Dataset Information

Audit and feedback using the Robson classification to reduce caesarean section rates: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: In most regions worldwide, caesarean section (CS) rates are increasing. In these settings, new strategies are needed to reduce CS rates.To identify, critically appraise and synthesise studies using the Robson classification as a system to categorise and analyse data in clinical audit cycles to reduce CS rates.Medline, Embase, CINAHL and LILACS were searched from 2001 to 2016.Studies reporting use of the Robson classification to categorise and analyse data in clinical audit cycles to reduce CS rates.Data on study design, interventions used, CS rates, and perinatal outcomes were extracted.Of 385 citations, 30 were assessed for full text review and six studies, conducted in Brazil, Chile, Italy and Sweden, were included. All studies measured initial CS rates, provided feedback and monitored performance using the Robson classification. In two studies, the audit cycle consisted exclusively of feedback using the Robson classification; the other four used audit and feedback as part of a multifaceted intervention. Baseline CS rates ranged from 20 to 36.8%; after the intervention, CS rates ranged from 3.1 to 21.2%. No studies were randomised or controlled and all had a high risk of bias.We identified six studies using the Robson classification within clinical audit cycles to reduce CS rates. All six report reductions in CS rates; however, results should be interpreted with caution because of limited methodological quality. Future trials are needed to evaluate the role of the Robson classification within audit cycles aimed at reducing CS rates.Use of the Robson classification in clinical audit cycles to reduce caesarean rates.

SUBMITTER: Boatin AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5763379 | biostudies-other | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Audit and feedback using the Robson classification to reduce caesarean section rates: a systematic review.

Boatin A A AA Cullinane F F Torloni M R MR Betrán A P AP

BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 20170717 1

<h4>Background</h4>In most regions worldwide, caesarean section (CS) rates are increasing. In these settings, new strategies are needed to reduce CS rates.<h4>Objectives</h4>To identify, critically appraise and synthesise studies using the Robson classification as a system to categorise and analyse data in clinical audit cycles to reduce CS rates.<h4>Search strategy</h4>Medline, Embase, CINAHL and LILACS were searched from 2001 to 2016.<h4>Selection criteria</h4>Studies reporting use of the Robs ...[more]

PMID: 28602031

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe 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.MethodsThe 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.ResultsNine 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.ConclusionsThe 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.

Project description:BackgroundCaesarean sections (CSs) are associated with increased maternal and perinatal morbidity, yet rates continue to increase within most countries. Effective interventions are required to reduce the number of non-medically indicated CSs and improve outcomes for women and infants. This paper reports findings of a systematic review of literature related to maternity service organisational interventions that have a primary intention of improving CS rates.MethodA three-phase search strategy was implemented to identify studies utilising organisational interventions to improve CS rates in maternity services. The database search (including Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Maternity and Infant Care, EMBASE and SCOPUS) was restricted to peer-reviewed journal articles published from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2017. Reference lists of relevant reviews and included studies were also searched. Primary outcomes were overall, planned, and unplanned CS rates. Secondary outcomes included a suite of birth outcomes. A series of meta-analyses were performed in RevMan, separated by type of organisational intervention and outcome of interest. Summary risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals were presented as the effect measure. Effect sizes were pooled using a random-effects model.ResultsFifteen articles were included in the systematic review, nine of which were included in at least one meta-analysis. Results indicated that, compared with women allocated to usual care, women allocated to midwife-led models of care implemented across pregnancy, labour and birth, and the postnatal period were, on average, less likely to experience CS (overall) (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.96), planned CS (average RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93), and episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.95). Narratively, audit and feedback, and a hospital policy of mandatory second opinion for CS, were identified as interventions that have potential to reduce CS rates.ConclusionMaternity service leaders should consider the adoption of midwife-led models of care across the maternity episode within their organisations, particularly for women classified as low-risk. Additional studies are required that utilise either audit and feedback, or a hospital policy of mandatory second opinion for CS, to facilitate the quantification of intervention effects within future reviews.Prospero registrationCRD42016039458 ; prospectively registered.

Project description:When medically indicated, caesarean section can prevent deaths and other serious complications in mothers and babies. Lack of access to caesarean section may result in increased maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. However, rising caesarean section rates globally suggest overuse in healthy women and babies, with consequent iatrogenic damage for women and babies, and adverse impacts on the sustainability of maternity care provision. To date, interventions to ensure that caesarean section is appropriately used have not reversed the upward trend in rates. Qualitative evidence has the potential to explain why and how interventions may or may not work in specific contexts. We aimed to establish stakeholders' views on the barriers and facilitators to non-clinical interventions targeted at organizations, facilities and systems, to reduce unnecessary caesarean section.We undertook a systematic qualitative evidence synthesis using a five-stage modified, meta-ethnography approach. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, EMBASE and grey literature databases (Global Index Medicus, POPLINE, AJOL) using pre-defined terms. Inclusion criteria were qualitative and mixed-method studies, investigating any non-clinical intervention to reduce caesarean section, in any setting and language, published after 1984. Study quality was assessed prior to data extraction. Interpretive thematic synthesis was undertaken using a barriers and facilitators lens. Confidence in the resulting Summaries of Findings was assessed using GRADE-CERQual.8,219 studies were identified. 25 studies were included, from 17 countries, published between 1993-2016, encompassing the views of over 1,565 stakeholders. Nineteen Summary of Findings statements were derived. They mapped onto three distinct themes: Health system, organizational and structural factors (6 SoFs); Human and cultural factors (7 SoFs); and Mechanisms of effect to achieve change factors (6 SoFs). The synthesis showed how inter- and intra-system power differentials, and stakeholder commitment, exert strong mechanisms of effect on caesarean section rates, independent of the theoretical efficacy of specific interventions to reduce them.Non-clinical interventions to reduce caesarean section are strongly mediated by organisational power differentials and stakeholder commitment. Barriers may be greatest where implementation plans contradict system and cultural norms.PROSPERO: CRD42017059456.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally, the increased use of cesarean sections has become prevalent in high-income and low and middle-income countries. In Palestine, the rate had risen from 20.3% in 2014 to 25.1% in 2018. We have rates as high as 35.8% in some governmental hospitals and some as low as 15%. This study aimed to understand better why there is a variation in cesarean rates in governmental hospitals that use the same guidelines.MethodsA qualitative and quantitative research approach was used. In-depth interviews were conducted with 27 specialists, obstetrics and gynecologists, and midwives in five government hospitals. The hospitals were selected based on the 2017 Annual Health Report reported cesarean section rates. The interview guide was created with the support of specialists and researchers and was piloted. Questions focused mainly on adherence to the obstetric guidelines and barriers to the use, sources of information, training for healthcare providers, the hospital system, and the factors that affect decision-making. Each hospital's delivery records for one month were analyzed to determine the reason for each cesarean section.ResultsThe results indicated that each governmental hospital at the system level had a different policy on cesarean sections. The National Guidelines were found to be interpreted differently among hospitals. One obstetrician-gynecologist decided on a cesarean section at high-rate hospitals, while low-rate hospitals used collective decision-making with empowered midwives. At the professional level, all hospitals urged the importance of a continuous training program to refresh the medical team knowledge, in-house training of new members joining the hospital, and discussion of cases subjective to obstetrician-gynecologists interpretations.ConclusionSeveral institutional factors were identified to strengthen the implementation of the national obstetric guidelines. For example, encouraging collective decision-making between obstetrician-gynecologists and midwives, promoting the use of a second opinion, and mandatory training.

Dataset Information

Audit and feedback using the Robson classification to reduce caesarean section rates: a systematic review.

Publications

Audit and feedback using the Robson classification to reduce caesarean section rates: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets