Dataset Information

Assessing geographical and economic inequalities in caesarean section rates between the districts of Bihar, India: a secondary analysis of the National Family Health Survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In Bihar, one of the most populous and poorest states in India, caesarean sections have increased over the last decade. However, an aggregated caesarean section rate at the state level may conceal inequities at the district level.

Objectives

The primary aim of this study was to analyse the inequalities in the geographical and socioeconomic distribution of caesarean sections between the districts of Bihar. The secondary aim was to compare the contribution of free-for-service government-funded public facilities and fee-for-service private facilities to the caesarean section rate.

Setting

Bihar, with a population in the 2011 census of approximately 104 million people, has a low GDP per capita (US$610), compared with other Indian states. The state has the highest crude birth rate (26.1 per 1000 population) in India, with one baby born every two seconds. Bihar is divided into 38 administrative districts, 101 subdivisions and 534 blocks. Each district has a district (Sadar) hospital, and six districts also have one or more medical college hospitals.

Methods

This retrospective secondary data analysis was based on open-source national datasets from the 2015 and 2019 National Family Health Surveys, with respective sample sizes of 45 812 and 42 843 women aged 15-49 years.

Participants

Secondary data analysis of pregnant women delivering in public and private institutions.

Results

The caesarean section rate increased from 6.2% in 2015 to 9.7% in 2019 in Bihar. Districts with a lower proportion of poor population had higher caesarean section rates (R²=0.45) among all institutional births, with 10.3% in private and 2.9% in public facilities. Access to private caesarean sections decreased (R²=0.46) for districts with poorer populations.

Conclusion

Marked inequalities exist in access to caesarean sections. The public sector needs to be strengthened to improve access to obstetric services for those who need it most.

SUBMITTER: Shukla M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8739431 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To provide an update on economic related inequalities in caesarean section rates within countries.Secondary analysis of demographic and health surveys and multiple indicator cluster surveys.72 low and middle income countries with a survey conducted between 2010 and 2014 for analysis of the latest situation of inequality, and 28 countries with a survey also conducted between 2000 and 2004 for analysis of the change in inequality over time.Women aged 15-49 years with a live birth during the two or three years preceding the survey.Data on caesarean section were disaggregated by asset based household wealth status and presented separately for five subgroups, ranging from the poorest to the richest fifth. Absolute and relative inequalities were measured using difference and ratio measures. The pace of change in the poorest and richest fifths was compared using a measure of excess change.National caesarean section rates ranged from 0.6% in South Sudan to 58.9% in the Dominican Republic. Within countries, caesarean section rates were lowest in the poorest fifth (median 3.7%) and highest in the richest fifth (median 18.4%). 18 out of 72 study countries reported a difference of 20 percentage points or higher between the richest and poorest fifth. The highest caesarean section rates and greatest levels of absolute inequality were observed in countries from the region of the Americas, whereas countries from the African region had low levels of caesarean use and comparatively lower levels of absolute inequality, although relative inequality was quite high in some countries. 26 out of 28 countries reported increases in caesarean section rates over time. Rates tended to increase faster in the richest fifth (median 0.9 percentage points per year) compared with the poorest fifth (median 0.2 percentage points per year), indicating an increase in inequality over time in most of these countries.Substantial within country economic inequalities in caesarean deliveries remain. These inequalities might be due to a combination of inadequate access to emergency obstetric care among the poorest subgroups and high levels of caesarean use without medical indication in the richest subgroups, especially in middle income countries. Country specific strategies should address these inequalities to improve maternal and newborn health.

Project description:BackgroundEven though the caesarean section is an essential component of comprehensive obstetric and newborn care for reducing maternal and neonatal mortality, there is a lack of data regarding caesarean section rates, its determinants and health outcomes among tribal communities in India.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to estimate and compare rates, determinants, indications and outcomes of caesarean section. The article provides an assessment on how the inequitable utilization can be addressed in a community-based hospital in tribal areas of Gujarat, India.MethodProspectively collected data of deliveries (N = 19923) from April 2010 to March 2016 in Kasturba Maternity Hospital was used. The odds ratio of caesarean section was estimated for tribal and non-tribal women. Decomposition analysis was done to decompose the differences in the caesarean section rates between tribal and non-tribal women.ResultsThe caesarean section rate was significantly lower among tribal compared to the non-tribal women (9.4% vs 15.6%, p-value < 0.01) respectively. The 60% of the differences in the rates of caesarean section between tribal and non-tribal women were unexplained. Within the explained variation, the previous caesarean accounted for 96% (p-value < 0.01) of the variation. Age of the mother, parity, previous caesarean and distance from the hospital were some of the important determinants of caesarean section rates. The most common indications of caesarean section were foetal distress (31.2%), previous caesarean section (23.9%), breech (16%) and prolonged labour (11.2%). There was no difference in case fatality rate (1.3% vs 1.4%, p-value = 0.90) and incidence of birth asphyxia (0.3% vs 0.6%, p-value = 0.26) comparing the tribal and non-tribal women.ConclusionSimilar to the prior evidences, we found higher caesarean rates among non-tribal compare to tribal women. However, the adverse outcomes were similar between tribal and non-tribal women for caesarean section deliveries.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The increasing trend of Caesarean section (CS) in childbirth has become a global public health challenge. Previous studies have proposed financial intervention strategies for reducing CS rates by limiting caesarean delivery on maternal request (CDMR). This study synthesizes such strategies while evaluating their effectiveness. METHODS:The sources of data for this study are Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL. The publication period included in this study is from January 1991 to November 2018. The financial intervention strategies are divide into two categories: healthcare provider interventions and patient interventions. Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) was employed to assess the risk of bias of included studies. The outcome of each study was evaluated with Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) through the GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool software. RESULTS:Nine studies were included in this systematic review: five with high certainty evidence (HCE), three with moderate certainty evidence (MCE), and one with low certainty evidence (LCE). Of the nine studies, seven are centered on the effect of provider-side interventions. Three of the HCE studies found that the diagnosis-related group payment system, risk-adjusted capitation, and equalizing fee for both facilities and physicians were effective intervention strategies. One HCE and one MCE study showed that only equalizing facility fees between vaginal and CS deliveries in healthcare service settings had no significant effect on reducing the CS rate. The MCE study showed that case payment had a negative effect on reducing the CS rates. One LCE study revealed that the effect of a global budget system was uncertain, and one HCE and one MCE study focused on combining both provider and patient-side interventions. However, equalizing fees for vaginal and CS deliveries and a co-payment policy for CDMRs failed to reduce the CS rate. CONCLUSIONS:The effectiveness of risk-adjusted payment methods appears promising and should be the subject of further research. Financial interventions should consider stakeholders' characteristics, especially the personal interests of doctors. Finally, high-quality randomized control trials and comparative studies on different financial intervention methods are needed to confirm or refute previous studies' outcomes.