Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29764384›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2018

Caesarean section audit to improve quality of care in a rural referral hospital in Tanzania.

Luuk Dekker, Tessa Houtzager, Omary Kilume, John Horogo, Jos van Roosmalen, Angelo Sadock Nyamtema

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Luuk DekkerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St. Francis Referral Hospital, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Tessa HoutzagerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St. Francis Referral Hospital, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Omary KilumeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St. Francis Referral Hospital, Ifakara, Tanzania.
John HorogoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St. Francis Referral Hospital, Ifakara, Tanzania.
Jos van RoosmalenDepartment of Obstetrics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Angelo Sadock NyamtemaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St. Francis Referral Hospital, Ifakara, Tanzania. nyamtema_angelo@yahoo.co.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1987-8134
Leiden University Medical Center · NLSt. Francis Referral Hospital · TZIfakara Health Institute · TZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCaesarean section (CS) is often a life-saving procedure, but can also lead to serious complications, even more so in low-resource settings. Therefore unnecessary CS should be avoided and optimal circumstances for vaginal delivery should be created. In this study, we aim to audit indications for Caesarean sections and improve decision-making and obstetric management.

methodsAudit of all cases of CS performed from January to August 2013 was performed in a rural referral hospital in Tanzania. The study period was divided in three audit blocks; retrospective (before auditing), prospective 1 and prospective 2. A local audit panel (LP) and an external auditor (EA) judged if obstetric management was adequate and indications were appropriate or if CS could have been prevented and yet retain good pregnancy outcome. Furthermore, changes in modes of deliveries, overall pregnancy outcome and decision-to-delivery interval were monitored.

resultsDuring the study period there were 1868 deliveries. Of these, 403 (21.6%) were Caesarean sections. The proportions of unjustified CS prior to introduction of audit were as high as 34 and 75%, according to the respective judgments of LP and EA. Following introduction of audit, the proportions of unjustified CS decreased to 23% (p = 0.29) and 52% (p = 0.01) according to LP and EA respectively. However, CS rate did not change (20.2 to 21.7%), assisted vacuum delivery rate did not increase (3.9 to 1.8%) and median decision-to-delivery interval was 83 min (range 10 - 390 min).

conclusionsAlthough this is a single center study, these findings suggest that unnecessary Caesarean sections exist at an alarming rate even in referral hospitals and suggest that a vast number can be averted by introducing a focused CS audit system. Our findings indicate that CS audit is a useful tool and, if well implemented, can enhance rational use of resources, improve decision-making and harmonise practice among care providers.

Indexed as

AdultCesarean SectionFemaleHospitals, RuralHumansMaternal Health ServicesMedical AuditPregnancyProspective StudiesQuality ImprovementReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesTanzaniaAssisted vaginal deliveryAuditCaesarean sectionDecision-to-delivery intervalTanzaniaVacuum delivery

Identifiers

PMID29764384
PMCPMC5952645
OpenAlexW2804236416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.