Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 6/2013

01-12-2013 | Review Article

An Overview of the Health Economic Implications of Elective Caesarean Section

Authors: Stavros Petrou, Kamran Khan

Published in: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy | Issue 6/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

The caesarean section rate has continued to increase in most industrialised countries, which raises a number of economic concerns. This review provides an overview of the health economic implications of elective caesarean section. It provides a succinct summary of the health consequences associated with elective caesarean section for both the infant and the mother over the perinatal period and beyond. It highlights factors that complicate our understanding of the health consequences of elective caesarean section, including inconsistencies in definitions and coding of the procedure, failure to adopt an intention-to-treat principle when drawing comparisons, and the widespread reliance on observational data. The paper then summarises the economic costs associated with elective caesarean section. Evidence is presented to suggest that planned caesarean section may be less costly than planned vaginal birth in some clinical contexts, for example where the singleton fetus lies in a breech position at term. In contrast, elective caesarean section (or caesarean section as a whole) appears to be more costly than vaginal delivery (either spontaneous or instrumented) in low-risk or unselected populations. The paper proceeds with an overview of economic evaluations associated with elective caesarean section. All are currently based on decision-analytic models. Evidence is presented to suggest that planned trial of labour (attempted vaginal birth) following a previous caesarean section appears to be a more cost-effective option than elective caesarean section, although its cost effectiveness is dependent upon the probability of successful vaginal delivery. There is conflicting evidence on the cost effectiveness of maternal request caesareans when compared with trial of labour. The paucity of evidence on the value pregnant women, clinicians and other groups in society place on the option of elective caesarean section is highlighted. Techniques that might be used to elicit preferences for elective caesarean section and its attributes are outlined. The review concludes with directions for future research in this area.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Meikle SF, Steiner CA, Zhang J, Lawrence WL. A national estimate of the elective primary cesarean delivery rate. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(4):751–6.PubMedCrossRef Meikle SF, Steiner CA, Zhang J, Lawrence WL. A national estimate of the elective primary cesarean delivery rate. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(4):751–6.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference National Collaborating Centre for Women and Children’s Health (NCCWCH). Caesarean section. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, 2011. National Collaborating Centre for Women and Children’s Health (NCCWCH). Caesarean section. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, 2011.
4.
go back to reference Niino Y. The increasing cesarean rate globally and what we can do about it. Biosci Trends. 2011;5(4):139–50.PubMedCrossRef Niino Y. The increasing cesarean rate globally and what we can do about it. Biosci Trends. 2011;5(4):139–50.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference MacDorman MF, Menacker F, Declercq E. Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clin Perinatol. 2008;35(2):293–307.PubMedCrossRef MacDorman MF, Menacker F, Declercq E. Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clin Perinatol. 2008;35(2):293–307.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, Zavaleta N, Carroli G, Velazco A, et al. Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet. 2006;367(9525):1819–29.PubMedCrossRef Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, Zavaleta N, Carroli G, Velazco A, et al. Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet. 2006;367(9525):1819–29.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference McCourt C, Weaver J, Statham H, Beake S, Gamble J, Creedy DK. Elective cesarean section and decision making: a critical review of the literature. Birth. 2007;34(1):65–79.PubMedCrossRef McCourt C, Weaver J, Statham H, Beake S, Gamble J, Creedy DK. Elective cesarean section and decision making: a critical review of the literature. Birth. 2007;34(1):65–79.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Gruber J, Owings M. Physician financial incentives and cesarean section delivery. Rand J Econ. 1996;27(1):99–123.PubMedCrossRef Gruber J, Owings M. Physician financial incentives and cesarean section delivery. Rand J Econ. 1996;27(1):99–123.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Eckerlund I, Gerdtham UG. Econometric analysis of variation in cesarean section rates: a cross-sectional study of 59 obstetrical departments in Sweden. Int J Technol Assess. 1998;14(4):774–87.CrossRef Eckerlund I, Gerdtham UG. Econometric analysis of variation in cesarean section rates: a cross-sectional study of 59 obstetrical departments in Sweden. Int J Technol Assess. 1998;14(4):774–87.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet. 2000;356(9239):1375–83.PubMedCrossRef Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet. 2000;356(9239):1375–83.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lavender T, Hofmeyr GJ, Neilson JP, Kingdon C, Gyte GM. Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(3):CD004660. Lavender T, Hofmeyr GJ, Neilson JP, Kingdon C, Gyte GM. Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(3):CD004660.
17.
go back to reference Lee YM, D’Alton ME. Cesarean delivery on maternal request: maternal and neonatal complications. Curr Opin Obstet Gyn. 2008;20(6):597–601. Lee YM, D’Alton ME. Cesarean delivery on maternal request: maternal and neonatal complications. Curr Opin Obstet Gyn. 2008;20(6):597–601.
19.
go back to reference Smith GC, Pell JP, Dobbie R. Caesarean section and risk of unexplained stillbirth in subsequent pregnancy. Lancet. 2003;362(9398):1779–84.PubMedCrossRef Smith GC, Pell JP, Dobbie R. Caesarean section and risk of unexplained stillbirth in subsequent pregnancy. Lancet. 2003;362(9398):1779–84.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Allen VM, O’Connell CM, Farrell SA, Baskett TF. Economic implications of method of delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(1):192–7.PubMedCrossRef Allen VM, O’Connell CM, Farrell SA, Baskett TF. Economic implications of method of delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(1):192–7.PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Allen VM, O’Connell CM, Baskett TF. Cumulative economic implications of initial method of delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(3, Part 1):549–55.PubMedCrossRef Allen VM, O’Connell CM, Baskett TF. Cumulative economic implications of initial method of delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(3, Part 1):549–55.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Bost BW. Cesarean delivery on demand: what will it cost? Am J Obstetr Gynecol. 2003;188(6):1418–23.CrossRef Bost BW. Cesarean delivery on demand: what will it cost? Am J Obstetr Gynecol. 2003;188(6):1418–23.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Clark SL, Scott JR, Porter TF, Schlappy DA, McClellan V, Burton DA. Is vaginal birth after cesarean less expensive than repeat cesarean delivery? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(3):599–602.PubMedCrossRef Clark SL, Scott JR, Porter TF, Schlappy DA, McClellan V, Burton DA. Is vaginal birth after cesarean less expensive than repeat cesarean delivery? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(3):599–602.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Comas M, Català L, Sala M, Payà A, Sala A, Del Amo E, et al. Descriptive analysis of childbirth healthcare costs in an area with high levels of immigration in Spain. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11(1):77.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Comas M, Català L, Sala M, Payà A, Sala A, Del Amo E, et al. Descriptive analysis of childbirth healthcare costs in an area with high levels of immigration in Spain. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11(1):77.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Declercq E, Barger M, Cabral HJ, Evans SR, Kotelchuck M, Simon C, et al. Maternal outcomes associated with planned primary cesarean births compared with planned vaginal births. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(3):669–77.PubMedCrossRef Declercq E, Barger M, Cabral HJ, Evans SR, Kotelchuck M, Simon C, et al. Maternal outcomes associated with planned primary cesarean births compared with planned vaginal births. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(3):669–77.PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference DiMaio H, Edwards RK, Euliano TY, Treloar RW, Cruz AC. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: an historic cohort cost analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(5):890–2.PubMedCrossRef DiMaio H, Edwards RK, Euliano TY, Treloar RW, Cruz AC. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: an historic cohort cost analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(5):890–2.PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Heer I, Kahlert S, Rummel S, Kümper C, Jonat W, Strauss A. Hospital treatment-is it affordable? A structured cost analysis of vaginal deliveries and planned caesarean sections. Eur J Med Res. 2009;14(11):502.PubMedCentralPubMed Heer I, Kahlert S, Rummel S, Kümper C, Jonat W, Strauss A. Hospital treatment-is it affordable? A structured cost analysis of vaginal deliveries and planned caesarean sections. Eur J Med Res. 2009;14(11):502.PubMedCentralPubMed
28.
go back to reference James M, Hunt K, Burr R, Johanson R. A decision analytical cost analysis of offering ECV in a UK district general hospital. BMC Health Serv Res. 2001;1(1):6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef James M, Hunt K, Burr R, Johanson R. A decision analytical cost analysis of offering ECV in a UK district general hospital. BMC Health Serv Res. 2001;1(1):6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
29.
30.
go back to reference Kazandjian VA, Chaulk CP, Ogunbo S, Wicker K. Does a Cesarean section delivery always cost more than a vaginal delivery? J Eval Clin Pract. 2007;13(1):16–20.PubMedCrossRef Kazandjian VA, Chaulk CP, Ogunbo S, Wicker K. Does a Cesarean section delivery always cost more than a vaginal delivery? J Eval Clin Pract. 2007;13(1):16–20.PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Khan A, Zaman S. Costs of vaginal delivery and Caesarean section at a tertiary level public hospital in Islamabad, Pakistan. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2010;10(1):2.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Khan A, Zaman S. Costs of vaginal delivery and Caesarean section at a tertiary level public hospital in Islamabad, Pakistan. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2010;10(1):2.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Petrou S, Glazener C. The economic costs of alternative modes of delivery during the first two months postpartum: results from a Scottish observational study. BJOG Int J Obstet Gy. 2002;109(2):214–7.CrossRef Petrou S, Glazener C. The economic costs of alternative modes of delivery during the first two months postpartum: results from a Scottish observational study. BJOG Int J Obstet Gy. 2002;109(2):214–7.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Sarowar M, Medin E, Gazi R, Koehlmoos T, Rehnberg C, Saifi R, et al. Calculation of costs of pregnancy- and puerperium-related care: experience from a hospital in a low-income country. J Health Popul Nutr. 2010;28(3):264.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Sarowar M, Medin E, Gazi R, Koehlmoos T, Rehnberg C, Saifi R, et al. Calculation of costs of pregnancy- and puerperium-related care: experience from a hospital in a low-income country. J Health Popul Nutr. 2010;28(3):264.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
35.
39.
go back to reference Chen KT, Sell RL, Tuomala RE. Cost-effectiveness of elective cesarean delivery in human immunodeficiency virus-infected women. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(2):161–8.PubMedCrossRef Chen KT, Sell RL, Tuomala RE. Cost-effectiveness of elective cesarean delivery in human immunodeficiency virus-infected women. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(2):161–8.PubMedCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Chung A, Macario A, El-Sayed YY, Riley ET, Duncan B, Druzin ML. Cost-effectiveness of a trial of labor after previous cesarean. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(6):932–41.PubMedCrossRef Chung A, Macario A, El-Sayed YY, Riley ET, Duncan B, Druzin ML. Cost-effectiveness of a trial of labor after previous cesarean. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(6):932–41.PubMedCrossRef
41.
go back to reference Culligan PJ, Myers JA, Goldberg RP, Blackwell L, Gohmann SF, Abell TD. Elective cesarean section to prevent anal incontinence and brachial plexus injuries associated with macrosomia: a decision analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2005;16(1):19–28.CrossRef Culligan PJ, Myers JA, Goldberg RP, Blackwell L, Gohmann SF, Abell TD. Elective cesarean section to prevent anal incontinence and brachial plexus injuries associated with macrosomia: a decision analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2005;16(1):19–28.CrossRef
42.
go back to reference Fawsitt CG, Bourke J, Greene RA, Everard CM, Murphy A, Lutomski JE. At what price? A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing trial of labour after previous caesarean versus elective repeat caesarean delivery. PloS One. 2013;8(3):e58577.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Fawsitt CG, Bourke J, Greene RA, Everard CM, Murphy A, Lutomski JE. At what price? A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing trial of labour after previous caesarean versus elective repeat caesarean delivery. PloS One. 2013;8(3):e58577.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
43.
go back to reference Grobman WA, Peaceman AM, Socol ML. Cost-effectiveness of elective cesarean delivery after one prior low transverse cesarean. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(5):745–51.PubMedCrossRef Grobman WA, Peaceman AM, Socol ML. Cost-effectiveness of elective cesarean delivery after one prior low transverse cesarean. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(5):745–51.PubMedCrossRef
44.
go back to reference Halpern MT, Read JS, Ganoczy DA, Harris DR. Cost-effectiveness of cesarean section delivery to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1. AIDS. 2000;14(6):691–700.PubMedCrossRef Halpern MT, Read JS, Ganoczy DA, Harris DR. Cost-effectiveness of cesarean section delivery to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1. AIDS. 2000;14(6):691–700.PubMedCrossRef
45.
go back to reference Herbst MA. Treatment of suspected fetal macrosomia: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(3 Pt 2):1035.PubMedCrossRef Herbst MA. Treatment of suspected fetal macrosomia: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(3 Pt 2):1035.PubMedCrossRef
46.
go back to reference Mrus JM, Goldie SJ, Weinstein MC, Tsevat J. The cost-effectiveness of elective cesarean delivery for HIV-infected women with detectable HIV RNA during pregnancy. AIDS. 2000;14(16):2543–52.PubMedCrossRef Mrus JM, Goldie SJ, Weinstein MC, Tsevat J. The cost-effectiveness of elective cesarean delivery for HIV-infected women with detectable HIV RNA during pregnancy. AIDS. 2000;14(16):2543–52.PubMedCrossRef
47.
go back to reference Plunkett BA, Grobman WA. Elective cesarean delivery to prevent perinatal transmission of hepatitis C virus: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(3):998–1003.PubMedCrossRef Plunkett BA, Grobman WA. Elective cesarean delivery to prevent perinatal transmission of hepatitis C virus: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(3):998–1003.PubMedCrossRef
48.
go back to reference Schackman BR, Oneda K, Goldie SJ. The cost-effectiveness of elective cesarean delivery to prevent hepatitis C transmission in HIV-coinfected women. AIDS. 2004;18(13):1827–34.PubMedCrossRef Schackman BR, Oneda K, Goldie SJ. The cost-effectiveness of elective cesarean delivery to prevent hepatitis C transmission in HIV-coinfected women. AIDS. 2004;18(13):1827–34.PubMedCrossRef
49.
go back to reference Xu X, Ivy JS, Patel DA, Patel SN, Smith DG, Ransom SB, et al. Pelvic floor consequences of cesarean delivery on maternal request in women with a single birth: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Women’s Health. 2010;19(1):147–60.CrossRef Xu X, Ivy JS, Patel DA, Patel SN, Smith DG, Ransom SB, et al. Pelvic floor consequences of cesarean delivery on maternal request in women with a single birth: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Women’s Health. 2010;19(1):147–60.CrossRef
50.
go back to reference Eden KB, Hashima JN, Osterweil P, Nygren P, Guise JM. Childbirth preferences after cesarean birth: a review of the evidence. Birth. 2004;31(1):49–60.PubMedCrossRef Eden KB, Hashima JN, Osterweil P, Nygren P, Guise JM. Childbirth preferences after cesarean birth: a review of the evidence. Birth. 2004;31(1):49–60.PubMedCrossRef
51.
52.
go back to reference Paterson-Brown S. Should doctors perform an elective caesarean section on request? Yes, as long as the woman is fully informed. BMJ. 1998;317(7156):462–3.PubMedCrossRef Paterson-Brown S. Should doctors perform an elective caesarean section on request? Yes, as long as the woman is fully informed. BMJ. 1998;317(7156):462–3.PubMedCrossRef
53.
go back to reference Cotzias CS, Paterson-Brown S, Fisk NM. Obstetricians say yes to maternal request for elective caesarean section: a survey of current opinion. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;97(1):15–6.PubMedCrossRef Cotzias CS, Paterson-Brown S, Fisk NM. Obstetricians say yes to maternal request for elective caesarean section: a survey of current opinion. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;97(1):15–6.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
An Overview of the Health Economic Implications of Elective Caesarean Section
Authors
Stavros Petrou
Kamran Khan
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy / Issue 6/2013
Print ISSN: 1175-5652
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1896
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-013-0063-8

Other articles of this Issue 6/2013

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 6/2013 Go to the issue