Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research article

Risk factors associated with adverse maternal outcomes following intrapartum cesarean birth: a secondary analysis of the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health, 2004–2008

Authors: Margo S. Harrison, Ana Pilar Betrán, Krithika Suresh, Joshua P. Vogel, Robert L. Goldenberg, A. Metin Gülmezoglu

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To identify risk factors associated with a composite adverse maternal outcomes in women undergoing intrapartum cesarean birth.

Methods

We used the facility-based, multi-country, cross-sectional WHO Global Survey of Maternal and Perinatal Health (2004–2008) to examine associations between woman-, labor/obstetric-, and facility-level characteristics and a composite adverse maternal outcome of postpartum morbidity and mortality. This analysis was performed among women who underwent intrapartum cesarean birth during the course of labor.

Results

We analyzed outcomes of 29,516 women from low- and middle-income countries who underwent intrapartum cesarean birth between the gestational ages of 24 and 43 weeks, 3.5% (1040) of whom experienced the composite adverse maternal outcome. In adjusted analyses, factors associated with a decreased risk of the adverse maternal outcome associated with intrapartum cesarean birth included having four or more antenatal visits (AOR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.43–0.84; p = 0.003), delivering in a medium- or high-human development index country (vs. low-human development index country: AOR 0.07; 95% CI: 0.01–0.85 and AOR 0.02; 95% CI: 0.001–0.39, respectively; p = 0.03), and malpresentation (vs. cephalic: breech AOR 0.52; CI: 0.31–0.87; p = 0.04). Women who were medically high risk (vs. not medically high risk: AOR 1.81; CI: 1.30–2.51, p < 0.0004), had less education (0–6 years) (vs. 13+ years; AOR 1.64; CI: 1.03–2.63; p = 0.01), were obstetrically high risk (vs. not high risk; AOR 3.67; CI: 2.58–5.23; p < 0.0001), or had a maternal or obstetric indication (vs. elective: AOR 4.74; CI: 2.36–9.50; p < 0.0001) had increased odds of the adverse outcome.

Conclusion

We found reduced adverse maternal outcomes of intrapartum cesarean birth in women with ≥ 4 antenatal visits, those who delivered in a medium or high human development index country, and those with malpresenting fetuses. Maternal adverse outcomes associated with intrapartum cesarean birth were medically and obstetrically high risk women, those with less education, and those with a maternal or obstetric indication for intrapartum cesarean birth.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Betran AP, et al. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148343.CrossRef Betran AP, et al. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148343.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Betran AP, et al. Interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections in healthy women and babies. Lancet. 2018;392(10155):1358–68.CrossRef Betran AP, et al. Interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections in healthy women and babies. Lancet. 2018;392(10155):1358–68.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Betran AP, et al. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG. 2016;123(5):667–70.CrossRef Betran AP, et al. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG. 2016;123(5):667–70.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Mariani GL, Vain NE. The rising incidence and impact of non-medically indicated pre-labour cesarean section in Latin America. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;24(1):11–7.CrossRef Mariani GL, Vain NE. The rising incidence and impact of non-medically indicated pre-labour cesarean section in Latin America. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;24(1):11–7.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Sobhy S, 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.CrossRef Sobhy S, 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.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Ologunde R, et al. Assessment of cesarean delivery availability in 26 low-and middle-income countries: a cross-sectional study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(5):504.e1–504.e12.CrossRef Ologunde R, et al. Assessment of cesarean delivery availability in 26 low-and middle-income countries: a cross-sectional study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(5):504.e1–504.e12.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Gibson K, Bailit JL. Cesarean delivery as a marker for obstetric quality. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2015;58(2):211–6.CrossRef Gibson K, Bailit JL. Cesarean delivery as a marker for obstetric quality. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2015;58(2):211–6.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Shah A, et al. Methodological considerations in implementing the WHO global survey for monitoring maternal and perinatal health. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86(2):126–31.CrossRef Shah A, et al. Methodological considerations in implementing the WHO global survey for monitoring maternal and perinatal health. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86(2):126–31.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Lumbiganon P, et al. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007–08. Lancet. 2010;375(9713):490–9.CrossRef Lumbiganon P, et al. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007–08. Lancet. 2010;375(9713):490–9.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Shah A, et al. Cesarean delivery outcomes from the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Africa. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;107(3):191–7.CrossRef Shah A, et al. Cesarean delivery outcomes from the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Africa. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;107(3):191–7.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Villar J, 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.CrossRef Villar J, 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.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Vogel JP, et al. Use of the Robson classification to assess caesarean section trends in 21 countries: a secondary analysis of two WHO multicountry surveys. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(5):e260–70.CrossRef Vogel JP, et al. Use of the Robson classification to assess caesarean section trends in 21 countries: a secondary analysis of two WHO multicountry surveys. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(5):e260–70.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Maswime S, Buchmann E. A systematic review of maternal near miss and mortality due to postpartum hemorrhage. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2017;137(1):1–7.CrossRef Maswime S, Buchmann E. A systematic review of maternal near miss and mortality due to postpartum hemorrhage. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2017;137(1):1–7.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Matern Med Rev. 2001;12(1):23–39.CrossRef Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Matern Med Rev. 2001;12(1):23–39.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Nimi T, et al. Prenatal care and pregnancy outcomes: a cross-sectional study in Luanda, Angola. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;135(S1):S72–8.CrossRef Nimi T, et al. Prenatal care and pregnancy outcomes: a cross-sectional study in Luanda, Angola. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;135(S1):S72–8.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Wilson RD, et al. Guidelines for antenatal and preoperative care in cesarean delivery: enhanced recovery after surgery society recommendations (part 1). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(6):523.e1–523.e15.CrossRef Wilson RD, et al. Guidelines for antenatal and preoperative care in cesarean delivery: enhanced recovery after surgery society recommendations (part 1). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(6):523.e1–523.e15.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference World Health Organization. WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience; 2016. p. 1–172. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience; 2016. p. 1–172.
21.
go back to reference Vogel JP, et al. Antenatal care packages with reduced visits and perinatal mortality: a secondary analysis of the WHO antenatal care trial. Reprod Health. 2013;10(1):19.CrossRef Vogel JP, et al. Antenatal care packages with reduced visits and perinatal mortality: a secondary analysis of the WHO antenatal care trial. Reprod Health. 2013;10(1):19.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Yeoh PL, Hornetz K, Dahlui M. Antenatal care utilisation and content between low-risk and high-risk pregnant women. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0152167.CrossRef Yeoh PL, Hornetz K, Dahlui M. Antenatal care utilisation and content between low-risk and high-risk pregnant women. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0152167.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Malouf R, Redshaw M. Specialist antenatal clinics for women at high risk of preterm birth: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative research. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017;17(1):51.CrossRef Malouf R, Redshaw M. Specialist antenatal clinics for women at high risk of preterm birth: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative research. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017;17(1):51.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Humphrey MD, Foxcroft KF, Callaway LK. Obstetric risk score - revalidated for triaging high-risk pregnancies in rural areas. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;57(1):63–7.CrossRef Humphrey MD, Foxcroft KF, Callaway LK. Obstetric risk score - revalidated for triaging high-risk pregnancies in rural areas. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;57(1):63–7.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Say L, et al. Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2(6):e323–33.CrossRef Say L, et al. Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2(6):e323–33.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Abalos E, et al. Pre-eclampsia, eclampsia and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes: a secondary analysis of the World Health Organization multicountry survey on maternal and newborn health. BJOG. 2014;121(Suppl 1):14–24.CrossRef Abalos E, et al. Pre-eclampsia, eclampsia and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes: a secondary analysis of the World Health Organization multicountry survey on maternal and newborn health. BJOG. 2014;121(Suppl 1):14–24.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference World Health Organization. WHO recommendations for prevention and treatment of pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Chicago: World Health Organization; 2011. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations for prevention and treatment of pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Chicago: World Health Organization; 2011.
28.
go back to reference American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Gestational hypertension and preeclampsia: ACOG Practice Bulletin, number 222. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135(6):e237–e260. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Gestational hypertension and preeclampsia: ACOG Practice Bulletin, number 222. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135(6):e237–e260.
29.
go back to reference World Health Organization. WHO recommendations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience; 2018. p. 1–210. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience; 2018. p. 1–210.
31.
go back to reference Suwal A, Shrivastava VR, Giri A. Maternal and fetal outcome in elective versus emergency cesarean section. JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc. 2013;52(192):563–6. Suwal A, Shrivastava VR, Giri A. Maternal and fetal outcome in elective versus emergency cesarean section. JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc. 2013;52(192):563–6.
32.
go back to reference Benzouina S, et al. Fetal outcome in emergency versus elective cesarean sections at Souissi Maternity Hospital, Rabat, Morocco. Pan Afr Med J. 2016;23:197. Benzouina S, et al. Fetal outcome in emergency versus elective cesarean sections at Souissi Maternity Hospital, Rabat, Morocco. Pan Afr Med J. 2016;23:197.
33.
go back to reference Betran AP. Reducing unnecessary cesarean section: a generic formative phase protocol for implementation preparation: World Health Organization; 2019. p. 1–148. Betran AP. Reducing unnecessary cesarean section: a generic formative phase protocol for implementation preparation: World Health Organization; 2019. p. 1–148.
34.
go back to reference Betran AP, et al. What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies. Reprod Health. 2015;12:57. Betran AP, et al. What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies. Reprod Health. 2015;12:57.
35.
go back to reference ACOG, Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. 2016. ACOG, Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. 2016.
36.
go back to reference Smith H, Peterson N, Lagrew D, Main E. Toolkit to support vaginal birth and reduce primary cesareans: a quality improvement toolkit. Stanford: California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative; 2016. Smith H, Peterson N, Lagrew D, Main E. Toolkit to support vaginal birth and reduce primary cesareans: a quality improvement toolkit. Stanford: California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative; 2016.
Metadata
Title
Risk factors associated with adverse maternal outcomes following intrapartum cesarean birth: a secondary analysis of the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health, 2004–2008
Authors
Margo S. Harrison
Ana Pilar Betrán
Krithika Suresh
Joshua P. Vogel
Robert L. Goldenberg
A. Metin Gülmezoglu
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-020-03390-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2020 Go to the issue