Search

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) Labour Care Guide (LCG) is a paper-based labour monitoring tool designed to facilitate the implementation of WHO's latest guidelines for effective, respectful care during labour and childbirth. Implementing the LCG into routine intrapartum care requires a strategy that improves healthcare provider practices during labour and childbirth. Such a strategy might optimize the use of Caesarean section (CS), along with potential benefits on the use of other obstetric interventions, maternal and perinatal health outcomes, and women's experience of care. However, the effects of a strategy to implement the LCG have not been evaluated in a randomised trial. This study aims to: (1) develop and optimise a strategy for implementing the LCG (formative phase); and (2) To evaluate the implementation of the LCG strategy compared with usual care (trial phase). Methods: In the formative phase, we will co-design the LCG strategy with key stakeholders informed by facility assessments and provider surveys, which will be field tested in one hospital. The LCG strategy includes a LCG training program, ongoing supportive supervision from senior clinical staff, and audit and feedback using the Robson Classification. We will then conduct a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized pilot trial in four public hospitals in India, to evaluate the effect of the LCG strategy intervention compared to usual care (simplified WHO partograph). The primary outcome is the CS rate in nulliparous women with singleton, term, cephalic pregnancies in spontaneous labour (Robson Group 1). Secondary outcomes include clinical and process of care outcomes, as well as women's experience of care outcomes. We will also conduct a process evaluation during the trial, using standardized facility assessments, in-depth interviews and surveys with providers, audits of completed LCGs, labour ward observations and document reviews. An economic evaluation will consider implementation costs and cost-effectiveness. Discussion: Findings of this trial will guide clinicians, administrators and policymakers on how to effectively implement the LCG, and what (if any) effects the LCG strategy has on process of care, health and experience outcomes. The trial findings will inform the rollout of LCG internationally. Trial registration: CTRI/2021/01/030695 (Protocol version 1.4, 25 April 2022). Plain language summary: The new WHO Labour Care Guide (LCG) is an innovative partograph that emphasises women-centred, evidence-based care during labour and childbirth. Together with clinicians working at four hospitals in India, we will develop and test a strategy to implement the LCG into routine care in labour wards of these hospitals. We will use a randomised trial design where this LCG strategy is introduced sequentially in each of the four hospitals, in a random order. We will collect data on all women giving birth and their newborns during this period and analyse whether the LCG strategy has any effects on the use of Caesarean section, women's and newborn's health outcomes, and women's experiences during labour and childbirth. While the trial is being conducted, we will also collect qualitative and quantitative data from doctors, nurses and midwives working in these hospitals, to understand their perspectives and experiences of using the LCG in their day-to-day work. In addition, we will collect economic data to understand how much the LCG strategy costs, and how much money it might save if it is effective. Through this study, our international collaboration will generate critical evidence and innovative tools to support implementation of the LCG in other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Caesarean section delivery is a major life-saving obstetric surgical intervention for mothers and babies from pregnancy and childbirth related complications. This paper attempts to investigate the geographical variations and correlating factors of caesarean section delivery in India, particularly focusing on the states of Bihar and Tamil Nadu, accounting for one of the lowest and highest prevalence states of caesarean section delivery respectively.Methods: This study is based on secondary data, collected from the fourth round of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4), 2015-16. We utilized 190,898 women aged 15-49 years who had a living child during the past 5 years preceding the survey. In this study, caesarean section delivery was the outcome variable. A variety of demographic, socio-economic, and pregnancy- and delivery-related variables were considered as explanatory variables. Descriptive statistics, bivariate percentage distribution, Pearson's Chi-square test, and multivariate binary logistic regression models were employed to draw the inferences from data.Results: Of participants, about 19% of women had undergone caesarean section delivery in the country. The state-wise distribution shows that Telangana (60%) followed by Andhra Pradesh (42%) and Tamil Nadu (36%) represented the topmost states in caesarean delivery, while Bihar (7%), Madhya Pradesh (10%), and Jharkhand (11%) placed at the bottom end. Multivariate logistic models show that the likelihood of caesarean delivery was higher among older women (35-49 years), women with higher levels of education, Muslims, women belonging to the upper quintiles of the household wealth, and those who received antenatal care (ANC), experienced pregnancy loss and delivery complications. Moreover, the odds of caesarean section delivery were remarkably greater for the private health sector than the public health sector in both focused states: Bihar (odds ratio [OR] = 12.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.90, 15.13) and Tamil Nadu (OR = 2.90; 95% CI: 2.54, 3.31).Conclusion: Findings of this study suggest that improvement in female education, providing economic incentives, and spreading awareness through mass media could raise the caesarean section delivery among women whose vaginal delivery could be unsafe for them as well as for their babies. Moreover, providing adequate ANC and well-equipped public healthcare services would facilitate caesarean delivery among needy women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Increasing caesarean births is a global trend and of recent origin in India. Besides its utility and disutility, increasing caesarean births exert higher economic burden on households and the nation. Using 148,746 births from the National Family Health Survey, 2015–16, this paper examines the correlates and provides comparable estimates of out of pocket expenditure (OOPE) on caesarean births in public and private health centres in India. The monthly state specific rural-urban consumer price index and the OOPE on births over seven years are used to derive comparable OOPE estimate at 2016 prices. A composite variable combining type of birth and place of delivery is computed and classified as private and caesarean, public and caesarean, private and non-caesarean, public and non-caesarean. Descriptive statistics, logistic and tobit regression model were used to understand the differentials and determinants of OOPE on caesarean births. Caesarean births were significantly higher among mothers belonging to higher socioeconomic status, first order births, mothers with high BMI, pregnancy complications, repeat caesarean and in private health centres confirming that both maternal demand and institutional factors are leading to the increasing in caesarean rates in India. The mean OOPE of caesarean births in public health centres of poorer states was higher than that in the richer states of India (US$107 in low performing states compared to US$88 in high performing states) while such differentials across private health centres are small. The marginal effect of a caesarean birth in private health centres in low performing states was US$296 dollar higher than that of non-caesarean births. Improving the public health centres for conducting caesarean births, developing standard guideline for clinical practices in conducting caesarean births and creating awareness on comprehensive pregnancy care can reduce the caesarean rates and OOPE on caesarean birth in India. Highlights • Incraese in caesarean births are due to both maternal and clinical factors. • Three of ten first-order births were caesarean; higher than any subsequent order. • Caesarean rate among mothers with prior caesarean births was above 90 percent. • OOPE of a caesarean birth in public health centre of poorer states was high. • Medicine and test accounts larger share of OOPE in public health centers in India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: India has experienced a steep rise in institutional childbirth. The relative contributions of public and private sector facilities to emergency obstetric care (EmOC) has not been studied in this setting. This paper aims to study in three districts of Gujarat state, India:(a) the availability of EmOC facilities in the public and private sectors; (b) the availability and distribution of human resources for birth attendance in the two sectors; and (c) to benchmark the above against 2005 World Health Report benchmarks (WHR2005).Methods: A cross-sectional survey of obstetric care facilities reporting 30 or more births in the last three months was conducted (n = 159). Performance of EmOC signal functions and availability of human resources were assessed.Results: EmOC provision was dominated by private facilities (112/159) which were located mainly in district headquarters or small urban towns. The number of basic and comprehensive EmOC facilities was below WHR2005 benchmarks. A high number of private facilities performed C-sections but not all basic signal functions (72/159). Public facilities were the main EmOC providers in rural areas and 40/47 functioned at less than basic EmOC level. The rate of obstetricians per 1000 births was higher in the private sector.Conclusions: The private sector is the dominant EmOC provider in the state. Given the highly skewed distribution of facilities and resources in the private sector, state led partnerships with the private sector so that all women in the state receive care is important alongside strengthening the public sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]