EVALUATING THE INDICATIONS FOR PRIMARY CESAREAN SECTION AT HA DONG GENERAL HOSPITAL
Nội dung chính của bài viết
Tóm tắt
Objective: To evaluate the indications for primary cesarean section at Ha Dong General Hospital in 2024.
Subject and method: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted on 572 pregnant women with a gestational age ≥ 28 weeks and no prior uterine scar who underwent their first cesarean section at Ha Dong General Hospital from January 2024 to December 2024.
Results: The hospital's cesarean section rate was 54.7%, with primary cesarean sections accounting for 28.1% of total births. Fetal causes were the most common indication (59,3%), primarily due to fetal distress (64,6% in nulliparous and 35.4% in multiparous women). Abnormal labor accounted for 18,0%, with fully dilated cervix but non-engaged head being the main cause, particularly in 62,2% of nulliparous cases. Maternal causes accounted for 9,1%, while adnexal causes represented 7.0%. Social factors (6,6%) were mainly related to infertility/IVF. Regarding clinical characteristics, 80,0% of cases were between 37 and 40 weeks of gestation, 83,2% were in the latent phase of labor, and 61,9% were nulliparous.
Conclusion: Indications for primary cesarean section at Ha Dong General Hospital in 2024 were primarily driven by fetal factors, especially fetal distress, and abnormalities in labor progression. Surgical decisions were frequently based on a combination of multiple clinical indications and were mostly performed during the latent phase of labor in full-term pregnancies.
Chi tiết bài viết
Từ khóa
Primary cesarean section; Indications for cesarean section; Fetal distress; Abnormal labor; Ha Dong General Hospital.
Tài liệu tham khảo
2. Guner G, Karabudak CB. Caesarean section rates and indications: a cross-sectional study from a tertiary care centre in Türkiye. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2025 Nov; 26(1):1..
3. World Health Organization. World Health Organization. 2015. WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates. Frequently Asked Questions. Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/who-statement-on-caesarean-section-rates-frequently-asked-questions
4. World Health Organization. WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates [Internet]. Geneva; 2015. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-RHR-15.02
5. Bang NT, Nga VTQ, Tin DM. Comments and evaluation of primary cesarean section results at Bach Mai Hospital in 2022 [Vietnamese]. J Vietnam Med. 2024;543(1):181–6.
6. Li HT, Luo S, Trasande L, Hellerstein S, Kang C, Li JX, et al. Geographic Variations and Temporal Trends in Cesarean Delivery Rates in China, 2008-2014. JAMA. 2017;317(1):69–76. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.18663.
7. Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise JM, Rouse DJ. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(3):179–93. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.01.026.
8. Brazier E, Borrell LN, Huynh M, Kelly EA, Nash D. Impact of new labor management guidelines on Cesarean rates among low-risk births at New York City hospitals: A controlled interrupted time series analysis. Ann Epidemiol. 2023;79:3–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2023.01.003.
9. Zhang J, Landy HJ, Ware Branch D, Burkman R, Haberman S, Gregory KD, et al. Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(6):1281–7. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181fdef6e.
10. Vogel JP, Betrán AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, et al. Use of the Robson classification to assess caesarean section trends in 21 countries: a secondary analysis of two WHO multicountry surveys. Lancet Glob Health. 2015;3(5):e260-70. DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(15)70094-X.
11. Boerma T, Ronsmans C, Melesse DY, Barros AJD, Barros FC, Juan L, et al. Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. Lancet. 2018;392(10155):1341–8. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31928-7.
12. Keag OE, Norman JE, Stock SJ. Long-term risks and benefits associated with cesarean delivery for mother, baby, and subsequent pregnancies: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2018;15(1):e1002494. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002494.