Review of socioeconomic risk factors for cesarean births: a population-based study

Review of socioeconomic risk factors for cesarean births: a population-based study

Authors

  • Gamal Sayed Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. women's wellness and research center. Hamad Medical City Hamad Medical corporation WWRC
  • Husam Salama
  • Salah Abumhara Hamad Medical corporation WWRC
  • Sawsan AL.Obaidly
  • Mai Al-Qubaisi
  • Hilal Al-Rifai

Keywords:

Cesarean section, population-based study, risk factors, socioeconomic factors, vaginal delivery.

Abstract

Objectives: The reasons for increased cesarean section (CS) rates are complex and multifactorial. The goal of this study was to look at different social and economic factors that might be causing more cases of CS in the population. Study design: A retrospective population-based cohort study. Data was taken from the Perinatal Neonatal Outcomes Research study in the Arabian Gulf (PEARL study) registry. Data from 60,728 live births ≥ 24 weeks of gestation were analyzed. In this study, various socioeconomic factors, such as maternal nationality, religion, educational level, employment status, parental income, consanguinity, housing, preterm birth, and tall stature, were examined for women undergoing cesarean section (CS) and their economic outcomes. Women who underwent vaginal delivery (VD) were compared. There are risks associated with pregnancy, smoking, assisted conception, and prenatal care. Results: 60,728 births ≥ 24 weeks gestation were included in the analysis. 17,535 women delivered by CS (28.9%). Women with university-level ­education and above were more likely to deliver by CS (61%), as compared to illiterate women or women with basic education at elementary or secondary levels (OR 0.73, CI 95%: P: <0.0001). Working women were more likely to deliver by CS (OR 1.40, CI 95%, P value <0.0001). Women living in rented houses were less likely to achieve a normal delivery (71.8%) (OR 1.40, CI 95%; P: <0.0001) as compared to women living in owned houses (74.7%). Women over 20 years old tended to achieve more VD compared to women less than 20 years old. P value <0.0001. Smoking was associated with lower chances of VD, with 42.4% of smokers delivered by CS compared to 28.3% of non-smokers (OR 1.87, CI 95%; P: <0.0001). Assisted conception was associated with higher CS rates as compared to spontaneous conceptions (OR 0.39; P: <0.0001). We found no statistically significant differences in how babies were born based on the mother’s nationality, the father’s job, or the mother’s income. Conclusions: Higher education, employed mothers, smoking, and living in rented houses were socioeconomic factors associated with a higher rate of CS in our population. Furthermore, women who had regular antenatal care were more at risk for delivery by cesarean section, which could be related to other comorbidities increasing the likelihood of cesarean birth rather than antenatal care itself. In our population, assisted reproduction was associated with a higher probability of cesarean delivery.

Author Biography

Husam Salama

 

 

References

Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The Increasing Trend in Cesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148343. Published 2016 Feb 5. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148343

Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L, et al. Short-term and long-term effects of cesarean section on the health of women and children. Lancet. 2018;392(10155):1349-1357. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31930-5

Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, et al. Cesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America [published correction appears in Lancet. 2006 Aug 12;368(9535):580]. Lancet. 2006;367(9525):1819-1829. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68704-7

Sevelsted A, Stokholm J, Bisgaard H. Risk of Asthma from Cesarean Delivery Depends on Membrane Rupture. J Pediatr. 2016;171:38-42.e424. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2015.12.066

Blustein J, Liu J. Time to consider the risks of cesarean delivery for long-term child health. BMJ. 2015;350:h2410. Published 2015 Jun 10. doi:10.1136/bmj.h2410

Begum T, Rahman A, Nababan H, et al. Indications and determinants of cesarean section delivery: Evidence from a population-based study in Matlab, Bangladesh. PLoS One. 2017;12(11):e0188074. Published 2017 Nov 20. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0188074.

MedCalc Software Ltd. Odds ratio calculator. https://www.medcalc.org/calc/odds_ratio.php (Version 20.116; accessed October 24, 2022).

Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, et al. What is the optimal rate of cesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies. Reprod Health. 2015;12:57. Published 2015 Jun 21. doi:10.1186/s12978-015-0043-6

Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang JJ, Gülmezoglu AM; WHO Working Group on Cesarean Section. WHO Statement on Cesarean Section Rates. BJOG. 2016;123(5):667-670. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.13526

Vogel JP, Betrán AP, Vindevoghel N, et al. Use of the Robson classification to assess cesarean section trends in 21 countries: a secondary analysis of two WHO multicountry surveys. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(5):e260-e270. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(15)70094-X

Tatar M, Günalp S, Somunoğlu S, Demirol A. Women's perceptions of cesarean section: reflections from a Turkish teaching hospital. Soc Sci Med. 2000;50(9):1227-1233. doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00315-9

Gilbert A, Benjamin A, Abenhaim HA. Does education level influence the decision to undergo elective repeat cesarean section among women with a previous cesarean section? J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2010;32(10):942-947. doi:10.1016/s1701-2163(16)34681-3

Memon H, Handa VL. Pelvic floor disorders following vaginal or cesarean delivery. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2012;24(5):349-354. doi:10.1097/GCO.0b013e328357628b

Rydahl E, Declercq E, Juhl M, Maimburg RD. Cesarean section on a rise-Does advanced maternal age explain the increase? A population register-based study. PLoS One. 2019;14(1):e0210655. Published 2019 Jan 24. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0210655

Herstad L, Klungsøyr K, Skjærven R, et al. Elective cesarean section or not? Maternal age and risk of adverse outcomes at term: a population-based registry study of low-risk primiparous women. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016;16:230. Published 2016 Aug 17. doi:10.1186/s12884-016-1028-3

Delpisheh A, Brabin L, Drummond S, Brabin BJ. Prenatal smoking exposure and asymmetric fetal growth restriction. Ann Hum Biol. 2008;35(6):573-583. doi:10.1080/03014460802375596

Ratnasiri AWG, Gordon L, Dieckmann RA, et al. Smoking during Pregnancy and Adverse Birth and Maternal Outcomes in California, 2007 to 2016. Am J Perinatol. 2020;37(13):1364-1376. doi:10.1055/s-0039-1693689

Lurie S, Ribenzaft S, Boaz M, Golan A, Sadan O. The effect of cigarette smoking during pregnancy on mode of delivery in uncomplicated term singleton pregnancies. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(8):812-815. doi:10.3109/14767058.2013.842551

Delbaere I, Cammu H, Martens E, Tency I, Martens G, Temmerman M. Limiting the cesarean section rate in low risk pregnancies is key to lowering the trend of increased abdominal deliveries: an observational study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2012;12:3. Published 2012 Jan 9. doi:10.1186/1471-2393-12-3

Mylonas I, Friese K. Indications for and Risks of Elective Cesarean Section. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112(29-30):489-495. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2015.0489

Källén B, Finnström O, Nygren KG, Otterblad Olausson P, Wennerholm UB. In vitro fertilisation in Sweden: obstetric characteristics, maternal morbidity and mortality. BJOG. 2005;112(11):1529-1535. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00745.x

Sullivan EA, Chapman MG, Wang YA, Adamson GD. Population-based study of cesarean section after in vitro fertilisation in Australia. Birth. 2010;37(3):184-191. doi:10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00405.x

Luke B, Gopal D, Cabral H, Stern JE, Diop H. Pregnancy, birth, and infant outcomes by maternal fertility status: the Massachusetts Outcomes Study of Assisted Reproductive Technology. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(3):327.e1-327.e14. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.04.006

Neuman M, Alcock G, Azad K, et al. Prevalence and determinants of cesarean section in private and public health facilities in underserved South Asian communities: cross-sectional analysis of data from Bangladesh, India and Nepal. BMJ Open. 2014;4(12):e005982. Published 2014 Dec 30. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005982

Gomes UA, Silva AA, Bettiol H, Barbieri MA. Risk factors for the increasing cesarean section rate in Southeast Brazil: a comparison of two birth cohorts, 1978-1979 and 1994. Int J Epidemiol. 1999;28(4):687-694. doi:10.1093/ije/28.4.687

Jurdi R, Khawaja M. Cesarean section rates in the Arab region: a cross-national study. Health Policy Plan. 2004;19(2):101-110. doi:10.1093/heapol/czh012

Downloads

Published

14-06-2023

Issue

Section

REVIEWS CLINICAL ARTICLES, UPDATES, FOCUS ON

How to Cite

1.
Sayed G, Salama H, Abumhara S, AL.Obaidly S, Al-Qubaisi M, Al-Rifai H. Review of socioeconomic risk factors for cesarean births: a population-based study. Acta Biomed [Internet]. 2023 Jun. 14 [cited 2024 Jul. 20];94(3):e2023082. Available from: https://www.mattioli1885journals.com/index.php/actabiomedica/article/view/13907