We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases and two trial registries (International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov) for studies published between March 29, 2010 (ie, the date of the previous version of the Cochrane review), and Aug 6, 2014. We updated our search on Feb 17, 2017, and March 8, 2018, for studies published until these dates. We searched for
SeriesInterventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections in healthy women and babies
Introduction
There is no debate about the need to increase access to safe caesarean sections (CSs) where the procedure is underused. However, there is no evidence of a benefit at the population level of CS for women and babies who do not require the procedure,1, 2 and, as for any surgery, there are short-term and long-term risks to CS that have been outlined in the second paper of this Series on Optimising Caesarean Section Use.3 Additionally, surgery overuse might constrain resources that could be used to address underuse.4
Consensus among the scientific and medical communities about the optimal population-level frequency of CS has not been reached.5 Even the intent to develop a global standard is contested in the scientific literature. However, there is an almost universal consensus that, in many settings, the current frequency of CS cannot be medically justified.2, 6, 7, 8 Underuse of CS has been a focus of medical literature, research, policy, and funding efforts for decades, since increasing access to CS is a priority to reduce maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. Overuse, however, is a more recent and less well understood phenomenon that can even coexist with underuse in many countries.9 There might be the potential, therefore, to redistribute resources in such countries to address underuse. This paper is the third in a Series on Optimising Caesarean Section Use,2, 3 and we focus here on interventions to reduce unnecessary CSs, which we define as CSs used in the absence of medical (including psychological) indications.10, 11, 12
We begin with an overview of the drivers of increasing CS use. We then examine the nature and effects of both clinical and non-clinical (behavioural, educational, and psychosocial) interventions that have been tested in studies specifically designed to safely reduce the use of births by CS. We discuss the degree to which these interventions target the underlying drivers and the mechanisms of their effect that might underpin successful reduction strategies. Finally, we propose research priorities for the future.
Section snippets
Drivers of excessive CS use
Many decisions to use CS are driven by the clinical or psychological needs of the mother or by the clinical needs of the baby, or by both. However, where frequency of use is greater than needed, the drivers fall into three broader, interconnected, and sometimes overlapping categories. These categories relate to childbearing women, families, communities, and the broader society; health professionals; and health-care systems, financing, and organisational design and cultures.
Interventions to reduce unnecessary caesareans
Interventions to reduce unnecessary CSs can be broadly conceptualised as clinical and non-clinical, although there is overlap between the two. Clinical interventions tend to target a specific clinical practice for an individual woman (eg, vaginal birth after CS [VBAC]). Such interventions might only slightly reduce CS use because CS for clinical indications represents a shrinking proportion of the overall increasing use of this operation, as reported in the first paper in this Series.2
Strategies for successful implementation of interventions
The data we have presented suggest that few interventions (clinical or non-clinical) are targeted to the several drivers of high CS use and their interactions (Kingdon et al, unpublished),45, 68, 93 which are complex, dynamic, and partly context-specific. Consequently, few of these interventions have been effective in reducing the frequency of unnecessary CSs.8, 12 For example, addressing preparedness and knowledge of pregnant women while ignoring health-care providers' demand for skill
Future research priorities
With some exceptions, interventions tested thus far to reduce unnecessary CSs have been single faceted, targeted to one group (eg, women or health-care providers), tested in a single site or country with a relatively small number of participants, and have provided low-quality or very low-quality evidence. Women's views and experiences were often not included, and medium-term and long-term follow-up was not done. Studies have rarely considered the qualitative evidence of what might work for a
Conclusions
Although there is almost universal consensus that current CS use has transgressed reasonable justification of need, effective interventions to optimise the frequency of births by CS by increasing use in settings with underuse and reducing overuse in areas where this is a key problem have proven elusive. The poor effect of these interventions in optimising the frequency of CS use might be due to the complexity of the factors that drive underuse and overuse of CS worldwide and to the prevalent
Search strategy and selection criteria
References (123)
- et al.
Unnecessary cesarean delivery in Louisiana: an analysis of birth certificate data
Am J Obstet Gynecol
(2004) - et al.
Estimating the proportion of unnecessary Cesarean sections in Ohio using birth certificate data
J Clin Epidemiol
(1998) - et al.
Rate of caesarean section is alarming in China
Lancet
(2014) Are Brazilian women really choosing to deliver by cesarean?
Soc Sci Med
(2000)- et al.
Maternal expectations and birth-related experiences: a survey of pregnant women of mixed parity from Calcutta, India
Int J Obstet Anesth
(2008) - et al.
Women's opinions about mode of birth in Brazil: a qualitative study in a public teaching hospital
Midwifery
(2010) - et al.
Factors associated with caesarean sections in Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Reprod Health Matters
(2016) - et al.
Behind the myth—few women prefer caesarean section in the absence of medical or obstetrical factors
Midwifery
(2011) - et al.
Why do women request caesarean section in a normal, healthy first pregnancy?
Midwifery
(2010) - et al.
Caesarean birth: consumption, safety, order, and good mothering
Soc Sci Med
(2007)
Vaginal births after caesarean: what does Google think about it?
Women Birth
The impact of the mass media on obstetricians' behavior in Norway
Health Policy
Fear, blame and transparency: obstetric caregivers' rationales for high caesarean section rates in a low-resource setting
Soc Sci Med
Is vacuum extraction still known, taught and practiced? A worldwide KAP survey
Int J Gynaecol Obstet
The disappearing art of instrumental delivery: time to reverse the trend
Int J Gynaecol Obstet
Methods of achieving and maintaining an appropriate caesarean section rate
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol
Induction of labor at full term in uncomplicated singleton gestations: a systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials
Am J Obstet Gynecol
LB01: a randomized trial of elective induction of labour at 39 weeks compared with expectant management of low-risk nulliparous women
Am J Obstet Gynecol
Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial
Lancet
Outcomes of children at 2 years after planned cesarean birth versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: the International Randomized Term Breech Trial
Am J Obstet Gynecol
A randomized comparative trial of two decision tools for pregnant women with prior cesareans
J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs
Randomized controlled trial of a prenatal vaginal birth after cesarean section education and support program
Am J Obstet Gynecol
WHO statement on caesarean section rates
Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections
Lancet
Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children
Lancet
Inequities in the use of cesarean section deliveries in the world
Am J Obstet Gynecol
Obstetricians' opinions of the optimal caesarean rate: a global survey
PLoS One
The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990–2014
PLoS One
Caesarean section on request: a comparison of obstetricians' attitudes in eight European countries
BJOG
Creating a public agenda for maternity safety and quality in cesarean delivery
Obstet Gynecol
Within country inequalities in caesarean section rates: observational study of 72 low and middle income countries
BMJ
Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Estimating the rate of cesarean section by maternal request: anonymous survey of obstetricians in Australia
Birth
Are there “unnecessary” cesarean sections? Perceptions of women and obstetricians about cesarean sections for nonclinical indications
Birth
Cesarean delivery on maternal request: obstetrician-gynecologists' knowledge, perception, and practice patterns
Obstet Gynecol
Women's preference for caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies
BJOG
Elective cesarean section and decision making: a critical review of the literature
Birth
Caesarean delivery or vaginal birth: preference of Turkish pregnant women and influencing factors
J Obstet Gynaecol
Severe fear of childbirth indicates high perinatal costs for Swedish women giving birth to their first child
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand
Women's preferences of method of delivery and influencing factors
Iran Red Crescent Med J
Why do some pregnant women prefer cesarean? The influence of parity, delivery experiences, and fear
Am J Obstet Gynecol
What characterizes women in Norway who wish to have a caesarean section?
Scand J Public Health
Preferences and concerns for delivery: an antepartum survey
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct
Women's knowledge and attitude towards mode of delivery and frequency of cesarean section on mother's request in six public and private hospitals in Tehran, Iran, 2012
J Obstet Gynaecol Res
Factors influencing the decision that women make on their mode of delivery: the Health Belief Model
BMC Health Serv Res
Do Italian women prefer cesarean section? Results from a survey on mode of delivery preferences
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
A longitudinal observational study of preference for elective caesarean section among nulliparous Hong Kong Chinese women
BJOG
Women's antenatal preferences for delivery route in a setting with high cesarean section rates and a medically dominated maternity system
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand
Pregnant women's perception of cesarean section on demand
J Perinat Med
Cited by (353)
Non-elective caesarean section risk assessment using Machine Learning techniques
2024, Clinica e Investigacion en Ginecologia y ObstetriciaA morphological study of symptomatic uterine niche using three-dimensional models from thin-slice magnetic resonance imaging
2024, Reproductive BioMedicine OnlineThe association between musculoskeletal pain during pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analyses
2024, European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive BiologyFetal Heart Rate Auscultation, 4th Edition
2024, Nursing for Women's HealthFetal Heart Rate Auscultation, 4th Edition
2024, JOGNN - Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing