Trends and Associated Risk Factors of Caesarean Deliveries in Northeast State of India

Sharatchandra Haobijam; Inaobi Elangbam

doi:10.55489/njcm.160820255414

Authors

Sharatchandra Haobijam Department of Statistics, Manipur University, Imphal, Manipur, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8113-0813
Inaobi Elangbam Department of Statistics, Dhanamanjuri University, Imphal, Manipur, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55489/njcm.160820255414

Keywords:

C-sections, Antenatal visits, Birth order, Terminated pregnancy

Abstract

Background: Caesarean (C-section) deliveries are rising across India, with National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4, 2015–16) reporting 17.2% of births by C-section. This study investigates the variations in C-section prevalence and the associated factors in the Northeastern states compared to the rest of the country.

Methods: This study analyses data collected from 232920 mothers under NFHS-5 (2019-2021). Bivariate analysis followed by logistic regression model was used to determine the risk factors associated with the C-sections based on the different criteria.

Results: In NFHS-4 and NFHS-5, Telangana reported the highest rates at 57.7% and 60.7%, respectively, and Nagaland reported the lowest at 5.7% and 5.2% respectively. C-section rates rise steadily up to age 39, then decline among mothers aged 40–49. C-section deliveries rise sharply among highly educated women, a trend consistent in both the Northeast and the rest of India. Mothers with high blood pressure, birth order of one, six or more antenatal visits, a past terminated pregnancy show higher rates of C-section in both Northeast and the rest of India.

Conclusion: Medical risk factors like antenatal visits and birth order strongly predict C-sections. This study highlights the complex interplay of medical and socio-economic factors influencing C-section rates across different regions.

References

Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang JJ, Gülmezoglu AM; WHO Working Group on Caesarean Section. WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates. BJOG. 2016 Apr;123(5):667-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.13526 PMid:26681211 PMCid:PMC5034743

Mezemir R, Olayemi O, Dessie Y. Trend and associated factors of cesarean section rate in Ethiopia: Evidence from 2000-2019 Ethiopia demographic and health survey data. PLoS One. 2023;18(3):e0282951. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282951 PMid:36928080 PMCid:PMC10019649

Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gulmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148343 PMid:26849801 PMCid:PMC4743929

Boerma T, Ronsmans C, Melesse DY, Barros AJD, Barros FC, Juan L, Moller AB, Say L, Hosseinpoor AR, Yi M, de Lyra Rabello Neto D, Temmerman M. Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1341-1348. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31928-7 PMid:30322584

Ghosh S. Increasing trend in cesarean section delivery in India: role of medicalization of maternal health. Bangalore: Institute for Social and Economic Change; 2010. (Working paper).

Buekens P. Over-medicalisation of maternal care in developing countries. In: De Brouwere V, Van Lerberghe W, editors. Safe Motherhood Strategies: A Review of the Evidence. Antwerp (Belgium): ITGPress;2001:191-202. Available from: https://files.givewell.org/files/DWDA%202009/Interventions/Maternal%20Mortality/SafeMotherhoodStrategies.pdf#page=199

Johanson R, Newburn M, Macfarlane A. Has the medicalisation of childbirth gone too far? BMJ. 2002 Apr 13;324(7342):892-895. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7342.892 PMid:11950741 PMCid:PMC1122835

Pai M. Unnecessary medical interventions: caesarean sections as a case study. Econ Polit Wkly. 2000;35:2755-2761.

Johnson EM, Rehavi MM. Physicians treating physicians: information and incentives in childbirth. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research; 2013. (NBER Working Paper No. 19242). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3386/w19242

World Health Organization. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. Geneva, Switzerland. 2015 Apr. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-RHR-15.02

International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and ICF. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4), 2015-16: India. Mumbai: IIPS; 2017. https://dhsprogram.com/publications/publication-FR339-DHS-Final-Reports.cfm or https://www.nfhsiips.in/nfhsuser/publication.php

Singh SK, Vishwakarma D, Sharma SK. Prevalence and determinants of voluntary caesarean deliveries and socio-economic inequalities in India: Evidence from National Family Health Survey (2015-16). Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health. 2020;8(2):335-342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cegh.2019.08.018

Radhakrishnan T, Vasanthakumari KP, Babu PK. Increasing trend of Caesarean section rates in India: Evidence from NFHS 4. Journal of Medical Science and Clinical Research. 2017;5(8):26167-26176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v5i8.31

Mishra US, Ramanathan M. Delivery-related complications and determinants of caesarean section rates in India. Health Policy Plan. 2002;17(1):90-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/17.1.90 PMid:11861590

El-Ardat MA, Izetbegovic S, Mehmedbasic E, Duric M. Frequency of vaginal birth after cesarean section at clinic of gynecology and obstetrics in Sarajevo. Med Arh. 2013;67(6):435-437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/medarh.2013.67.435-437 PMid:25568516 PMCid:PMC4272460

Neethi Mohan V, Shirisha P, Vaidyanathan G, Muraleedharan VR. Variations in the prevalence of caesarean section deliveries in India between 2016 and 2021 - an analysis of Tamil Nadu and Chhattisgarh. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023 Aug 30;23(1):622. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05928-4. Erratum in: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023 Sep 26;23(1):693. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-06020-7. PMID: 37649006; PMCID: PMC10466745.

International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and Macro International. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3), 2005-06: India: Volume I. Mumbai: IIPS; 2007. Available from: https://dhsprogram.com/publications/publication-FRIND3-DHS-Final-Reports.cfm or https://www.nfhsiips.in/nfhsuser/publication.php

International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and ICF. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5), 2019-21: India: Volume I. Mumbai: IIPS; 2021 https://dhsprogram.com/publications/publication-FR375-DHS-Final-Reports.cfm

Ecker JL, Chen KT, Cohen AP, Riley LE, Lieberman ES. Increased risk of cesarean delivery with advancing maternal age: indications and associated factors in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Oct;185(4):883-887. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2001.117364 PMid:11641671

Abdulla F, Hossain MM, Rahman MM, Rahman MS, Rahman A. Risk factors of caesarean deliveries in urban-rural areas of Bangladesh. Front Reprod Health. 2023 Feb 15;5:1101400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/frph.2023.1101400 PMid:36874261 PMCid:PMC9975760

Al Busaidi I, Al-Farsi Y, Ganguly S, Gowri V. Obstetric and non-obstetric risk factors for cesarean section in Oman. Oman Med J. 2012;27(6):478-481. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5001/omj.2012.114 PMid:23226819 PMCid:PMC3515046

Darsareh F, Aghamolaei T, Rajaei M, Madani A. Determinants of caesarean birth on maternal demand in the Islamic Republic of Iran: a review. East Mediterr Health J. 2017 Aug 20;23(6):441-448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26719/2017.23.6.441 PMid:28836657

Rahman M, Ahmad Shariff A, Shafie A, Saaid R, Md Tahir R. Determinants of Caesarean Risk Factor in Northern Region of Bangladesh: A Multivariate Analysis. Iran J Public Health. 2014 Jan;43(1):16-27. PMID: 26060675; PMCID: PMC4454039.

Gestational Hypertension and Preeclampsia: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 222. Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Jun;135(6):e237-e260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003891 PMid:32443079

Magee LA, Pels A, Helewa M, Rey E, von Dadelszen P; Canadian Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy (HDP) Working Group. Diagnosis, evaluation, and management of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2014 Apr;4(2):105-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2014.01.003. Epub 2014 Feb 25. PMID: 26104418.

Bhattacharya S, Lowit A, Bhattacharya S, Raja EA, Lee AJ, Mahmood T, Templeton A. Reproductive outcomes following induced abortion: a national register-based cohort study in Scotland. BMJ Open. 2012 Aug 6;2(4):e000911. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-000911 PMid:22869092 PMCid:PMC4400701