» Articles » PMID: 32867791

Reducing Unnecessary Caesarean Sections: Scoping Review of Financial and Regulatory Interventions

Overview
Journal Reprod Health
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2020 Sep 2
PMID 32867791
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Caesarean sections (CS) are increasing worldwide. Financial incentives and related regulatory and legislative factors are important determinants of CS rates. This scoping review examines the evidence base of financial, regulatory and legislative interventions intended to reduce CS rates.

Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and two trials registers in June 2019. Both experimental and observational intervention studies were eligible for inclusion. Primary outcome measures were: CS, spontaneous vaginal and instrumental birth rates. We assessed quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method.

Results: We identified 9057 articles and assessed 65 full-texts. We included 16 observational studies. Most of the studies were conducted in high-income countries. Three studies assessed payment methods for health workers: equalising physician fees for vaginal and caesarean delivery reduced CS rates in one study; however, little or no difference in CS rates was found in the remaining two studies. Nine studies assessed payment methods for health organisations: There was no difference in CS rates between diagnosis-related group (DRG) payment system compared to fee-for-service system in one study. However, DRG system was associated with lower odds for CS in another study. There was little or no difference in CS rates following implementation of global budget payment (GBP) system in two studies. Vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC) increased after implementation of a case-based payment system in one study. Caesarean section increased while VBAC rates decreased following implementation of a cap-based payment system in another study. Financial incentive for providers to promote vaginal delivery combined with free vaginal delivery policy was found to reduce CS rates in one study. Studied regulatory and legislative interventions (comprising legislatively imposed practice guidelines for physicians in one study and multi-faceted strategy which included policies to control CS on maternal request in another study) were found to reduce CS rates. The GRADE quality of evidence varied from very low to low.

Conclusions: Available evidence on the effects of financial and regulatory strategies intended to reduce unnecessary CS is inconclusive given inconsistency in effects and low quality of the available evidence. More rigorous studies are needed.

Citing Articles

Cesarean Delivery Upon Request in Pregnancies Following Vaginal Delivery: A Nationwide Study.

Jung Y, Wi W, Cho K, Hong S, Oh M, Cho G J Korean Med Sci. 2025; 39(50):e318.

PMID: 39742875 PMC: 11685277. DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e318.


Evidence-Based Strategies to Minimize Unnecessary Primary Cesarean Sections: A Comprehensive Review.

Metwali N, Ahmed R, Hussain Timraz J, Irfan H, Makarfi S, Metwali M Cureus. 2024; 16(11):e74729.

PMID: 39735004 PMC: 11682606. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.74729.


Effects of factors influencing cesarean section rates between 2008 and 2018 in Taiwan: A population-based cross-sectional study.

Tsui W, Deng G, Hsieh T, Ding D Medicine (Baltimore). 2024; 103(49):e40811.

PMID: 39654177 PMC: 11630996. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000040811.


Urgent need to address increasing caesarean section rates in lower-middle-income countries like Bangladesh.

Sizear M, Rashid M Front Glob Womens Health. 2024; 5:1365504.

PMID: 39086736 PMC: 11289978. DOI: 10.3389/fgwh.2024.1365504.


Prevalence and associated factors of caesarean section among mothers who gave birth across Eastern Africa countries: Systematic review and meta-analysis study.

Habteyes A, Mekuria M, Negeri H, Kassa R, Deribe L, Sendo E Heliyon. 2024; 10(12):e32511.

PMID: 38952380 PMC: 11215273. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32511.


References
1.
Boerma T, Ronsmans C, Melesse D, Barros A, Barros F, Juan L . Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. Lancet. 2018; 392(10155):1341-1348. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31928-7. View

2.
Betran A, Ye J, Moller A, Zhang J, Gulmezoglu A, Torloni M . The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016; 11(2):e0148343. PMC: 4743929. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148343. View

3.
Portela M, Pronovost P, Woodcock T, Carter P, Dixon-Woods M . How to study improvement interventions: a brief overview of possible study types. BMJ Qual Saf. 2015; 24(5):325-36. PMC: 4413733. DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003620. View

4.
Souza J, Gulmezoglu A, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Carroli G, Fawole B . 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. BMC Med. 2010; 8:71. PMC: 2993644. DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-71. View

5.
Buhimschi C, Buhimschi I . Advantages of vaginal delivery. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 49(1):167-83. DOI: 10.1097/01.grf.0000198186.71542.03. View