Influence of audit and feedback on use of caesarean section in a geographically-defined population
- PMID: 8365537
- DOI: 10.1016/0028-2243(93)90165-9
Influence of audit and feedback on use of caesarean section in a geographically-defined population
Erratum in
- Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1993 Aug;50(3):261
Abstract
The influence of audit and feedback on use of caesarean section was investigated in a geographically defined population. At the beginning of 1986 and throughout that year the three principal reasons for the increased use of caesarean section were drawn to the attention of the resident obstetricians in the hospital where 85% of the women resident in the health district gave birth. A repeat survey of the indications for caesarean section was conducted for 1986 births. Despite an increase in the number of women delivered in 1986 who had previously had two or more sections, the caesarean section rate fell from 15.9% in 1982 to 12.7% in 1986 (P < 0.005). Most of this decrease was due to a reduction in caesarean section for the three indications that were the main contributors to the increased rate between 1974 and 1982. The rate for the women who gave birth in the hospital whose resident obstetricians had been informed about the preceding audit was 12.2%, compared with 15.6%, for the women who gave birth in other hospitals. Audit and feedback of specific information, imparted in a non-directive way to resident obstetricians responsible for performing caesarean section, probably accounted for a more rational use of caesarean section.
Similar articles
-
[Introducing a daily obstetric audit: A solution to reduce the cesarean section rate?].J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2015 Jun;44(6):550-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2014.08.003. Epub 2014 Sep 30. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2015. PMID: 25260605 French.
-
An audit of caesarean section in a maternity district.Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1982 Oct;89(10):787-92. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1982.tb05027.x. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1982. PMID: 7126498
-
A prospective observational study of emergency caesarean section rates and the effect of the labour ward experience.J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005 Oct;25(7):666-8. doi: 10.1080/01443610500280325. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005. PMID: 16263540
-
[Indications for cesarean section and their outcome at the Hospital Center in Libreville].Rev Fr Gynecol Obstet. 1990 Jun;85(6):393-8. Rev Fr Gynecol Obstet. 1990. PMID: 2202041 Review. French.
-
Indications for caesarean section.Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001 Feb;15(1):1-15. doi: 10.1053/beog.2000.0146. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001. PMID: 11359312 Review.
Cited by
-
Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 28;9(9):CD005528. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005528.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018. PMID: 30264405 Free PMC article.
-
Understanding rising caesarean section trends: relevance of inductions and prelabour obstetric interventions at term.Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2011;3(4):286-91. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2011. PMID: 24753879 Free PMC article.
-
Audit and feedback using the Robson classification to reduce caesarean section rates: a systematic review.BJOG. 2018 Jan;125(1):36-42. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14774. Epub 2017 Jul 17. BJOG. 2018. PMID: 28602031 Free PMC article.
-
A Framework for the Development of maternal quality of care indicators.Matern Child Health J. 2005 Sep;9(3):317-41. doi: 10.1007/s10995-005-0001-y. Matern Child Health J. 2005. PMID: 16160758
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical