medigraphic.com
Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.

2008, Number 07

<< Back Next >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2008; 76 (07)

Risk factors in cesarean section

Flores PL, González PGJ, Trejo FJ, Vega LG, Cabrera PCE, Campos A, Navarro SA, Navarro NC

Language: Spanish
References: 16
Page: 392-397
PDF size: 173.29 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Improvement of surgical techniques, innovation, and technological development have increased the frequency of cesarean section.
Objective: To identify the sociodemographics, obstetrical, attention and medical practice factors of risk most frequently associated to cesarean section.
Patients and method: From January to June 2007, we carried out a study of cases and controls with 222 cases of cesarean section and 358 controls of vaginal childbirth in Hospital General no. 6 of Ciudad Juárez. We compared frequency of sociodemographics, obstetrical, attention, and medical practice variables, by means of χ2 and Fisher exact tests; association among these variables and cesarean section was considered with odds ratio. In all cases chosen confidence interval was 95%.
Results: Risk factors associated with cesarean section were: maternal age over 28 years, previous cesarean section, complicated pregnancy, fetal suffering, cephalopelvic disproportion, deficient prenatal care; fetal podalic version, oxytocin administration, abnormal amniotic fluid, double- or triple-circle umbilical cord; patient attended by a gynecologist with more than 16 years of experience and by a resident; and medical care in evening shift. There was no association with age, menarche, beginning of sexual relationships, body mass index, smoking, or addictions.
Conclusions: Risk factors associated with cesarean section were: previous cesarean section and patient attended by a gynecologist with more than 16 years of experience and by a resident.


REFERENCES

  1. Secretaría de Salud. Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-007-SSA2-1993. Atención de la Mujer durante el Embarazo, Parto y Puerperio y del Recién Nacido. Criterios y Procedimientos para la Prestación del Servicio. Diario Oficial de la Federación, 14 de julio de 1994. México, DF;p:63.

  2. Stephenson PA, Bakoula C, Hemminki E, Knudsen L, et al. Patterns of use of obstetrical interventions in 12 countries. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1993;7:45-54.

  3. Rattner D. Sobre a hipótesis de estabilizaçao das tasas de cesárea do estado de Sao Paulo, Brasil. Rev Saúde Pública 1996:30:19-33.

  4. González-Pérez GJ, Vega-Lopez MG, Cabrera-Pivaral C, Muñoz A, Valle A. Cesarean section in Mexico: are not they too many? Health Policy and Planning 2001;16:62-67.

  5. Hueston WJ. Site to site variation in the factors affecting cesarean section rates. Arch Fam Med 1995;4:346-51.

  6. Alexander JM, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. Prolonged pregnancy: induction of labor and cesarean births. Obstet Gynecol 2001;97:911-5.

  7. Guzmán A, González MJ, González M, Villa F. ¿Cómo reducir el número de cesáreas? Ginecol Obstet Mex 1997;65:273-6.

  8. Neri ES, Valerio E, Cárdenas R, Navarro C. Presentación pélvica, ¿siempre cesárea? Ginecol Obstet Mex 1997;64;474-7.

  9. Cerda J, Benavides L, Martínez E. Atención del parto después de la operación cesárea. Ginecol Obstet Mex 1994;62:312-4.

  10. De la Garza QC, Celaya JJ, Hernández EC. Parto después de una cesárea previa en el Hospital Gineco-Obstetricia Garza García, Nuevo León. Ginecol Obstet Mex 1997;65:126-30.

  11. Tussing AD, Wojtowicz MA. The effect of physician characteristics on clinical behavior: cesarean section in New York State. Soc Sci Med 1993;37:1251-60.

  12. Ryding EL. Investigation of 33 women who demanded a cesarean section for personal reasons. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1993;72:280-5.

  13. Potter IHO, Leal OF. Cesáreas no deseadas en los sectores público y privado de Brasil. Rev Panam Salud Publica 2002;11:34-35.

  14. Gould J, Davey B, Safford R. Socioeconomic differences in the rates of cesarean section. N Eng J Med 1989;321:233-9.

  15. Lech M, Szamotulska K, Michniezuk H. Non clinical factors in decision making about cesarean section. Ginekol Pol 1997;68(1):22-29.

  16. Trujillo Hernández B, Tena Pérez CE, Ríos Silva M. Factores de riesgo para cesárea: un enfoque epidemiológico. Ginecol Obstet Méx 2000;68:306-11.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com