Author:
Jamaluddine Zeina,Paolucci Gloria,Ballout Ghada,Al-Fudoli Hussam,Day Louise T.,Seita Akihiro,Campbell Oona M. R.
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundRising caesarean-section rates worldwide are driven by non-medically indicated caesarean-sections. A systematic review concluded that the ten-group classification system (Robson) is the most appropriate for assessing drivers of caesarean deliveries. Evidence on the drivers of caesarean-section rates from conflict-affected settings is scarce. This study examines caesareans-section rates among Palestinian refugees by seven-group classification, compares to WHO guidelines, and to rates in the host settings, and estimates the costs of high rates.MethodsElectronic medical records of 290,047 Palestinian refugee women using UNRWA’s (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East) antenatal service from 2017–2020 in five settings (Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, West Bank, Gaza) were used. We modified Robson criteria to compare rates within each group with WHO guidelines. The host setting data were extracted from publicly available reports. Data on costs came from UNRWA’s accounts.FindingsPalestinian refugees in Gaza had the lowest caesarean-section rates (22%), followed by those residing in Jordan (28%), West Bank (30%), Lebanon (50%) and Syria (64%). The seven groups caesarean section classification showed women with previous caesarean-sections contributed the most to overall rates. Caesarean-section rates were substantially higher than the WHO guidelines, and excess caesarean-sections (2017–2020) were modelled to cost up to 6.8 million USD. We documented a steady increase in caesarean-section rates in all five settings for refugee and host communities; refugee rates paralleled or were below those in their host country.InterpretationCaesarean-section rates exceed recommended guidance within most groups. The high rates in the nulliparous groups will drive future increases as they become multiparous women with a previous caesarean-section and in turn, face high caesarean rates. Our analysis helps suggest targeted and tailored strategies to reduce caesarean-section rates in priority groups (among low-risk women) organized by those aimed at national governments, and UNRWA, and those aimed at health-care providers.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Reference47 articles.
1. World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2:436–7.
2. World Health Organization. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. World Health Organization; 2015.
3. Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, Ye J, Mikolajczyk R, Deneux-Tharaux C, et al. What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies. Reprod Health. 2015;12(1):57.
4. Molina G, Weiser TG, Lipsitz SR, Esquivel MM, Uribe-Leitz T, Azad T, et al. Relationship Between Cesarean Delivery Rate and Maternal and Neonatal Mortality. JAMA. 2015;314(21):2263–70.
5. Betran AP, Ye J, Moller A-B, Souza JP, Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(6): e005671.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献