature search in last 5 years. Focus on optimizing indications of primary C-section resulted in making us rethink modifiable indications like labor dystocia, indeterminate fetal heart rate tracing, suspected fetal macrosomia, malposition, risk-adapted obstetrics, litigation fears, on demand cesarean in literate women and overuse of labor induction. Use of uniform classification system (Robson/WHO classification) with recommendations of WHO, FIGO and annual audits with cloud-based anonymous registry will streamline decisions for cesarean in nullipara and help to control the situation.
KeywordsRising cesarean rates Robson classification Modifiable indications of cesarean Primary cesarean Labor dystocia
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 3.WHO statement on caesarean section rates. Geneva: World Health Organisation. 2015.Google Scholar
- 5.Editorial. Stemming the global caesarean section epidemic. The Lancet. 2018;392(10155): 1279.Google Scholar
- 6.National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4) 2015-16. International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, India.Google Scholar
- 9.Tanaka K, Mahomed K. The ten-group Robson classification: a single centre approach identifying strategies to optimise caesarean section rates. Obst Gynecol Int 2017, 5648938, 5 p. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5648938.
- 16.Voge JP, Betrán AP, Vindevoghel N, et al. Use of the Robson classification to assess caesarean section trends in 21 countries: a secondary analysis on behalf of the WHO Multi-Country Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health Research Network. Lancet. 2015;3(5):e260–70.Google Scholar
- 24.Spong CY, Berghella V, Wenstrom K, et al. Preventing the first Cesarean delivery; summary of a Joint Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute Of Child Health And Human Development, Society For Maternal- Fetal Medicine, and American College Of Obstetrician And Gynecologists Workshop. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120:1181–93.Google Scholar
- 25.Nelson K, Sartwelle T, Rouse D. Electronic fetal monitoring, cerebral palsy, and caesareans: assumptions versus evidence. BMJ. 2016;355:16405.Google Scholar
- 26.Obstetric Care Consensus ACOG number 1, March 2014.Google Scholar