PDF herunterladen
CC BY 4.0 · Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2022; 44(07): 640-645
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748976
Original Article
Obstetrics

Factors Associated with the Chance of Carrying out a Primary Cesarean in a University Hospital

Fatores associados à chance de realização de cesariana primária em hospital universitário
Maria Celeste Osório Wender 
1   Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences: Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
2   Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine (FAMED), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
5   Service of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
,
Rafaela Girardi Duarte 
3   Faculty of Medicine (FAMED), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
,
Gabriel Cardozo Muller 
4   Postgraduate Program in Epidemiology, Department of Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine (FAMED), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
,
Rosaura Rolim Cavalheiro 
5   Service of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
,
Yanick Adolfo Leal Correia Silva 
1   Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences: Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
,
Cristiane Carboni 
1   Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences: Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
,
Edimárlei Gonsales Valério 
1   Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences: Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
2   Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine (FAMED), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
5   Service of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective The present study seeks to identify the associated factors that increased primary cesarean delivery rates.

Methods This was a cross-sectional study that evaluated the number of primary cesarean sections performed in the years 2006 and 2018 at the Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA, in the Portuguese acronym), through the collection of data from the medical records of the patients.

Results Advanced maternal age, twin pregnancy, and higher body mass index (BMI) became more frequent in 2018 in comparison with 2006. To mitigate the impact of confounding in comparisons among groups, we made an adjustment by propensity scores and detected significant differences when comparing both age groups on twin pregnancy rates, gestational diabetes mellitus, and thyroid disease.

Conclusion Data from the present study can be used to prevent and improve the management of morbidities, impacting on better outcomes in obstetrical practice.

Resumo

Objetivo O presente estudo busca identificar os fatores associados que aumentam as taxas de partos cesáreos primários.

Métodos Estudo transversal, avaliando o número de cesáreas primárias realizadas nos anos de 2006 e 2018 no Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), por meio da coleta de dados nos prontuários das pacientes.

Resultados Idade materna avançada, gravidez gemelar e índice de massa corporal (IMC) mais elevado tornaram-se mais frequentes em 2018. Para mitigar o impacto dos fatores de confusão nas comparações entre os grupos, fizemos um ajuste por escores de propensão e detectamos diferenças significativas nas taxas de gravidez gemelar, diabetes mellitus gestacional e doença da tireoide.

Conclusão Os dados do presente estudo podem ser utilizados para prevenir e melhorar o manejo de morbidades, impactando em melhores resultados na prática obstétrica.

Keywords

cesarean section - indication - associated factors

Palavras-chave

cesariana - indicação - fatores associados

Contributors

All authors participated in the concept and design of the present study, as well as in the analysis and interpretation of data, draft, or revision of the manuscript. All authors have approved the manuscript as submitted. All authors are responsible for the reported research.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 15. November 2021

Angenommen: 24. März 2022

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
06. Juni 2022

© 2022. Federação Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • References

  • 1 Mahadik K. Rising cesarean rates: are primary sections overused?. J Obstet Gynaecol India 2019; 69 (06) 483-489
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hodnett ED, Chalmers B, Kung R, Willan A. et al; Term Breech Trial 3-Month Follow-up Collaborative Group. Outcomes at 3 months after planned cesarean vs planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term: the international randomized Term Breech Trial. JAMA 2002; 287 (14) 1822-1831
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, Leveno KJ, Spong CY, Thom EA. et al; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107 (06) 1226-1232
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Kingdon C, Downe S, Betran AP. Non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section targeted at organisations, facilities and systems: Systematic review of qualitative studies. PLoS One 2018; 13 (09) e0203274
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Clark SL, Belfort MA, Dildy GA, Herbst MA, Meyers JA, Hankins GD. Maternal death in the 21st century: causes, prevention, and relationship to cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199 (01) 36.e1-36.e5 , discussion 91–92, e7–e11.
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Queenan JT, Spong CY, Lockwood CJ. Protocols for high-risk pregnancies: an evidence-based approach. 7th ed. Hoboken:: John Wiley & Sons;; 2021
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Lean SC, Derricott H, Jones RL, Heazell AEP. Advanced maternal age and adverse pregnancy outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2017; 12 (10) e0186287
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Bayrampour H, Heaman M, Duncan KA, Tough S. Comparison of perception of pregnancy risk of nulliparous women of advanced maternal age and younger age. J Midwifery Womens Health 2012; 57 (05) 445-453
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Chiefari E, Arcidiacono B, Foti D, Brunetti A. Gestational diabetes mellitus: an updated overview. J Endocrinol Invest 2017; 40 (09) 899-909
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Wang J, Chen K, Jin X, Li X, An P, Yang N. et al. Prognostic factors for cesarean section outcome of pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes 2019; 12: 913-929
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Gorgal R, Gonçalves E, Barros M, Namora G, Magalhães A, Rodrigues T. et al. Gestational diabetes mellitus: a risk factor for non-elective cesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2012; 38 (01) 154-159
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Paulo MS, Abdo NM, Bettencourt-Silva R, Al-Rifai RH. Gestational diabetes mellitus in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence studies. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2021; 12: 691033
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Sullivan-Pyke CS, Senapati S, Mainigi MA, Barnhart KT. In Vitro fertilization and adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes. Semin Perinatol 2017; 41 (06) 345-353
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Foggin H, Hutcheon JA, Liauw J. Making sense of harms and benefits: Assessing the numeric presentation of risk information in ACOG obstetrical clinical practice guidelines. Patient Educ Couns 2021; S0738-3991 (21)00576-0
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 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. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2001; 56 (03) 132-134
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Macharey G, Gissler M, Rahkonen L, Ulander V-M, Väisänen-Tommiska M, Nuutila M. et al. Breech presentation at term and associated obstetric risks factors-a nationwide population based cohort study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2017; 295 (04) 833-838
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Belizán JM, Althabe F, Cafferata ML. Health consequences of the increasing caesarean section rates. Epidemiology 2007; 18 (04) 485-486
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Villar J, Carroli G, Zavaleta N, Donner A, Wojdyla D, Faundes A. et al; World Health Organization 2005 Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health Research Group. Maternal and neonatal individual risks and benefits associated with caesarean delivery: multicentre prospective study. BMJ 2007; 335 (7628): 1025
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar