Cesarean Section Rates in Low-Risk Deliveries in Belgium
Author Information
Author(s): Aelvoet Willem, Windey Francis, Molenberghs Geert, Verstraelen Hans, Van Reempts Patrick, Foidart Jean-Michel
Primary Institution: Federal Service of Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment, Brussels, Belgium
Hypothesis
Hospitals with a high cesarean section rate will not experience better neonatal outcomes.
Conclusion
The study highlights significant inter-hospital differences in cesarean section rates and suggests that these differences may indicate over-use or under-use of cesarean sections.
Supporting Evidence
- Inter-hospital differences in cesarean section rates were significant, with some hospitals having rates as high as 75% above the national average.
- The national cesarean section rate showed an upward trend of approximately 2% per semester.
- Neonatal outcomes, such as Apgar scores, were worse in hospitals with higher cesarean section rates.
- Data completeness and accuracy were found to be adequate for the variables selected in the study.
Takeaway
Some hospitals do a lot more cesarean sections than others, but that doesn't mean the babies are healthier there.
Methodology
The study used multivariable logistic regression to analyze cesarean section rates among low-risk deliveries across 107 hospitals in Belgium.
Potential Biases
Potential biases may arise from the coding practices and the definitions used for low-risk deliveries.
Limitations
The study relies on administrative data, which may have completeness and accuracy issues, and does not distinguish between primary elective and repeat cesareans.
Participant Demographics
The study population included low-risk deliveries defined as singleton, vertex, full-term, live born infants weighing between 2500g and 4500g.
Statistical Information
P-Value
0.01245
Confidence Interval
95%CI [1.015; 1.022]
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website