Evolution of cesarean sections in Colombia and its association with the legal standing of the institutions where deliveries take place
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18597/rcog.3901Keywords:
Cesarean section, private sector, health systems, normal delivery, hospitalsAbstract
Objectives: To describe how the frequency of cesarean section has evolved in Colombia since 1998, both in overall terms as well as discriminated according to the legal standing of the healthcare providers (IPSs) where delivery takes place, and to estimate the size of the association between the legal standing of the institutions and the performance of cesarean sections between 2015 and 2017.
Material and methods: A cross-sectional cohort study that describes the frequency of cesarean deliveries between 1998 and 2020, plus an analytical component to estimate the association between the legal nature and the route of delivery between 2015 and 2017, based on the birth records of the Colombian National Statistics Administrative Department (DANE). The prevalence ratio was used as an estimator of this association.
Results: In 1998, the proportion of cesarean deliveries was 25.7 %; it increased to 46.4 % by 2015 and then dropped to 44.6 % by 2020. After 1998, the proportion of cesarean sections in public hospitals increased from 26.2 % to 42.9 % by 2014, while in private providers it increased from 45.0 % to 57.7 % by 2013. The prevalence ratio of cesarean sections in private versus public institutions was 1.57 (95 % CI: 1.56-1.57).
Conclusions: After a long period of sustained growth, there is now a reduction in the proportion of cesarean sections in the country. In public health care institutions, these procedures increased in greater proportion during most of the study period, while in private healthcare providers they are carried out at a higher frequency in all subgroups of women. It will be necessary to evaluate in the future, using more robust methodologies, whether the decrease in the frequency of cesarean section is a real or secular trend.
Author Biography
John Jairo Zuleta-Tobón, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín (Colombia).
Departamento de Obstetricia y Ginecología, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín (Colombia).
References
Hoxha I, Fink G. Caesarean sections and health financing: A global analysis. BMJ Open. 2021;11(5):e044383. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044383
Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller A-B, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: Global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148343. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148343
Souza JP, Gülmezoglu A, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Carroli G, Fawole B, 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. BMC Med. 2010;8(1):71. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-8-71
Keag OE, Norman JE, Stock SJ. Long-term risks and benefits associated with cesarean delivery for mother, baby, and subsequent pregnancies: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Myers JE, editor. PLOS Med. 2018;15(1):e1002494. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002494
Sobhy S, Arroyo-Manzano D, Murugesu N, Karthikeyan G, Kumar V, Kaur I, et al. Maternal and perinatal mortality and complications associated with caesarean section in low-income and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2019;393(10184):1973-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32386-9
Mascarello KC, Horta BL, Silveira MF. Maternal complications and cesarean section without indication: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev Saude Publica. 2017;51:105. https://doi.org/10.11606/S1518-8787.2017051000389
Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L, Mola G, Visser GH, Homer CS, et al. Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children. Lancet. 2018 Oct;392(10155):1349-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31930-5
Declercq E, Young R, Cabral H, Ecker J. Is a rising cesarean delivery rate inevitable? Trends in industrialized countries, 1987 to 2007. Birth. 2011;38(2):99-104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00459.x
Boerma T, Ronsmans C, Melesse DY, Barros AJD, Barros FC, Juan L, et al. Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. Lancet. 2018;392(10155):1341-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31928-7
Laurita Longo V, Odjidja EN, Beia TK, Neri M, Kielmann K, Gittardi I, et al. “An unnecessary cut?” multilevel health systems analysis of drivers of caesarean sections rates in Italy: A systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20(1):770. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-020-03462-1
Dahlen HG, Tracy S, Tracy M, Bisits A, Brown C, Thornton C. Rates of obstetric intervention among low-risk women giving birth in private and public hospitals in NSW: A population-based descriptive study. BMJ Open. 2012;2(5). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001723
Hoxha I, Syrogiannouli L, Luta X, Tal K, Goodman DC, da Costa BR, et al. Caesarean sections and for-profit status of hospitals: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2017;7(2):e013670. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013670
Sk R. Does delivery in private hospitals contribute largely to Caesarean Section births? A path analysis using generalised structural equation modelling. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0239649. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239649
Betran AP, Ye J, Moller A-B, Souza JP, Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: Global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Heal. 2021;6(6). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671
Uribe-Leitz T, Barrero-Castillero A, Cervantes-Trejo A, Santos JM, de la Rosa-Rabago A, Lipsitz SR, et al. Trends of caesarean delivery from 2008 to 2017, Mexico. Bull World Health Organ. 2019;97(7):502-12. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.18.224303
Niino Y. The increasing cesarean rate globally and what we can do about it. Biosci Trends. 2011;5(4):139-50. https://doi.org/10.5582/bst.2011.v5.4.139
McCall SJ, Semaan A, Altijani N, Opondo C, Abdel-Fattah M, Kabakian-Khasholian T. Trends, wealth inequalities and the role of the private sector in caesarean section in the Middle East and North Africa: A repeat cross-sectional analysis of population-based surveys. PLoS One. 2021;16(11):e0259791. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259791
Rubio-Romero JA, Fonseca-Pérez JE, Molina S, Buitrago Leal M, Zuleta-Tobon JJ, et al. Racionalización del uso de la cesárea en Colombia. Consenso de la Federación Colombiana de Obstetricia y Ginecología (Fecolsog) y la Federación Colombiana de Perinatología (Fecopen). Bogotá, 2014. Rev Colomb Obstet Ginecol. 2014;65(2):139-51. https://doi.org/10.18597/rcog.62
Murray SF. Relation between private health insurance and high rates of caesarean section in Chile: Qualitative and quantitative study. BMJ. 2000;321(7275):1501-5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7275.1501
Gibbons L, Belizán JM, Lauer JA, Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. The global numbers and costs of additionally needed and unnecessary caesarean sections performed per year: Overuse as a barrier to universal coverage [Internet]. 2010. Disponible en: https://www.who.int/healthsystems/topics/financing/healthreport/30C-sectioncosts.pdf
Nakamura-Pereira M, do Carmo Leal M, Esteves-Pereira AP, Domingues RMSM, Torres JA, Dias MAB, et al. Use of Robson classification to assess cesarean section rate in Brazil: The role of source of payment for childbirth. Reprod Health. 2016;13(Suppl 3):128. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-016-0228-7
Alfonso EA, Arcila AD, Latorre ML. Atlas de variaciones geográficas en salud de Colombia [Internet]. Bogotá: Ministerio de Salud; s. f. Disponible en: https://www.minsalud.gov.co/sites/rid/Lists/BibliotecaDigital/RIDE/DE/PES/atlas-variaciones-geograficas-salud2.pdf
How to Cite
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
| Article metrics | |
|---|---|
| Abstract views | |
| Galley vies | |
| PDF Views | |
| HTML views | |
| Other views | |
