PATTERN OF CESAREAN SECTION DELIVERIES AND ASSOCIATED INDICATIONS: A HOSPITAL-BASED STUDY
Main Article Content
Keywords
Cesarean section; indications; previous cesarean delivery; fetal distress; maternal outcomes; tertiary care hospital
Abstract
Cesarean section rates have escalated globally, raising concerns about appropriateness of indications and implications for maternal-neonatal health. Understanding institutional patterns is essential for optimizing surgical delivery practices.
Objective: To determine the pattern of cesarean section deliveries and identify associated indications among women at a tertiary care teaching hospital.
Methods: A hospital-based descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at Gian Sagar Hospital & Medical College, Patiala, from July 2021 to December 2021. Using consecutive sampling, 148 women who underwent cesarean delivery were enrolled. Data were collected through structured questionnaires and medical record review, capturing sociodemographic characteristics, obstetric parameters, cesarean section indications, and maternal-neonatal outcomes. Descriptive statistics were employed for data analysis using SPSS version 20.0.
Results: The majority of participants were aged 20-30 years (74.3%), with 41.9% being primigravida. Emergency cesarean sections predominated (75.7%). Previous cesarean section emerged as the leading indication (32.4%), followed by fetal distress (21.6%), cephalopelvic disproportion (12.2%), malpresentation (10.1%), and failure to progress in labor (8.1%). Most neonates (68.9%) had normal birth weight, and 89.2% achieved satisfactory APGAR scores (≥7). Maternal complications occurred in 17.6% of cases, predominantly postpartum hemorrhage (9.5%) and wound infection (5.4%). Hospital stay was ≤5 days for 66.2% of participants.
Conclusion: Previous cesarean section and fetal distress constituted the predominant indications, with emergency procedures outnumbering elective surgeries. Maternal-neonatal outcomes remained generally favorable. Implementing evidence-based protocols and promoting vaginal birth after cesarean section could optimize cesarean delivery rates while maintaining safety standards.
References
2. Betrán, A. P., Merialdi, M., Lauer, J. A., Bing-Shun, W., Thomas, J., Van Look, P., & Wagner, M. (2007). Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 21(2), 98-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3016.2007.00786.x
3. Betran, A. P., Torloni, M. R., Zhang, J. J., & Gülmezoglu, A. M. (2016). WHO statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 123(5), 667-670. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.13526
4. Boerma, T., Ronsmans, C., Melesse, D. Y., Barros, A. J., Barros, F. C., Juan, L., Moller, A. B., Say, L., Hosseinpoor, A. R., Yi, M., Neto, D. D. L. R., & Temmerman, M. (2018). Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. The Lancet, 392(10155), 1341-1348. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31928-7
5. Bowser, D., & Hill, K. (2010). Exploring evidence for disrespect and abuse in facility-based childbirth. USAID-TRAction Project, Harvard School of Public Health, 1-57.
6. Dodd, J. M., Crowther, C. A., Huertas, E., Guise, J. M., & Horey, D. (2008). Planned elective repeat caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2008(4), CD004224. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004224.pub3
7. Gibbons, L., Belizán, J. M., Lauer, J. A., Betrán, A. P., Merialdi, M., & Althabe, F. (2010). The global numbers and costs of additionally needed and unnecessary caesarean sections performed per year: overuse as a barrier to universal coverage. World Health Report, 30, 1-31.
8. Guise, J. M., Eden, K., Emeis, C., Denman, M. A., Marshall, N., Fu, R. R., Janik, R., Nygren, P., Walker, M., & McDonagh, M. (2010). Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment, (191), 1-397.
9. Hamilton, B. E., Martin, J. A., & Osterman, M. J. (2016). Births: Preliminary data for 2015. National Vital Statistics Reports, 65(3), 1-15.
10. Kolås, T., Saugstad, O. D., Daltveit, A. K., Nilsen, S. T., & Øian, P. (2006). Planned cesarean versus planned vaginal delivery at term: comparison of newborn infant outcomes. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 195(6), 1538-1543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.05.005
11. Liu, S., Liston, R. M., Joseph, K. S., Heaman, M., Sauve, R., & Kramer, M. S. (2007). Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 176(4), 455-460. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.060870
12. Lumbiganon, P., Laopaiboon, M., Gülmezoglu, A. M., Souza, J. P., Taneepanichskul, S., Ruyan, P., Attygalle, D. E., Shrestha, N., Mori, R., Nguyen, D. H., Hoang, T. B., Rathavy, T., Chuyun, K., Cheang, K., Festin, M., Udomprasertgul, V., Germar, M. J., Yanqiu, G., Roy, M., Carroli, G., Ba-Thike, K., Filatova, E., & Villar, J. (2010). Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-08. The Lancet, 375(9713), 490-499. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61870-5
13. MacDorman, M. F., Menacker, F., & Declercq, E. (2008). Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clinics in Perinatology, 35(2), 293-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clp.2008.03.007
14. Menacker, F., & Hamilton, B. E. (2010). Recent trends in cesarean delivery in the United States. NCHS Data Brief, (35), 1-8.
15. Mylonas, I., & Friese, K. (2015). Indications for and risks of elective cesarean section. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 112(29-30), 489-495. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2015.0489
16. Neuman, M., Alcock, G., Azad, K., Kuddus, A., Osrin, D., More, N. S., Nair, N., Tripathy, P., Sikorski, C., Saville, N., Houweling, T. A., Erni, L., Haghparast-Bidgoli, H., James, P., Fottrell, E., Colbourn, T., Manandhar, D. S., Costello, A., & Pulkki-Brännström, A. M. (2014). Prevalence and determinants of caesarean section in private and public health facilities in underserved South Asian communities: cross-sectional analysis of data from Bangladesh, India and Nepal. BMJ Open, 4(12), e005982. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005982
17. Osterman, M. J., & Martin, J. A. (2014). Trends in low-risk cesarean delivery in the United States, 1990-2013. National Vital Statistics Reports, 63(6), 1-16.
18. Robson, M. S. (2001). Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review, 12(1), 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0965539501000122
19. Silver, R. M., Landon, M. B., Rouse, D. J., Leveno, K. J., Spong, C. Y., Thom, E. A., Moawad, A. H., Caritis, S. N., Harper, M., Wapner, R. J., Sorokin, Y., Miodovnik, M., Carpenter, M., Peaceman, A. M., O'Sullivan, M. J., Sibai, B., Langer, O., Thorp, J. M., Ramin, S. M., & Mercer, B. M. (2006). Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 107(6), 1226-1232. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.84
20. 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, K. S., Giordano, D., Kublickas, M., & Acosta, A. (2006). Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. The Lancet, 367(9525), 1819-1829. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68704-7
21. World Health Organization. (2015). WHO statement on caesarean section rates. Reproductive Health Matters, 23(45), 149-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rhm.2015.07.007
22. Zhang, J., Landy, H. J., Branch, D. W., Burkman, R., Haberman, S., Gregory, K. D., Hatjis, C. G., Ramirez, M. M., Bailit, J. L., Gonzalez-Quintero, V. H., Hibbard, J. U., Hoffman, M. K., Kominiarek, M., Learman, L. A., Van Veldhuis, P., Troendle, J., & Reddy, U. M. (2010). Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 116(6), 1281-1287. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181fdef6e
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Dr Pooja Gehlot
Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Gian Sagar Hospital & Medical College, Patiala, Punjab, India.