Estimating the Financial Impact of Reducing Primary Cesareans.

INTRODUCTION: Preventing a primary cesarean birth in nulliparous women with term, singleton, vertex pregnancies (NTSV) is recognized as an important strategy to reduce maternal morbidities and risks to the newborn. Multiple professional organizations are supporting approaches to safely reduce NTSV cesarean rates, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine; and the Association of Women's Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses. The American College of Nurse-Midwives (ACNM) is leading one such effort as part of its Healthy Birth Initiative: the Reducing Primary Cesareans (RPC) Learning Collaborative. The objective of this study is to estimate the cost savings of a decrease in NTSV cesareans at one hospital participating in the RPC Learning Collaborative. METHODS: All women giving birth at Baystate Medical Center from October 1, 2016, to March 31, 2017, and their newborns were identified by Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group (N = 1747). Total hospital costs were calculated using a resource consumption profile for each of 6 groups: women who had vaginal birth, primary cesarean, and repeat cesarean and their linked newborns. A model was developed to estimate cost differences for the first and second births and overall cost savings. RESULTS: For the NTSV birth, total costs for primary cesarean and newborn care were $5989 higher compared with vaginal birth and newborn care. For the subsequent birth, repeat cesareans and newborn care were $4250 higher compared with vaginal birth. In 2016, 69 primary cesareans were prevented, for an actual cost savings of $413,241. Projecting the prevention of 66 subsequent repeat cesareans would result in additional savings of $280,500, for a total savings of $693,741. Apgar score at 5 minutes and length of stay remained unchanged. DISCUSSION: Participation in ACNM's RPC Learning Collaborative led to significant savings in hospital costs during the first year without affecting quality metrics. This cost comparison model could be replicated by other hospitals involved in cesarean reduction endeavors.

Reducing caesarean delivery: An economic evaluation of routine induction of labour at 39 weeks in low-risk nulliparous women.

BACKGROUND: Clinical interventions known to reduce the risk of caesarean delivery include routine induction of labour at 39 weeks, caseload midwifery and chart audit, but they have not been compared for cost-effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: To assesses the cost-effectiveness of three different interventions known to reduce caesarean delivery rates compared to standard care; and conduct a budget impact analysis. METHODS: A Markov microsimulation model was constructed to compare the costs and outcomes produced by the different interventions. Costs included all costs to the health system, and outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. A budget impact analysis was undertaken using this model to quantify the costs (in Australian dollars) over three years for government health system funders. RESULTS: All interventions, plus standard care, produced similar health outcomes (mean of 1.84 QALYs gained over 105 weeks). Caseload midwifery was the lowest cost option at $15 587 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15 269, 15 905), followed by routine induction of labour ($16 257, 95% CI 15 989, 16 536), and chart audit ($16 325, 95% CI 15 979, 16 671). All produced lower costs on average than standard care ($16 905, 95% CI 16 551, 17 259). Caseload midwifery would produce the greatest savings of $172.6 million over three years if implemented for all low-risk nulliparous women in Australia. CONCLUSIONS: Caseload midwifery presents the best value for reducing caesarean delivery rates of the options considered. Routine induction of labour at 39 weeks and chart audit would also reduce costs compared to standard care.

Challenges to achieving appropriate and equitable access to Caesarean section: ethnographic insights from rural Pakistan.

Access to Caesarean section (C-section) remains inadequate for some groups of women while others have worryingly high rates. Understanding differential receipt demands exploration of the socio-cultural, and political economic, characteristics of the health systems that produce them. This extensive institutional ethnography investigated under- and over-receipt of C-section in two rural districts in Pakistan - Jhelum and Layyah. Data were collected between November and July 2013 using semi-structured interviews from a randomly selected sample of 11 physicians, 38 community midwives, 18 Lady Health Visitors and nurses and 15 Traditional Birth Attendants. In addition, 78 mothers, 35 husbands and 23 older women were interviewed. The understandings of birth by C-section held by women and their family members were heavily shaped by gendered constructions of womanhood, patient-provider power differentials and financial constraints. They considered C-section an expensive and risky procedure, which often lacked medical justification, and was instead driven by profit motive. Physicians saw C-section as symbolizing obstetric skill and status and a source of legitimate income. Physician views and practices were also shaped by the wider health care system characterized by private practice, competition between providers and a lack of regulation and supervision. These multi-layered factors have resulted in both unnecessary intervention, and missed opportunities for appropriate C-sections. The data indicate a need for synergistic action at patient, provider and system levels. Recommendations include: improving physician communication with patients and family so that the need for C-section is better understood as a life-saving procedure, challenging negative attitudes and promoting informed decision-making by mothers and their families, holding physicians accountable for their practice and introducing price caps and regulations to limit financial incentives associated with C-sections. The current push for privatization of health care in low-income countries also needs scrutiny given its potential to encourage unnecessary intervention.

Normal delivery and cesarean section: cost per brazilian regions, 2015.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the number of funds made by the Brazilian National Health System to normal delivery and cesarean procedures, according to the Brazilian regions in 2015, and estimate the cost cutting if the recommendation concerning the prevalence of cesarean deliveries by the World Health Organization (10 to 15%) were respected. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from the Hospital Information System of the Brazilian National Health System. The variables considered were the type of delivery (cesarean section and normal), geographic region of admission, length of stay and amount paid for admission in 2015. RESULTS: In the year 2015, there were 984,307 admissions to perform labor in the five Brazilian regions, of which 36.2% were cesarean section. The Northeast and Southeast regions were the two regions that had the highest number of normal deliveries and cesarean sections. The overall average hospital stay for delivery was 3.2 days. About R$ 650 million (US$ 208,5 million) were paid, 45% of the total in cesarean deliveries. If the maximum prevalence proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) were considered, there would be a potential reduction in spending in the order of R$ 57.7 million (US$ 18,5 million). CONCLUSIONS: Cesarean sections are above the parameter recommended by the WHO in all Brazilian regions. The Northeast and Southeast had the highest total number of normal and cesarean deliveries and thus the greatest potential reduction in estimated costs (69.6% of all considered reduction).

Normal delivery and cesarean section: cost per brazilian regions, 2015

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: To describe the number of funds made by the Brazilian National Health System to normal delivery and cesarean procedures, according to the Brazilian regions in 2015, and estimate the cost cutting if the recommendation concerning the prevalence of cesarean deliveries by the World Health Organization (10 to 15%) were respected. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from the Hospital Information System of the Brazilian National Health System. The variables considered were the type of delivery (cesarean section and normal), geographic region of admission, length of stay and amount paid for admission in 2015. RESULTS: In the year 2015, there were 984,307 admissions to perform labor in the five Brazilian regions, of which 36.2% were cesarean section. The Northeast and Southeast regions were the two regions that had the highest number of normal deliveries and cesarean sections. The overall average hospital stay for delivery was 3.2 days. About R$ 650 million (US$ 208,5 million) were paid, 45% of the total in cesarean deliveries. If the maximum prevalence proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) were considered, there would be a potential reduction in spending in the order of R$ 57.7 million (US$ 18,5 million). CONCLUSIONS: Cesarean sections are above the parameter recommended by the WHO in all Brazilian regions. The Northeast and Southeast had the highest total number of normal and cesarean deliveries and thus the greatest potential reduction in estimated costs (69.6% of all considered reduction).

RESUMO OBJETIVO: Descrever o montante de recursos pagos pelo Sistema Único de Saúde por procedimentos de parto normal e cesárea, segundo as regiões brasileiras, em 2015, estimando a redução de gastos caso a recomendação da Organização Mundial da Saúde quanto à prevalência de partos cesáreas (10% a 15%) fosse seguida. MÉTODOS: Emprego de dados secundários presentes no Sistema de Informações Hospitalares do Sistema Único de Saúde. As variáveis consideradas foram: tipo de parto (cesárea e normal), região geográfica de ocorrência, tempo de permanência hospitalar e valor da Autorização de Internação Hospitalar paga, em 2015. RESULTADOS: No ano de 2015 ocorreram 984.307 internações para realização de parto nas cinco regiões brasileiras, sendo 36,2% de partos por cesárea. Nordeste e Sudeste foram as duas regiões que se destacaram, com os maiores números de partos normais e cesáreas. A média geral em dias de internação para parto nas cinco regiões foi de 3,2 dias. Foram pagos aproximadamente R$ 650 milhões (US$ 208,5 milhões), 45% desse total em partos cesáreas. Caso o parâmetro máximo proposto pela Organização Mundial da Saúde fosse considerado, haveria uma redução potencial de gastos na ordem de R$ 57,7 milhões (US$ 18,5 milhões). CONCLUSÕES: Os partos cesáreas estão acima do parâmetro recomendado em todas as regiões brasileiras. As regiões Nordeste e Sudeste se destacaram por representar potencialmente a maior redução na estimativa de gastos (69,6% de toda a redução considerada).

[Cost-effectiveness analysis of spontaneous vaginal delivery and elective cesarean for normal risk pregnant women in the Brazilian Unified National Health System]. / Análise de custo-efetividade do parto vaginal espontâneo e da cesariana eletiva para gestantes de risco habitual no Sistema Único de Saúde.

The purpose of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of spontaneous vaginal delivery and elective cesarean (with no clinical indication) for normal risk pregnant women, from the perspective of the Brazilian Unified National Health System. An analytical decision model was developed and included the choice of delivery mode and clinical consequences for mothers and newborns, from admission for delivery to hospital discharge. The reference population consisted of normal risk pregnant women with singleton, at-term gestations in cephalic position, subdivided into primiparas and multiparas with prior uterine scar. Cost data were obtained from three public maternity hospitals (two in Rio de Janeiro, one in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais State, Brazil). Direct costs were identified with human resources, hospital inputs, and capital and administrative costs. Effectiveness measures were identified, based on the scientific literature. The study showed that vaginal delivery was more efficient for primiparas, at lower cost (BRL 1,709.58; USD 518.05) than cesarean (BRL 2,245.86; USD 680.56) and greater effectiveness for three of the four target outcomes. For multiparas with prior uterine scar, repeat cesarean was cost-effective for the outcomes averted maternal morbidity, averted uterine rupture, averted neonatal ICU, and averted neonatal death, but the result was not supported by probabilistic sensitivity analysis. For maternal death as the outcome, there was no difference in effectiveness, and labor showed the lowest cost. This study can contribute to the management of perinatal care, expanding measures that encourage adequate delivery according to the population's characteristics.

O objetivo deste estudo foi realizar uma análise de custo-efetividade do parto vaginal espontâneo comparado à cesariana eletiva, sem indicação clínica, para gestantes de risco habitual, sob a perspectiva do Sistema Único de Saúde. Um modelo de decisão analítico foi desenvolvido e incluiu a escolha do tipo de parto e consequências clínicas para mãe e recém-nascido, da internação para o parto até a alta hospitalar. A população de referência foi gestantes de risco habitual, feto único, cefálico, a termo, subdivididas em primíparas e multíparas com uma cicatriz uterina prévia. Os dados de custos foram obtidos de três maternidades públicas, duas situadas no Rio de Janeiro e uma em Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brasil. Foram identificados custos diretos com recursos humanos, insumos hospitalares, custos de capital e administrativos. As medidas de efetividade foram identificadas com base na literatura científica. O estudo evidenciou que o parto vaginal é mais eficiente para gestantes primíparas, com menor custo (R$ 1.709,58) que a cesariana (R$ 2.245,86) e melhor efetividade para três dos quatro desfechos avaliados. Para multíparas, com uma cicatriz uterina prévia, a cesariana de repetição foi custo-efetiva para os desfechos morbidade materna evitada, ruptura uterina evitada, internação em UTI neonatal evitada e óbito neonatal evitado, mas o resultado não foi suportado pela análise de sensibilidade probabilística. Para o desfecho óbito materno não houve diferença de efetividade e o trabalho de parto se mostrou com o menor custo. Este estudo pode contribuir para a gestão da atenção perinatal, ampliando medidas que estimulem o parto adequado de acordo com as características da população.

El objetivo de este estudio fue realizar un análisis de costo-efectividad del parto vaginal espontáneo, comparado con la cesárea electiva, sin indicación clínica, para gestantes de riesgo habitual, bajo la perspectiva del Sistema Único de Salud. Un modelo de decisión analítico se desarrolló e incluyó la elección del tipo de parto y consecuencias clínicas para la madre y recién nacido, desde el internamiento para el parto hasta el alta hospitalaria. La población de referencia fueron gestantes de riesgo habitual, feto único, cefálico, a término, subdivididas en primíparas y multíparas, con una cicatriz uterina previa. Los datos de costos se obtuvieron de tres maternidades públicas, dos situadas en Río de Janeiro y una en Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brasil. Se identificaron costos directos con recursos humanos, insumos hospitalarios, costos de capital y administrativos. Las medidas de efectividad se identificaron en base a la literatura científica. El estudio evidenció que el parto vaginal es más eficiente para gestantes primíparas, con un menor costo (BRL 1.709,58) que la cesárea (BRL 2.245,86) y mejor efectividad para tres de los cuatro desenlaces evaluados. Para multíparas, con una cicatriz uterina previa, la cesárea de repetición fue costo-efectiva para los desenlaces de morbilidad materna evitada, rotura uterina evitada, internamiento en UTI neonatal evitado y óbito neonatal evitado, pero el resultado no fue apoyado por el análisis de sensibilidad probabilístico. Para el desenlace óbito materno no hubo diferencia de efectividad y el trabajo de parto se mostró con el menor coste. Este estudio puede contribuir a la gestión de la atención perinatal, ampliando medidas que estimulen el parto apropiado, de acuerdo con las características de la población.

The Effect of Diagnosis-Related Group Payment System on Quality of Care in the Field of Obstetrics and Gynecology among Korean Tertiary Hospitals.

PURPOSE: To examine changes in clinical practice patterns following the introduction of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) under the fee-for-service payment system in July 2013 among Korean tertiary hospitals and to evaluate its effect on the quality of hospital care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the 2012-2014 administrative database from National Health Insurance Service claim data, we reviewed medical information for 160400 patients who underwent cesarean sections (C-secs), hysterectomies, or adnexectomies at 43 tertiary hospitals. We compared changes in several variables, including length of stay, spillover, readmission rate, and the number of simultaneous and emergency operations, from before to after introduction of the DRGs. RESULTS: DRGs significantly reduced the length of stay of patients undergoing C-secs, hysterectomies, and adnexectomies (8.0±6.9 vs. 6.0±2.3 days, 7.4±3.5 vs. 6.4±2.7 days, 6.3±3.6 vs. 6.2±4.0 days, respectively, all p<0.001). Readmission rates decreased after introduction of DRGs (2.13% vs. 1.19% for C-secs, 4.51% vs. 3.05% for hysterectomies, 4.77% vs. 2.65% for adnexectomies, all p<0.001). Spillover rates did not change. Simultaneous surgeries, such as colpopexy and transobturator-tape procedures, during hysterectomies decreased, while colporrhaphy during hysterectomies and adnexectomies or myomectomies during C-secs did not change. The number of emergency operations for hysterectomies and adnexectomies decreased. CONCLUSION: Implementation of DRGs in the field of obstetrics and gynecology among Korean tertiary hospitals led to reductions in the length of stay without increasing outpatient visits and readmission rates. The number of simultaneous surgeries requiring expensive operative instruments and emergency operations decreased after introduction of the DRGs.

Cost analysis of the CTLB Study, a multitherapy antenatal education programme to reduce routine interventions in labour.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the multitherapy antenatal education 'CTLB' (Complementary Therapies for Labour and Birth) Study programme leads to net cost savings. DESIGN: Cost analysis of the CTLB Study, using analysis of outcomes and hospital funding data. METHODS: We take a payer perspective and use Australian Refined Diagnosis-Related Group (AR-DRG) cost data to estimate the potential savings per woman to the payer (government or private insurer). We consider scenarios in which the intervention cost is either borne by the woman or by the payer. Savings are computed as the difference in total cost between the control group and the study group. RESULTS: If the cost of the intervention is not borne by the payer, the average saving to the payer was calculated to be $A808 per woman. If the payer covers the cost of the programme, this figure reduces to $A659 since the average cost of delivering the programme was $A149 per woman. All these findings are significant at the 95% confidence level. Significantly more women in the study group experienced a normal vaginal birth, and significantly fewer women in the study group experienced a caesarean section. The main cost saving resulted from the reduced rate of caesarean section in the study group. CONCLUSION: The CTLB antenatal education programme leads to significant savings to payers that come from reduced use of hospital resources. Depending on which perspective is considered, and who is responsible for covering the cost of the programme, the net savings vary from $A659 to $A808 per woman. Compared with the average cost of birth in the control group, we conclude that the programme could lead to a reduction in birth-related healthcare costs of approximately 9%. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12611001126909.

Impact of Provider Competition under Global Budgeting on the Use of Cesarean Delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of provider competition under global budgeting on the use of cesarean delivery in Taiwan. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: (1) Quarterly inpatient claims data of all clinics and hospitals with birth-related expenses from 2000 to 2008; (2) file of health facilities' basic characteristics; and (3) regional quarterly point values (price conversion index) for clinics and hospitals, respectively, from the fourth quarter in 1999 to the third quarter in 2008, from the Statistics of the National Health Insurance Administration. STUDY DESIGN: Panel data of quarterly facility-level cesarean delivery rates with provider characteristics, birth volumes, and regional point values are analyzed with the fractional response model to examine the effect of external price changes on provider behavior in birth delivery services. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The decline in de facto prices of health services as a result of noncooperative competition under global budgeting is associated with an increase in cesarean delivery rates, with a high degree of response heterogeneity across different types of provider facilities. CONCLUSIONS: While global budgeting is an effective cost containment tool, intensified financial pressures may lead to unintended consequences of compromised quality due to a shift in provider practice in pursuit of financial rewards.

Análise de custo-efetividade do parto vaginal espontâneo e da cesariana eletiva para gestantes de risco habitual no Sistema Único de Saúde / Cost-effectiveness analysis of spontaneous vaginal delivery and elective cesarean for normal risk pregnant women in the Brazilian Unified National Health System / Análisis de costo-efectividad del parto vaginal espontáneo y la cesárea electiva para gestantes de riesgo habitual en el Sistema Único de Salud

Resumo: O objetivo deste estudo foi realizar uma análise de custo-efetividade do parto vaginal espontâneo comparado à cesariana eletiva, sem indicação clínica, para gestantes de risco habitual, sob a perspectiva do Sistema Único de Saúde. Um modelo de decisão analítico foi desenvolvido e incluiu a escolha do tipo de parto e consequências clínicas para mãe e recém-nascido, da internação para o parto até a alta hospitalar. A população de referência foi gestantes de risco habitual, feto único, cefálico, a termo, subdivididas em primíparas e multíparas com uma cicatriz uterina prévia. Os dados de custos foram obtidos de três maternidades públicas, duas situadas no Rio de Janeiro e uma em Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brasil. Foram identificados custos diretos com recursos humanos, insumos hospitalares, custos de capital e administrativos. As medidas de efetividade foram identificadas com base na literatura científica. O estudo evidenciou que o parto vaginal é mais eficiente para gestantes primíparas, com menor custo (R$ 1.709,58) que a cesariana (R$ 2.245,86) e melhor efetividade para três dos quatro desfechos avaliados. Para multíparas, com uma cicatriz uterina prévia, a cesariana de repetição foi custo-efetiva para os desfechos morbidade materna evitada, ruptura uterina evitada, internação em UTI neonatal evitada e óbito neonatal evitado, mas o resultado não foi suportado pela análise de sensibilidade probabilística. Para o desfecho óbito materno não houve diferença de efetividade e o trabalho de parto se mostrou com o menor custo. Este estudo pode contribuir para a gestão da atenção perinatal, ampliando medidas que estimulem o parto adequado de acordo com as características da população.

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of spontaneous vaginal delivery and elective cesarean (with no clinical indication) for normal risk pregnant women, from the perspective of the Brazilian Unified National Health System. An analytical decision model was developed and included the choice of delivery mode and clinical consequences for mothers and newborns, from admission for delivery to hospital discharge. The reference population consisted of normal risk pregnant women with singleton, at-term gestations in cephalic position, subdivided into primiparas and multiparas with prior uterine scar. Cost data were obtained from three public maternity hospitals (two in Rio de Janeiro, one in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais State, Brazil). Direct costs were identified with human resources, hospital inputs, and capital and administrative costs. Effectiveness measures were identified, based on the scientific literature. The study showed that vaginal delivery was more efficient for primiparas, at lower cost (BRL 1,709.58; USD 518.05) than cesarean (BRL 2,245.86; USD 680.56) and greater effectiveness for three of the four target outcomes. For multiparas with prior uterine scar, repeat cesarean was cost-effective for the outcomes averted maternal morbidity, averted uterine rupture, averted neonatal ICU, and averted neonatal death, but the result was not supported by probabilistic sensitivity analysis. For maternal death as the outcome, there was no difference in effectiveness, and labor showed the lowest cost. This study can contribute to the management of perinatal care, expanding measures that encourage adequate delivery according to the population's characteristics.

Resumen: El objetivo de este estudio fue realizar un análisis de costo-efectividad del parto vaginal espontáneo, comparado con la cesárea electiva, sin indicación clínica, para gestantes de riesgo habitual, bajo la perspectiva del Sistema Único de Salud. Un modelo de decisión analítico se desarrolló e incluyó la elección del tipo de parto y consecuencias clínicas para la madre y recién nacido, desde el internamiento para el parto hasta el alta hospitalaria. La población de referencia fueron gestantes de riesgo habitual, feto único, cefálico, a término, subdivididas en primíparas y multíparas, con una cicatriz uterina previa. Los datos de costos se obtuvieron de tres maternidades públicas, dos situadas en Río de Janeiro y una en Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brasil. Se identificaron costos directos con recursos humanos, insumos hospitalarios, costos de capital y administrativos. Las medidas de efectividad se identificaron en base a la literatura científica. El estudio evidenció que el parto vaginal es más eficiente para gestantes primíparas, con un menor costo (BRL 1.709,58) que la cesárea (BRL 2.245,86) y mejor efectividad para tres de los cuatro desenlaces evaluados. Para multíparas, con una cicatriz uterina previa, la cesárea de repetición fue costo-efectiva para los desenlaces de morbilidad materna evitada, rotura uterina evitada, internamiento en UTI neonatal evitado y óbito neonatal evitado, pero el resultado no fue apoyado por el análisis de sensibilidad probabilístico. Para el desenlace óbito materno no hubo diferencia de efectividad y el trabajo de parto se mostró con el menor coste. Este estudio puede contribuir a la gestión de la atención perinatal, ampliando medidas que estimulen el parto apropiado, de acuerdo con las características de la población.

A cost effectiveness analysis of midwife psycho-education for fearful pregnant women - a health system perspective for the antenatal period.

BACKGROUND: Psycho-education can reduce childbirth fear and caesarean section numbers. This study determines the cost-effectiveness of a midwife-led psycho-education intervention for women fearful of birth. METHOD: One thousand four hundred ten pregnant women in south-east Queensland, Australia were screened for childbirth fear (W-DEQ A ≥ 66). Women with high scores (n = 339) were randomised to the BELIEF Study (Birth Emotions and Looking to Improve Expectant Fear) to receive psycho-education (n = 170) at 24 and 34 weeks of pregnancy or to the control group (n = 169). Women in both groups were surveyed 6 weeks postpartum with total cost for health service use during pregnancy calculated. Logistic regression models assessed the odds ratio of having vaginal birth or caesarean section in the study groups. RESULT: Of 339 women randomised, 184 (54%) women returned data at 6 weeks postpartum (Intervention Group n = 91; Control Group n = 93). Women receiving psycho-education had a higher likelihood of vaginal birth compared to controls (n = 60, 66% vs. n = 54, 58%; OR 2.34). Mean 'treatment' cost for women receiving psycho-education was AUS$72. Mean cost for health services excluding the cost of psycho-education, was less in the intervention group (AUS$1193 vs. AUS$1236), but not significant (p = 0.78). For every five women who received midwife counselling, one caesarean section was averted. The incremental healthcare cost to prevent one caesarean section using this intervention was AUS$145. CONCLUSION: Costs of delivering midwife psycho-education to women with childbirth fear during pregnancy are offset by improved vaginal birth rates and reduction in caesarean section numbers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Controlled Trials Registry ACTRN12612000526875 , 17th May 2012 (retrospectively registered one week after enrolment of first participant).

[Caesarean section in the context of free policy in Benin]. / La césarienne dans le contexte de gratuité au Bénin.

Caesarean section was well appreciated by most beneficiaries. However, an audit of caesarean sections would ensure compliance with the principles of free care and better management of women at all levels of the health system..

Fear, blame and transparency: Obstetric caregivers' rationales for high caesarean section rates in a low-resource setting.

In recent decades, there has been growing attention to the overuse of caesarean section (CS) globally. In light of a high CS rate at a university hospital in Tanzania, we aimed to explore obstetric caregivers' rationales for their hospital's CS rate to identify factors that might cause CS overuse. After participant observations, we performed 22 semi-structured individual in-depth interviews and 2 focus group discussions with 5-6 caregivers in each. Respondents were consultants, specialists, residents, and midwives. The study relied on a framework of naturalistic inquiry and we analyzed data using thematic analysis. As a conceptual framework, we situated our findings in the discussion of how transparency and auditing can induce behavioral change and have unintended effects. Caregivers had divergent opinions on whether the hospital's CS rate was a problem or not, but most thought that there was an overuse of CS. All caregivers rationalized the high CS rate by referring to circumstances outside their control. In private practice, some stated they were affected by the economic compensation for CS, while others argued that unnecessary CSs were due to maternal demand. Residents often missed support from their senior colleagues when making decisions, and felt that midwives pushed them to perform CSs. Many caregivers stated that their fear of blame from colleagues and management in case of poor outcomes made them advocate for, or perform, CSs on doubtful indications. In order to lower CS rates, caregivers must acknowledge their roles as decision-makers, and strive to minimize unnecessary CSs. Although auditing and transparency are important to improve patient safety, they must be used with sensitivity regarding any unintended or counterproductive effects they might have.

Does current evidence support the use of intraoperative cell salvage in reducing the need for blood transfusion in caesarean section?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: An important cause of maternal morbidity and direct maternal death is obstetric haemorrhage at caesarean section. Concerns regarding allogeneic blood safety, limited blood supplies and rising health costs have collectively generated enthusiasm for the utility of methods intended to reduce the use of allogeneic blood transfusion in cases of haemorrhage at caesarean section. This can be achieved by intraoperative cell salvage (IOCS). The aim of this review is to summarize and examine the evidence for the efficacy of IOCS during caesarean section, in women at risk of haemorrhage, in reducing the need for allogeneic blood transfusion. RECENT FINDINGS: The majority of the evidence currently available is from case reports and case series. Although this evidence appears to support the use of IOCS in obstetrics, strong clinical evidence or economic effectiveness from clinical trials are essential to support the routine practice of IOCS in obstetrics. SUMMARY: Current evidence is limited to reported case series and two small controlled studies. Overall, IOCS may reduce the need for allogeneic blood transfusions during caesarean section. Future large randomized trials are required to assess effectiveness, cost effectiveness and safety. The results of the current ongoing SALVO (A randomised controlled trial of intra-operative cell salvage during caesarean section in women at risk of haemorrhage) trial will shed light on these aspects.

Cost savings of red cell salvage during cesarean delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To use decision analysis to evaluate whether and under what conditions routine setup of intraoperative cell salvage during cesarean delivery is cost-saving. METHODS: We developed a decision model to compare costs associated with two strategies for cesarean delivery: 1) routine setup of intraoperative cell salvage; or 2) standard care without intraoperative cell salvage. One-, two-, and three-way sensitivity analyses as well as Monte Carlo simulation were used to assess the robustness of our findings. RESULTS: Among nonselected women undergoing cesarean delivery, our base case estimate was that 3.2% would require red blood cell transfusion. Under this assumption, cell salvage is cost-saving only if each woman requires at least 60 units. Conversely, if only two units on average are required, the probability of transfusion needs to be at least 58% for cell salvage to be cost-saving. In our base case analysis, setup of intraoperative cell salvage during routine cesarean deliveries is not cost-saving, increasing the cost per cesarean delivery by $223.80. We found that cell salvage would be cost-saving only in very high-risk scenarios. For example, severe maternal anemia or abnormal placentation, in which 54% and 75% of women are transfused three and two units per case, respectively, would make cell salvage cost-saving. CONCLUSION: Setup of intraoperative cell salvage during cesarean delivery is cost-saving and should be considered only when there is a predictably high probability of transfusion or when a massive transfusion is reasonably likely.

Managing the primary cesarean delivery rate.

One third of deliveries in the United States are by cesarean, a rate that far exceeds that recommended by professional organizations and experts. A dominant reason for the high overall cesarean rate is the rising primary cesarean rate. The high primary cesarean rate results from multiple factors, both clinical and nonclinical. This review outlines proposed interventions to lower the primary cesarean rate. We focus on those implementable at a facility level and would likely yield immediate results, including aligning provider incentives for vaginal birth, limiting elective induction of labor, and improving labor management of dystocia and abnormal fetal heart rate tracings.

The increasing cesarean rate globally and what we can do about it.

Cesarean sections sometimes save the lives of mothers and babies; however, they are excessively used compared to medical necessity, which is influenced by various factors that are explored in this article. Since, in most cases the risks of cesarean sections are greater than the benefits, particularly in cesareans that are not medically indicated, it is astonishing that cesarean surgery is the most common surgical procedure, taking away resources from medically necessary care. While economic incentive is counted among the reasons for the increasing cesarean trend, the situation is not so simple since many factors interact to cause the trend. Since reversal of the vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) trend downward is correlated with revised policy statements by e.g. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), which have since been partially moderated, it became much more difficult for medical institutions to provide VBACs due to concerns about liability. Although whether to give birth by cesarean delivery is a matter for informed consent, yet childbearing women are influenced significantly by their health service providers' opinions. Even though the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the most peripheral level of maternity care for normal pregnancy and childbirth that is safe using midwives, yet the percentage of midwife deliveries is low. Among other things, it has been suggested that more childbirth by midwife delivery and in out-of-hospital settings can reduce medically unnecessary cesareans and the undue risks associated with them, and free up medical resources for those in need.