Lee SI

Language: Spanish
References: 16
Page: 199-204
PDF size: 61.37 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: to determine causes and tendencies of the cesarean section.
Material and methods: we conducted an observational-type study; descriptive inquiry was carried out and records of women who had undergone cesarean section were selected. To identify aspects related with causes and indications for cesarean section, 667 cases of women surgically operated on for cesarean section within a period of 6 months during the year 2002 were selected for participation in the study. To determine tendency over time, cesarean section proportions of the last 10 years were analyzed (1993 to 2002), as well as maternal and perinatal mortality rate during the same time period. For analysis of cesarean sections and maternal and perinatal mortality rate proportion, a 5-year grouping was done and confidence intervals were calculated (95 % CI).
Results: during the 5-year period from 1993 to 1997, cesarean section average was 30.7 % (95 % IC = 30-31.3) versus 34.8 % (31.4-38.1) during the 1998 to 2002 time period. Diagnoses with high-er frequency were previous cesarean section (35.3%) and cephalopelvic disproportion (20.5%). While impact measuring was carried out, maternal mortality rate during the 1993 to 1997 time period was found as 1.69 (95 % CI = 0.5-3.88) for 10000 live newborns versus 3.93 (95 % CI = 2.36-5.3) during the 1998 to 2002 time period, whereas perinatal mortality rate was 17.54 (95 % CI = 15.9-19.1) for 1000 births during the 1993 to 1997 time period versus 12.73 (95 % CI = 12.1-13.3) during the 1998 to 2002 time period.
Conclusions: an increment in cesarean section is being observed, but a relationship between a greater proportion of cesarean sections and positive impacts in maternal and perinatal death rate has not been evident.

REFERENCES

1. Constance P. Una epidemia de cesárea. BIDAmérica: Fechado julio-agosto de 2000. Revista del Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. Tomado el 24 de octubre de 2002. http://www.iadb.org/idbamerica/archive/stories/2000/esp/AGO00c/c800i.htm

2. Porreco R, Thorp J. The cesarean birth epidemic: Trends, causes, and solutions. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175(2):369-374.

3. Velasco V, Navarrete E, Cardona JA, Madrazo M. Aspectos epidemiológicos de la operación cesárea en el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. Rev Med IMSS 1997;35(3):207-212.

4. Juárez S, Fajardo A, Pérez G, Guerrero R, Gómez A. Tendencias de los embarazos terminado por cesárea en México durante el periodo 1991-1995. Ginecol Obstet Mex 1999;67(4):308-317.

5. Guzmán A, González J, González M, Villa F. ¿Qué hacer para reducir el número de cesáreas? Ginecol Obstet Mex 1997;65(4):273-276.

6. Serrano J. Razones en pro y en contra de la opera-ción cesárea. Ginecol Obstet Mex 1999;67(4):353-355.

7. Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Sistema único de información. Subsistema 10 Población y Servicios, 2002.

8. Norma oficial mexicana NOM-007-SSA2-1993, atención de la mujer durante el embarazo, parto y puerperio y del recién nacido. Criterios y procedi-mientos para la prestación del servicio. México: Diario Oficial de la Federación; 1995 p. 19-38.

9. Peña D, Crispín L, Méndez E, Montás P. Incidencia de cesáreas en el Hospital Dr. Rafael J. Mañón del Instituto Dominicano de Seguros Sociales, San Cristóbal, R. D. Revista Acta Médica Dominicana. Biblioteca (Biblioteca virtual en salud) Fechado: enero de 1999. Tomado el 13 de noviembre de 2002 de http://www.bvs.org.do/cesaria.htm

10. Belizán J, Althabe F, Barros F, Alexander S. Rates and implications of caesarean section in Latin America: ecological study. BMJ 1999;319(7222): 1397-1400.

11. Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. Manual de organización del Comité de Estudio de Mortalidad Perinatal, Infantil y Preescolar, 2001. Distrito Federal, México: Dirección de Prestaciones Médicas; 2001.

12. Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. Manual metodológico. Indicadores de desempeño, 2001. Distrito Federal, México: Dirección de Prestaciones Médicas; 2002.

13. Velasco V, Navarrete E, Pozos JL, Ojeda R, Cárdenas C, Cardona J. Indicaciones y justificación de las cesáreas en el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. Gac Med Mex 2000;136(5):421-431.

14. Lee I. Causas de necesidades insatisfechas en pla-nificación familiar. Rev Med IMSS 2003;41(4):313-319.

15. Lee I. Mortalidad perinatal en un hospital de segundo nivel de atención. Rev Med IMSS 2003; 41(1):31-36.

16. O’Driscoll K, Foley M. Correlation of decrease in perinatal mortality and increase in cesarean rates. Obstet Gynecol 1983;61:1-5.