Do you pay to go private?: a single centre comparison of induction of labour and caesarean section rates in private versus public patients

Investment in the peace of mind? How private services change the landscape of maternity care in Poland

For over two decades midwifery research advocated for the continuity of care and the ability to establish a relationship between care providers and care users as an important features of quality maternity services. In many countries, while unavailable through public services, continuity of care became commercialized and can be access as a private service. In Poland, private prenatal consultations and dedicated midwifery care allow women to access continuity and establish personal relationships with care providers. In this study, we explore, how accessing these private services, impact the rates of medical interventions and type of care women receive during labour and birth. We analyse data collected through an online questionnaire from 4402 first-time mothers in healthy pregnancy who had given birth in Poland between 2020 and 2021. We show that while private consultation did not translate into any significant differences in care, women who accessed private dedicated midwifery services experienced more attentive and less medicalized care, namely were more likely to give birth in vertical position, move freely during labour and less likely to experience emergency caesarean section. However, private dedicated midwifery care did not shield them from negative experience. While private care offers benefits for women who can afford it, it also contributes to inequalities in access to quality care and puts women with less social and financial resources in a vulnerable position. Efforts should be made to develop a more universal and equitable model of care that allows for building personal relationships between maternity care providers and women.

What would reduce caesarean section rates?—Views from pregnant women and clinicians in Ireland

Background

Caesarean section rates continue to rise in most parts of the world. While CS is a lifesaving procedure there is evidence that, beyond a certain threshold, CS rates may contribute to increased maternal and perinatal morbidity. This study aimed to elicit the views of pregnant women’s and clinicians’ on how CS rates might be reduced.

Methods

Pregnant women and their partners, and clinicians working with pregnant women in a maternity hospital in the Republic of Ireland of Ireland, were invited to participate in focus groups. Eligibility criteria included all women attending antenatal classes and clinicians working with pregnant women. A convenience sample was used and interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

Four focus group interviews were conducted with 30 clinicians and 15 pregnant women and two partners participated in three focus groups. A further two women were interviewed individually. Participants expressed a view that rising CS rates were impacted by a societal perception that CS had become a ‘normal mode of birth’. Suggestions for reducing CS rates were offered by clinicians and pregnant women and their partners.

Conclusions

Clinicians and pregnant women consider that CS rates can be reduced if a shared philosophy supporting normal birth is prioritised alongside adequate resourcing. Women and their partners also believe that enhanced communication with clinicians is central to reducing CS rates.

Outpatient labour induction

The inexorable rise in induction rates over the past two decades, in parallel with increasing medical costs and pressure to reduce length of stay, has led to marked logistic difficulties for health care workers, managers and planners. Maternity services are being overwhelmed by the need to allocate staff and delivery suite space for the scheduling and undertaking of induction processes, rather than focussing care for women in spontaneous labour. Induction of labour according to the majority of current protocols and guidelines necessitates increased length of stay and relatively aggressive use of oxytocin (to reduce the time expended in the labour ward from artificial rupture of membranes (AROM) to establishment of labour). This increased oxytocin usage requires increased use of continuous electronic foetal monitoring, and may also increase epidural usage, further increasing the complexity of labour for the woman and her health care workers. Outpatient care after cervical priming and even outpatient care after AROM may help to ease these pressures and may reduce the medicalisation of the birth experience when induction is indicated, with a potential to reduce oxytocin use and associated interventions. If the period between cervical priming to AROM is managed as outpatient care, then the woman may be able to find better psychological and social support at home, as well as maintain autonomy and get better rest prior to the onset of labour. Inpatient AROM could also be followed by outpatient care until the pregnant person returns to the hospital, either in spontaneous labour, or for initiation of syntocinon after 12-18 h. High-quality research has already demonstrated that outpatient care for cervical ripening is acceptable to mothers and caregivers, has economic benefits and has an acceptable safety profile in appropriately selected low-risk inductions.