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

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Sectio Ceasarea | Research article

Do you pay to go private?: a single centre comparison of induction of labour and caesarean section rates in private versus public patients

Authors: Simon Craven, Fionnuala Byrne, Rhona Mahony, Jennifer M. Walsh

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

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to compare rates of induction and subsequent caesarean delivery among nulliparous women with private versus publicly funded health care at a single institution. This is a retrospective cohort study using the electronic booking and delivery records of nulliparous women with singleton pregnancies who delivered between 2010 and 2015 in an Irish Tertiary Maternity Hospital (approx. 9000 deliveries per annum).

Methods

Data were extracted from the National Maternity Hospital (NMH), Dublin, Patient Administration System (PAS) on all nulliparous women who delivered a liveborn infant at ≥37 weeks gestation during the 6-year period. At NMH, all women in spontaneous labour are managed according to a standardised intrapartum protocol. Twenty-two thousand two hundred thirty-two women met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 2520 (12.8%) were private patients; the remainder (19,712; 87.2%) were public. Mode of and gestational age at delivery, rates of and indications for induction of labour, rates of pre-labour caesarean section, and maternal and neonatal outcomes were examined. Rates of labour intervention and subsequent maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between those with and without private health cover.

Results

Women attending privately were more than twice as likely to have a pre-labour caesarean section (12.7% vs. 6.5%, RR = 2.0, [CI 1.8–2.2])); this finding persisted following adjustment for differences in maternal age and body mass index (BMI) (adjusted relative risk 1.74, [CI 1.5–2.0]). Women with private cover were also more likely to have induction of labour and significantly less likely to labour spontaneously. Women who attended privately were significantly more likely to have an operative vaginal delivery, whether labour commenced spontaneously or was induced.

Conclusions

These findings demonstrate significant differences in rates of obstetric intervention between those with private and public health cover. This division is unlikely to be explained by differences in clinical risk factors as no significant difference in outcomes following spontaneous onset of labour were noted. Further research is required to determine the roots of the disparity between private and public decision-making. This should focus on the relative contributions of both mothers and maternity care professionals in clinical decision making, and the potential implications of these choices.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Eurostat. First population estimates EU population up to almost 512 million at 1 January 2017. Increase driven by migration. 110/2017, 10 July 2017. Available at ec.europa.eu/eurostat. Eurostat. First population estimates EU population up to almost 512 million at 1 January 2017. Increase driven by migration. 110/2017, 10 July 2017. Available at ec.​europa.​eu/​eurostat.
2.
go back to reference Department of Health (DoH). Creating a better future together: national maternity strategy 2016–2026, 2016. Department of Health (DoH). Creating a better future together: national maternity strategy 2016–2026, 2016.
3.
go back to reference Roberts CL, Nippita TA. International caesarean section rates: the rising tide. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(5):e241–2.CrossRef Roberts CL, Nippita TA. International caesarean section rates: the rising tide. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(5):e241–2.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Einarsdóttir K, Haggar F, Pereira G, Leonard H, de Klerk N, Stanley FJ, et al. Role of public and private funding in the rising caesarean section rate: a cohort study. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e002789. Einarsdóttir K, Haggar F, Pereira G, Leonard H, de Klerk N, Stanley FJ, et al. Role of public and private funding in the rising caesarean section rate: a cohort study. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e002789.
6.
go back to reference Sinnott SJ, Brick A, Layte R, Cunningham N, Turner MJ. National Variation in caesarean section rates: a cross sectional study in Ireland. PLoS One. 2016;11(6):e0156172.CrossRef Sinnott SJ, Brick A, Layte R, Cunningham N, Turner MJ. National Variation in caesarean section rates: a cross sectional study in Ireland. PLoS One. 2016;11(6):e0156172.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Nolan A. Chapter 10: health: funding, access and efficiency. In: O’Hagan J, O’Toole F, editors. The economy of Ireland, 13, ESRI Series ed. Dublin: Red Globe Press; 2017. p. 1–24. Nolan A. Chapter 10: health: funding, access and efficiency. In: O’Hagan J, O’Toole F, editors. The economy of Ireland, 13, ESRI Series ed. Dublin: Red Globe Press; 2017. p. 1–24.
9.
go back to reference Dahlen HG, Tracy S, Tracy M, Bisits A, Brown C, Thornton C. Rates of obstetric intervention and associated perinatal mortality and morbidity among low-risk women giving birth in private and public hospitals in NSW (2000-2008): a linked data population-based cohort study. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e004551.CrossRef Dahlen HG, Tracy S, Tracy M, Bisits A, Brown C, Thornton C. Rates of obstetric intervention and associated perinatal mortality and morbidity among low-risk women giving birth in private and public hospitals in NSW (2000-2008): a linked data population-based cohort study. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e004551.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference O’Driscoll K, Meagher D, Boylan PC. Active management of labour: the Dublin experience. 3rd ed. London: Mosby Year Book; 1993. O’Driscoll K, Meagher D, Boylan PC. Active management of labour: the Dublin experience. 3rd ed. London: Mosby Year Book; 1993.
11.
go back to reference Hehir MP, McHugh AF, Maguire PJ, Mahony R. Extreme macrosomia – obstetric outcomes and complications in birthweights >5000 g. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2015;55:42–6.CrossRef Hehir MP, McHugh AF, Maguire PJ, Mahony R. Extreme macrosomia – obstetric outcomes and complications in birthweights >5000 g. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2015;55:42–6.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol. 1964;24:266–8.PubMed Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol. 1964;24:266–8.PubMed
15.
go back to reference Adams N, Tudehope D, Gibbons KS, Flenady V. Perinatal mortality disparities between public care and private obstetrician-led care: a propensity score analysis. BJOG. 2018;125:149–58.CrossRef Adams N, Tudehope D, Gibbons KS, Flenady V. Perinatal mortality disparities between public care and private obstetrician-led care: a propensity score analysis. BJOG. 2018;125:149–58.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Lutomski JE, Murphy M, Devane D, Meaney S, Greene RA. Private health care coverage and increased risk of obstetric intervention. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:13.CrossRef Lutomski JE, Murphy M, Devane D, Meaney S, Greene RA. Private health care coverage and increased risk of obstetric intervention. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:13.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Tracy SK, Welsh A, Hall B, Hartz D, Lainchbury A, Bisits A, et al. Caseload midwifery compared to standard or private obstetric care for first time mothers in a public teaching hospital in Australia: a cross sectional study of cost and birth outcomes. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:46.CrossRef Tracy SK, Welsh A, Hall B, Hartz D, Lainchbury A, Bisits A, et al. Caseload midwifery compared to standard or private obstetric care for first time mothers in a public teaching hospital in Australia: a cross sectional study of cost and birth outcomes. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:46.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Jackson S, Fleege L, Fridman M, Gregory K, Zelop C, Olsen J. Morbidity following primary cesarean delivery in the Danish National Birth Cohort. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(2):139.e1–5.CrossRef Jackson S, Fleege L, Fridman M, Gregory K, Zelop C, Olsen J. Morbidity following primary cesarean delivery in the Danish National Birth Cohort. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(2):139.e1–5.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Betrán AP, Temmerman M, Kingdon C, Mohidden A, Opiyo N, Torloni MR, Zhang J, Musana O, Wanyonyi SZ, Gulmezoglu AM, Downe S. Interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections in healthy women and babies. Lancet. 2018;392:1358–68.CrossRef Betrán AP, Temmerman M, Kingdon C, Mohidden A, Opiyo N, Torloni MR, Zhang J, Musana O, Wanyonyi SZ, Gulmezoglu AM, Downe S. Interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections in healthy women and babies. Lancet. 2018;392:1358–68.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Bowman ZS, Eller AG, Bardsley TR, Greene T, Varner MW, Silver RM. Risk factors for placenta accreta: a large prospective cohort. Am J Perinatol. 2014;31(9):799–804.PubMed Bowman ZS, Eller AG, Bardsley TR, Greene T, Varner MW, Silver RM. Risk factors for placenta accreta: a large prospective cohort. Am J Perinatol. 2014;31(9):799–804.PubMed
22.
go back to reference Upson K, Silver RM, Greene R, Lutomski J, Holt VL. Placenta accreta and maternal morbidity in the Republic of Ireland, 2005-2010. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(1):24–9.CrossRef Upson K, Silver RM, Greene R, Lutomski J, Holt VL. Placenta accreta and maternal morbidity in the Republic of Ireland, 2005-2010. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(1):24–9.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Kamara M, Henderson J, Doherty D, Dickinson J, Pennell C. The risk of placenta accreta following primary elective caesarean delivery: a case–control study. BJOG. 2013;120:879–86.CrossRef Kamara M, Henderson J, Doherty D, Dickinson J, Pennell C. The risk of placenta accreta following primary elective caesarean delivery: a case–control study. BJOG. 2013;120:879–86.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise JM, Rouse DJ. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(3):179–93. Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise JM, Rouse DJ. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(3):179–93.
25.
go back to reference Kingdon C, Neilson J, Singleton V, Gyte G, Hart A, Gabbay M, Lavender T. Choice and birth method: mixed-method study of caesarean delivery for maternal request. BJOG. 2009;116(7):886–95.CrossRef Kingdon C, Neilson J, Singleton V, Gyte G, Hart A, Gabbay M, Lavender T. Choice and birth method: mixed-method study of caesarean delivery for maternal request. BJOG. 2009;116(7):886–95.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Soltani H, Sandall J. Organisation of maternity care and choices of mode of birth: a worldwide view. Midwifery. 2012;28:146–9.CrossRef Soltani H, Sandall J. Organisation of maternity care and choices of mode of birth: a worldwide view. Midwifery. 2012;28:146–9.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Catling-Paull C, Johnston R, Ryan C, Foureur MJ, Homer CS. Non-clinical interventions that increase the uptake and success of vaginal birth after caesarean section: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2011;67(8):1662–76.CrossRef Catling-Paull C, Johnston R, Ryan C, Foureur MJ, Homer CS. Non-clinical interventions that increase the uptake and success of vaginal birth after caesarean section: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2011;67(8):1662–76.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Movsas TZ, Wells E, Mongoven A, Grigorescu V. Does medical insurance type (private vs public) influence the physician’s decision to perform caesarean delivery? J Med Ethics. 2012;38(8):470–3.CrossRef Movsas TZ, Wells E, Mongoven A, Grigorescu V. Does medical insurance type (private vs public) influence the physician’s decision to perform caesarean delivery? J Med Ethics. 2012;38(8):470–3.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion Number 761. January 2019. Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:73–7. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion Number 761. January 2019. Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:73–7.
31.
go back to reference World Health Organization. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015. (WHO/RHR/15.02). World Health Organization. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015. (WHO/RHR/15.02).
32.
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.CrossRef MacDorman MF, Menacker F, Declercq E. Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clin Perinatol. 2008;35(2):293–307.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health. Caesarean section. Clinical guideline. London: RCOG Press; 2004. National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health. Caesarean section. Clinical guideline. London: RCOG Press; 2004.
Metadata
Title
Do you pay to go private?: a single centre comparison of induction of labour and caesarean section rates in private versus public patients
Authors
Simon Craven
Fionnuala Byrne
Rhona Mahony
Jennifer M. Walsh
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/s12884-020-03443-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2020 Go to the issue