Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Health Economics Review 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research

Prenatal care and socioeconomic status: effect on cesarean delivery

Authors: Carine Milcent, Saad Zbiri

Published in: Health Economics Review | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Cesarean deliveries are widely used in many high- and middle-income countries. This overuse both increases costs and lowers quality of care and is thus a major concern in the healthcare industry. The study first examines the impact of prenatal care utilization on cesarean delivery rates. It then determines whether socioeconomic status affects the use of prenatal care and thereby influences the cesarean delivery decision. Using exclusive French delivery data over the 2008–2014 period, with multilevel logit models, and controlling for relevant patient and hospital characteristics, we show that women who do not participate in prenatal education have an increased probability of a cesarean delivery compared to those who do. The study further indicates that attendance at prenatal education varies according to socioeconomic status. Low socioeconomic women are more likely to have cesarean deliveries and less likely to participate in prenatal education. This result emphasizes the importance of focusing on pregnancy health education, particularly for low-income women, as a potential way to limit unnecessary cesarean deliveries. Future studies would ideally investigate the effect of interventions promoting such as care participation on cesarean delivery rates.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
4.
go back to reference Korenstein D, Falk R, Howell EA, Bishop T, Keyhani S. Overuse of health care services in the United States: an understudied problem. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(2):171–8.CrossRefPubMed Korenstein D, Falk R, Howell EA, Bishop T, Keyhani S. Overuse of health care services in the United States: an understudied problem. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(2):171–8.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Nassery N, Segal JB, Chang E, Bridges JF. Systematic overuse of healthcare services: a conceptual model. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2015;13(1):1–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Nassery N, Segal JB, Chang E, Bridges JF. Systematic overuse of healthcare services: a conceptual model. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2015;13(1):1–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA, Bing-Shun W, Thomas J, Van Look P, Wagner M. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21(2):98–113.CrossRefPubMed Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA, Bing-Shun W, Thomas J, Van Look P, Wagner M. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21(2):98–113.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, Zavaleta N, Carroli G, Velazco A, Shah A, Campodónico L, Bataglia V, Faundes A, Langer A, Narváez A, Donner A, Romero M, Reynoso S, de Pádua KS, Giordano D, Kublickas M, Acosta A. WHO 2005 global survey on maternal and perinatal health research group. 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.CrossRefPubMed Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, Zavaleta N, Carroli G, Velazco A, Shah A, Campodónico L, Bataglia V, Faundes A, Langer A, Narváez A, Donner A, Romero M, Reynoso S, de Pádua KS, Giordano D, Kublickas M, Acosta A. WHO 2005 global survey on maternal and perinatal health research group. 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.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Gibbons L, Belizan JM, Lauer JA, Betran AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. Inequities in the use of cesarean section deliveries in the world. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(4):331–e1.CrossRefPubMed Gibbons L, Belizan JM, Lauer JA, Betran AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. Inequities in the use of cesarean section deliveries in the world. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(4):331–e1.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2(8452):436–7. World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2(8452):436–7.
11.
go back to reference Xu X, Gariepy A, Lundsberg LS, Sheth SS, Pettker CM, Krumholz HM, Illuzzi JL. Wide variation found in hospital facility costs for maternity stays involving low-risk childbirth. Health Aff. 2015;34(7):1212–9.CrossRef Xu X, Gariepy A, Lundsberg LS, Sheth SS, Pettker CM, Krumholz HM, Illuzzi JL. Wide variation found in hospital facility costs for maternity stays involving low-risk childbirth. Health Aff. 2015;34(7):1212–9.CrossRef
12.
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.CrossRefPubMed Allen VM, O'Connell CM, Farrell SA, Baskett TF. Economic implications of method of delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(1):192–7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
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.CrossRefPubMed Allen VM, O’Connell CM, Baskett TF. Cumulative economic implications of initial method of delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(3, Part 1):549–55.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Gilbert SA, Grobman WA, Landon MB, Varner MW, Wapner RJ, Sorokin Y, Sibai BM, Thorp JM, Ramin SM, Mercer BM, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Lifetime cost-effectiveness of trial of labor after cesarean in the United States. Value Health. 2013;16(6):953–64.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gilbert SA, Grobman WA, Landon MB, Varner MW, Wapner RJ, Sorokin Y, Sibai BM, Thorp JM, Ramin SM, Mercer BM, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Lifetime cost-effectiveness of trial of labor after cesarean in the United States. Value Health. 2013;16(6):953–64.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Belizán JM, Althabe F, Cafferata ML. Health consequences of the increasing caesarean section rates. Epidemiology. 2007;18(4):485–6.CrossRefPubMed Belizán JM, Althabe F, Cafferata ML. Health consequences of the increasing caesarean section rates. Epidemiology. 2007;18(4):485–6.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Hyde MJ, Mostyn A, Modi N, Kemp PR. The health implications of birth by caesarean section. Biol Rev. 2012;87(1):229–43.CrossRefPubMed Hyde MJ, Mostyn A, Modi N, Kemp PR. The health implications of birth by caesarean section. Biol Rev. 2012;87(1):229–43.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Villar J, Carroli G, Zavaleta N, Donner A, Wojdyla D, Faundes A, Velazco A, Bataglia V, Langer A, Narváez A, Valladares E, Shah A, Campodónico L, Romero M, Reynoso S, de Pádua KS, Giordano D, Kublickas M, Maternal AA. Neonatal individual risks and benefits associated with caesarean delivery: multicentre prospective study. BMJ. 2007;335(7628):1025.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Villar J, Carroli G, Zavaleta N, Donner A, Wojdyla D, Faundes A, Velazco A, Bataglia V, Langer A, Narváez A, Valladares E, Shah A, Campodónico L, Romero M, Reynoso S, de Pádua KS, Giordano D, Kublickas M, Maternal AA. Neonatal individual risks and benefits associated with caesarean delivery: multicentre prospective study. BMJ. 2007;335(7628):1025.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference O’Leary CM, De Klerk N, Keogh J, Pennell C, De Groot J, York L, Mulroy S, Stanley FJ. Trends in mode of delivery during 1984-2003: can they be explained by pregnancy and delivery complications? BJOG. 2007;114(7):855–64.CrossRefPubMed O’Leary CM, De Klerk N, Keogh J, Pennell C, De Groot J, York L, Mulroy S, Stanley FJ. Trends in mode of delivery during 1984-2003: can they be explained by pregnancy and delivery complications? BJOG. 2007;114(7):855–64.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Mazzoni A, Althabe F, Liu NH, Bonotti AM, Gibbons L, Sánchez AJ, Belizán JM. Women’s preference for caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BJOG. 2011;118(4):391–9.CrossRefPubMed Mazzoni A, Althabe F, Liu NH, Bonotti AM, Gibbons L, Sánchez AJ, Belizán JM. Women’s preference for caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BJOG. 2011;118(4):391–9.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Grant D. Physician financial incentives and cesarean delivery: new conclusions from the healthcare cost and utilization project. J Health Econ. 2009;28(1):244–50.CrossRefPubMed Grant D. Physician financial incentives and cesarean delivery: new conclusions from the healthcare cost and utilization project. J Health Econ. 2009;28(1):244–50.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Epstein AJ, Nicholson S. The formation and evolution of physician treatment styles: an application to cesarean sections. J Health Econ. 2009;28(6):1126–40.CrossRefPubMed Epstein AJ, Nicholson S. The formation and evolution of physician treatment styles: an application to cesarean sections. J Health Econ. 2009;28(6):1126–40.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Lin HC, Xirasagar S. Institutional factors in cesarean delivery rates: policy and research implications. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103(1):128–36.CrossRefPubMed Lin HC, Xirasagar S. Institutional factors in cesarean delivery rates: policy and research implications. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103(1):128–36.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Milcent C, Rochut J. Hospital payment system and medical practice: the cesarean section in France. Rev Economique. 2009;60(2):489–506.CrossRef Milcent C, Rochut J. Hospital payment system and medical practice: the cesarean section in France. Rev Economique. 2009;60(2):489–506.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Guihard P, Blondel B. Trends in risk factors for caesarean sections in France between 1981 and 1995: lessons for reducing the rates in the future. BJOG. 2001;108(1):48–55.PubMed Guihard P, Blondel B. Trends in risk factors for caesarean sections in France between 1981 and 1995: lessons for reducing the rates in the future. BJOG. 2001;108(1):48–55.PubMed
25.
go back to reference Kottwitz A. Mode of birth and social inequalities in health: the effect of maternal education and access to hospital care on cesarean delivery. Health Place. 2014;27:9–21.CrossRefPubMed Kottwitz A. Mode of birth and social inequalities in health: the effect of maternal education and access to hospital care on cesarean delivery. Health Place. 2014;27:9–21.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Simoes E, Kunz S, Bosing-Schwenkglenks M, Schmahl FW. Occupation and risk of cesarean section: study based on the perinatal survey of Baden-Württemberg, Germany. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2005;271(4):338–42.CrossRefPubMed Simoes E, Kunz S, Bosing-Schwenkglenks M, Schmahl FW. Occupation and risk of cesarean section: study based on the perinatal survey of Baden-Württemberg, Germany. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2005;271(4):338–42.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Cesaroni G, Forastiere F, Perucci CA. Are cesarean deliveries more likely for poorly educated parents? A brief report from Italy. Birth. 2008;35(3):241–4.CrossRefPubMed Cesaroni G, Forastiere F, Perucci CA. Are cesarean deliveries more likely for poorly educated parents? A brief report from Italy. Birth. 2008;35(3):241–4.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Lee SI, Khang YH, Yun S, Jo MW. Rising rates, changing relationships: caesarean section and its correlates in South Korea, 1988–2000. BJOG. 2005;112(6):810–9.CrossRefPubMed Lee SI, Khang YH, Yun S, Jo MW. Rising rates, changing relationships: caesarean section and its correlates in South Korea, 1988–2000. BJOG. 2005;112(6):810–9.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Linton A, Peterson MR, Williams TV. Effects of maternal characteristics on cesarean delivery rates among US Department of defense healthcare beneficiaries, 1996-2002. Birth. 2004;31(1):3–11.CrossRefPubMed Linton A, Peterson MR, Williams TV. Effects of maternal characteristics on cesarean delivery rates among US Department of defense healthcare beneficiaries, 1996-2002. Birth. 2004;31(1):3–11.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Tollånes MC, Thompson JM, Daltveit AK, Irgens LM. Cesarean section and maternal education; secular trends in Norway, 1967–2004. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007;86(7):840–8.CrossRefPubMed Tollånes MC, Thompson JM, Daltveit AK, Irgens LM. Cesarean section and maternal education; secular trends in Norway, 1967–2004. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007;86(7):840–8.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Joseph KS, Dodds L, Allen AC, Jones DV, Monterrosa L, Robinson H, Liston RM, Young DC. Socioeconomic status and receipt of obstetric services in Canada. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(3):641–50.CrossRefPubMed Joseph KS, Dodds L, Allen AC, Jones DV, Monterrosa L, Robinson H, Liston RM, Young DC. Socioeconomic status and receipt of obstetric services in Canada. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(3):641–50.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Alexander GR, Kotelchuck M. Assessing the role and effectiveness of prenatal care: history, challenges, and directions for future research. Public Health Rep. 2001;116(4):306.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Alexander GR, Kotelchuck M. Assessing the role and effectiveness of prenatal care: history, challenges, and directions for future research. Public Health Rep. 2001;116(4):306.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
go back to reference Carroli G, Rooney C, Villar J. How effective is antenatal care in preventing maternal mortality and serious morbidity? An overview of the evidence. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2001;15(s1):1–42.CrossRefPubMed Carroli G, Rooney C, Villar J. How effective is antenatal care in preventing maternal mortality and serious morbidity? An overview of the evidence. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2001;15(s1):1–42.CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Yan J. The effects of prenatal care utilization on maternal health and health behaviors. Health Econ. 2017;26(8):1001–18.CrossRefPubMed Yan J. The effects of prenatal care utilization on maternal health and health behaviors. Health Econ. 2017;26(8):1001–18.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Blondel B, Marshall B. Poor antenatal care in 20 French districts: risk factors and pregnancy outcome. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52(8):501–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Blondel B, Marshall B. Poor antenatal care in 20 French districts: risk factors and pregnancy outcome. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52(8):501–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
go back to reference Krueger PM, Scholl TO. Adequacy of prenatal care and pregnancy outcome. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2000;100(8):485–92.PubMed Krueger PM, Scholl TO. Adequacy of prenatal care and pregnancy outcome. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2000;100(8):485–92.PubMed
38.
go back to reference Rous JJ, Jewell RT, Brown RW. The effect of prenatal care on birthweight: a full-information maximum likelihood approach. Health Econ. 2004;13(3):251–64.CrossRefPubMed Rous JJ, Jewell RT, Brown RW. The effect of prenatal care on birthweight: a full-information maximum likelihood approach. Health Econ. 2004;13(3):251–64.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Partridge S, Balayla J, Holcroft CA, Abenhaim HA. Inadequate prenatal care utilization and risks of infant mortality and poor birth outcome: a retrospective analysis of 28,729,765 US deliveries over 8 years. Am J Perinatol. 2012;29(10):787.CrossRefPubMed Partridge S, Balayla J, Holcroft CA, Abenhaim HA. Inadequate prenatal care utilization and risks of infant mortality and poor birth outcome: a retrospective analysis of 28,729,765 US deliveries over 8 years. Am J Perinatol. 2012;29(10):787.CrossRefPubMed
40.
go back to reference Raatikainen K, Heiskanen N, Heinonen S. Under-attending free antenatal care is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. BMC Public Health. 2007;7(1):1.CrossRef Raatikainen K, Heiskanen N, Heinonen S. Under-attending free antenatal care is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. BMC Public Health. 2007;7(1):1.CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Sieber S, Germann N, Barbir A, Ehlert U. Emotional well-being and predictors of birth-anxiety, self-efficacy, and psychosocial adaptation in healthy pregnant women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(10):1200–7.CrossRefPubMed Sieber S, Germann N, Barbir A, Ehlert U. Emotional well-being and predictors of birth-anxiety, self-efficacy, and psychosocial adaptation in healthy pregnant women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(10):1200–7.CrossRefPubMed
42.
go back to reference Clark AE, Milcent C. Public employment and political pressure: the case of French hospitals. J Health Econ. 2011;30(5):1103–12.CrossRefPubMed Clark AE, Milcent C. Public employment and political pressure: the case of French hospitals. J Health Econ. 2011;30(5):1103–12.CrossRefPubMed
43.
go back to reference Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Mater Med Rev. 2001;12(01):23–39.CrossRef Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Mater Med Rev. 2001;12(01):23–39.CrossRef
44.
go back to reference Coulm B, Ray C, Lelong N, Drewniak N, Zeitlin J, Blondel B. Obstetric interventions for low-risk pregnant women in France: do maternity unit characteristics make a difference? Birth. 2012;39(3):183–91.CrossRefPubMed Coulm B, Ray C, Lelong N, Drewniak N, Zeitlin J, Blondel B. Obstetric interventions for low-risk pregnant women in France: do maternity unit characteristics make a difference? Birth. 2012;39(3):183–91.CrossRefPubMed
45.
go back to reference Blondel B, Lelong N, Kermarrec M, Goffinet F, National Coordination Group of the National Perinatal Surveys. Trends in perinatal health in France from 1995 to 2010. Results from the French National Perinatal Surveys. J Gynécol Obstét Biol Reprod. 2012;41(4):e1–e15.CrossRef Blondel B, Lelong N, Kermarrec M, Goffinet F, National Coordination Group of the National Perinatal Surveys. Trends in perinatal health in France from 1995 to 2010. Results from the French National Perinatal Surveys. J Gynécol Obstét Biol Reprod. 2012;41(4):e1–e15.CrossRef
46.
go back to reference Hildingsson I. How much influence do women in Sweden have on caesarean section? A follow-up study of women's preferences in early pregnancy. Midwifery. 2008;24(1):46–54.CrossRefPubMed Hildingsson I. How much influence do women in Sweden have on caesarean section? A follow-up study of women's preferences in early pregnancy. Midwifery. 2008;24(1):46–54.CrossRefPubMed
48.
go back to reference Quinlivan JA, Petersen RW, Nichols CN. Patient preference the leading indication for elective caesarean section in public patients--results of a 2-year prospective audit in a teaching hospital. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;39(2):207–14.CrossRefPubMed Quinlivan JA, Petersen RW, Nichols CN. Patient preference the leading indication for elective caesarean section in public patients--results of a 2-year prospective audit in a teaching hospital. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;39(2):207–14.CrossRefPubMed
49.
go back to reference Beeckman K, Louckx F, Putman K. Determinants of the number of antenatal visits in a metropolitan region. BMC Public Health. 2010;10(1):1.CrossRef Beeckman K, Louckx F, Putman K. Determinants of the number of antenatal visits in a metropolitan region. BMC Public Health. 2010;10(1):1.CrossRef
50.
go back to reference Fairley L, Dundas R, Leyland AH. The influence of both individual and area based socioeconomic status on temporal trends in caesarean sections in Scotland 1980-2000. BMC Public Health. 2011;11(1):1.CrossRef Fairley L, Dundas R, Leyland AH. The influence of both individual and area based socioeconomic status on temporal trends in caesarean sections in Scotland 1980-2000. BMC Public Health. 2011;11(1):1.CrossRef
51.
go back to reference Chen MM, Hancock H. Women's knowledge of options for birth after caesarean section. Women Birth. 2012;25(3):e19–26.CrossRefPubMed Chen MM, Hancock H. Women's knowledge of options for birth after caesarean section. Women Birth. 2012;25(3):e19–26.CrossRefPubMed
52.
go back to reference Loke AY, Davies L, Li SF. Factors influencing the decision that women make on their mode of delivery: the health belief model. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15(1):1.CrossRef Loke AY, Davies L, Li SF. Factors influencing the decision that women make on their mode of delivery: the health belief model. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15(1):1.CrossRef
53.
go back to reference Räisänen S, Lehto SM, Nielsen HS, Gissler M, Kramer MR, Heinonen S. Fear of childbirth in nulliparous and multiparous women: a population-based analysis of all singleton births in Finland in 1997-2010. BJOG. 2014;121(8):965–70.CrossRefPubMed Räisänen S, Lehto SM, Nielsen HS, Gissler M, Kramer MR, Heinonen S. Fear of childbirth in nulliparous and multiparous women: a population-based analysis of all singleton births in Finland in 1997-2010. BJOG. 2014;121(8):965–70.CrossRefPubMed
54.
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.CrossRefPubMed 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.CrossRefPubMed
55.
go back to reference Wax JR, Cartin A, Pinette MG, Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean-the Maine experience. Birth. 2005;32(3):203–6.CrossRefPubMed Wax JR, Cartin A, Pinette MG, Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean-the Maine experience. Birth. 2005;32(3):203–6.CrossRefPubMed
56.
go back to reference Wax JR, Cartin A, Pinette MG, Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean: an evidence-based review. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2004;59(8):601–16.CrossRefPubMed Wax JR, Cartin A, Pinette MG, Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean: an evidence-based review. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2004;59(8):601–16.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Prenatal care and socioeconomic status: effect on cesarean delivery
Authors
Carine Milcent
Saad Zbiri
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Health Economics Review / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 2191-1991
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-018-0190-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Health Economics Review 1/2018 Go to the issue