Khunpradit Suthit, Tavender Emma, Lumbiganon Pisake, Laopaiboon Malinee, Wasiak Jason, Gruen Russell L
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Lamphun Hospital, 177 Jamthevee Road, Lamphun, Lamphun, Thailand, 51000.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jun 15(6):CD005528. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005528.pub2.
Caesarean section rates are steadily increasing globally. The factors contributing to these observed increases are complex. Non-clinical interventions, those applied independent of patient care in a clinical encounter, may have a role in reducing unnecessary caesarean sections.
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean sections.
We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register (29 March 2010), the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Specialised Register (29 March 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2); MEDLINE (1950 to March 2010); EMBASE (1947 to March 2010) and CINAHL (1982 to March 2010).
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental studies, controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) with at least two intervention and control sites, and interrupted time series analyses (ITS) where the intervention time was clearly defined and there were at least three data points before and three after the intervention. Studies evaluated non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section rates. Participants included pregnant women and their families, healthcare providers who work with expectant mothers, communities and advocacy groups.
Three review authors independently assessed the quality and abstracted data of all eligible studies using a standardised data extraction form, modified from the Cochrane EPOC checklists. We contacted study authors for additional information.
We included 16 studies in this review.Six studies specifically targeted pregnant women. Two RCTs were shown to be effective in reducing caesarean section rates: a nurse-led relaxation training programme for women with a fear or anxiety of childbirth and birth preparation sessions. However, both RCTs were small in size and targeted younger mothers with their first pregnancies. There is insufficient evidence that prenatal education and support programmes, computer patient decision-aids, decision-aid booklets and intensive group therapy are effective.Ten studies targeted health professionals. Three of these studies were effective in reducing caesarean section rates. A cluster-RCT of guideline implementation with mandatory second opinion resulted in a small, statistically significant reduction in total caesarean section rates (adjusted risk difference (RD) -1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8 to -0.1); this reduction was predominately in intrapartum sections. An ITS study of mandatory second opinion and peer review feedback at department meetings found statistically significant results at 48 months for reducing repeat caesarean section rates (change in level was -6.4%; 95% CI -9.7% to -3.1% and change in slope -1.14%; 95% CI -1.9% to -0.3%) but not for total caesarean section rates. A cluster-RCT of guideline implementation with support from local opinion leaders increased the proportion of women with a previous caesarean section being offered a trial of labour (absolute difference 16.8%) and the number who had a vaginal birth (VBAC rates) (absolute difference 13.5%). The P values are, however, not reported due to unit of analysis errors. There was insufficient evidence that audit and feedback, training of public health nurses, insurance reform, external peer review and legislative changes are effective.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of guidelines with mandatory second opinion can lead to a small reduction in caesarean section rates, predominately in intrapartum sections. Peer review, including pre-caesarean consultation, mandatory secondary opinion and postcaesarean surveillance can lead to a reduction in repeat caesarean section rates. Guidelines disseminated with endorsement and support from local opinion leaders may increase the proportion of women with previous caesarean sections being offered a trial of labour in certain settings. Nurse-led relaxation classes and birth preparation classes may reduce caesarean section rates in low-risk pregnancies.
全球剖宫产率在稳步上升。导致这种上升趋势的因素较为复杂。非临床干预措施,即在临床诊疗过程中独立于患者护理之外实施的措施,可能在减少不必要的剖宫产方面发挥作用。
评估非临床干预措施减少不必要剖宫产的有效性和安全性。
我们检索了以下电子数据库:Cochrane有效实践与护理组织(EPOC)小组专业注册库(2010年3月29日)、Cochrane妊娠与分娩小组专业注册库(2010年3月29日)、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(Cochrane图书馆2010年第2期);医学索引在线数据库(1950年至2010年3月);荷兰医学文摘数据库(1947年至2010年3月)以及护理学与健康照护数据库(1982年至2010年3月)。
我们纳入了随机对照试验(RCT)、准实验研究、对照临床试验(CCT)、具有至少两个干预组和对照组的前后对照研究(CBA)以及干预时间明确且干预前后至少各有三个数据点的中断时间序列分析(ITS)。研究评估了减少不必要剖宫产率的非临床干预措施。参与者包括孕妇及其家庭、为孕妇提供服务的医护人员、社区和倡导团体。
三位综述作者使用从Cochrane EPOC清单修改而来的标准化数据提取表,独立评估了所有符合条件研究的质量并提取数据。我们与研究作者联系以获取更多信息。
本综述纳入了16项研究。六项研究专门针对孕妇。两项RCT显示在降低剖宫产率方面有效:一项由护士主导的针对有分娩恐惧或焦虑的女性的放松训练计划以及分娩准备课程。然而,这两项RCT规模都较小,且针对的是初产妇且年龄较轻的母亲。没有足够证据表明产前教育和支持计划、计算机辅助患者决策工具、决策辅助手册以及强化团体治疗有效。十项研究针对卫生专业人员。其中三项研究在降低剖宫产率方面有效。一项实施指南并强制要求二次会诊的整群RCT导致剖宫产总率有小幅但具有统计学意义的降低(调整风险差(RD)-1.9;95%置信区间(CI)-3.8至-0.1);这种降低主要体现在产时剖宫产。一项在科室会议上进行强制二次会诊和同行评审反馈的ITS研究发现,在48个月时降低再次剖宫产率有统计学意义的结果(水平变化为-6.4%;95%CI -9.7%至-3.1%,斜率变化为-1.14%;95%CI -1.9%至-0.3%),但对剖宫产总率无影响。一项在当地意见领袖支持下实施指南的整群RCT增加了有剖宫产史的女性接受试产的比例(绝对差异16.8%)以及阴道分娩(VBAC率)的人数(绝对差异13.5%)。然而,由于分析单位错误,未报告P值。没有足够证据表明审核与反馈、公共卫生护士培训、保险改革、外部同行评审和立法变革有效。
实施带有强制二次会诊的指南可导致剖宫产率小幅降低,主要是产时剖宫产率。同行评审,包括剖宫产术前会诊、强制二次会诊和剖宫产后监测,可降低再次剖宫产率。在当地意见领袖认可和支持下传播的指南可能会在某些情况下增加有剖宫产史的女性接受试产的比例。护士主导的放松课程和分娩准备课程可能会降低低风险妊娠的剖宫产率。