Title : Regional Differences and Sociodemographic Factors Associated with Cesarean Section Delivery in Bangladesh through Multilevel Poisson Regression Model

Vol 6 No 8 (2023): Volume 06 Issue 08 August 2023

Article Date Published : 5 August 2023 | Page No.: 5494-5502 | Google Scholar | Crossref doi for this article

Abstract :

Cesarean section is the most challenging issue not only in developing countries but also in developed countries because it is increasing at an alarming rate worldwide, where the majority of cesarean sections are unnecessary. Unnecessary cesarean delivery in Bangladesh is widespread and is responsible for long-term and short-term health complications for both mothers and children. This study aimed to assess regional differences and sociodemographic factors associated with cesarean section delivery in Bangladesh. The most recent Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2017-18 data was used in this study. A total of 5,299 ever-married women who gave birth within the three years preceding the survey were analyzed. A multilevel Poisson regression model was used to identify the sociodemographic factors associated with cesarean section deliveries in Bangladesh. The prevalence of cesarean section deliveries was about 33.0%. The result showed that women’s aged 30-36 years (IRR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.01–1.22), women’s secondary education (IRR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.14–2.02), higher secondary education (IRR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.35–2.47), partner’s secondary education (IRR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.05–1.57),  higher secondary education  (IRR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.25–1.91), women living in the Dhaka division (IRR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.04–1.43), women living in the Khulna division (IRR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.15–1.60), and women living in the Rajshahi division (IRR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.06–1.51), middle wealth index (IRR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.13-1.52), richest wealth index (IRR=1.59, 95% CI=1.37-1.84) and exposure to mass media (IRR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.27–1.64)  were significantly more to deliver by cesarean section. Therefore, attention to women’s age, education, partner’s education, division, wealth index, and exposure to mass media might help policymakers make appropriate strategies and policies that would contribute to avoiding unnecessary cesarean section deliveries in Bangladesh.

Keywords :

Bangladesh, Cesarean section, Incidence rate ratio, Multilevel Poisson regression model, Prevalence

References :

  • Rahman, A. Ahmad Shariff, A. Shafie, R. Saaid, and R. Md Tahir, “Determinants of Caesarean Risk Factor in Northern Region of Bangladesh: A Multivariate Analysis,” Iran. J. Public Health, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 16–27, Jan. 2014.
  • Begum et al., “Indications and determinants of caesarean section delivery: Evidence from a population-based study in Matlab, Bangladesh,” PLOS ONE, vol. 12, no. 11, p. e0188074, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188074.
  • Yaya, O. A. Uthman, A. Amouzou, and G. Bishwajit, “Disparities in caesarean section prevalence and determinants across sub-Saharan Africa countries,” Glob. Health Res. Policy, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 19, Jul. 2018, doi: 10.1186/s41256-018-0074-y.
  • K. Panda, I. Nayak, and U. S. Mishra, “Determinant of inequality in cesarean delivery in India: A decomposition analysis,” Health Care Women Int., vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 817–832, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1080/07399332.2020.1711757.
  • Neuman et al., “Prevalence and determinants of caesarean section in private and public health facilities in underserved South Asian communities: cross-sectional analysis of data from Bangladesh, India and Nepal,” BMJ Open, vol. 4, no. 12, p. e005982, Dec. 2014, doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005982.
  • Hasan, Md. M. Alam, and Md. G. Hossain, “Associated factors and their individual contributions to caesarean delivery among married women in Bangladesh: analysis of Bangladesh demographic and health survey data,” BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, vol. 19, no. 1, p. 433, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2588-9.
  • S. Ahmed, M. Islam, I. Jahan, and I. F. Shaon, “Multilevel analysis to identify the factors associated with caesarean section in Bangladesh: evidence from a nationally representative survey,” Int. Health, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 30–36, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.1093/inthealth/ihac006.
  • Ahmmed, M. M. R. Manik, and M. J. Hossain, “Caesarian section (CS) delivery in Bangladesh: A nationally representative cross-sectional study,” PLOS ONE, vol. 16, no. 7, p. e0254777, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254777.
  • M. Idris and S. Menghisteab, “Cesarean section delivery rates, determinants, and indications: a retrospective study in Dekemhare Hospital,” Glob. Reprod. Health, vol. 7, no. 1, p. e56, Spring 2022, doi: 10.1097/GRH.0000000000000056.
  1. Maharlouei, M. Moalaee, S. Ajdari, M. Zarei, and K. B. Lankarani, “Caesarean Delivery in South-Western Iran: Trends and Determinants in a Community-Based Survey,” Med. Princ. Pract., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 184–188, Aug. 2012, doi: 10.1159/000341762.
  2. Ashfaq, K. Ashfaq, M. A.- Rehman, N. Ali, and M. Tariq, “A cross-sectional study to assess the frequency and determinants of cesarean section in three cities of Punjab.,” Pak. Biomed. J., pp. 300–303, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.54393/pbmj.v5i1.299.
  3. Asfaw and A. Tesema, “Determinant factors, trend and outcomes of cesarean delivery in Debre Berhan referral hospital, North Shewa Zone, Ethiopia,” Pediatr. Rep., vol. 12, no. 2, Art. no. 2, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.4081/pr.2020.8430.
  4. Afiaz, A. R. Arusha, N. Ananna, E. Kabir, and R. K. Biswas, “A national assessment of elective cesarean sections in Bangladesh and the need for health literacy and accessibility,” Sci. Rep., vol. 11, no. 1, Art. no. 1, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-96337-0.
  5. K. C. Bhandari, B. Dhungel, and M. Rahman, “Trends and correlates of cesarean section rates over two decades in Nepal,” BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 763, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-03453-2.
  6. M. Dibabi, A. T. Debiso, and K. M. Rodamo, “Adverse maternal outcomes associated with Cesarean deliveries and their determinants: hospital based cross sectional, mixed- methods study,” J. Health Res., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 696–704, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1108/JHR-09-2020-0396.
  7. Gyaase et al., “Prevalence and determinants of caesarean section deliveries in the Kintampo Districts of Ghana,” BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, vol. 23, no. 1, p. 286, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-05622-5.
  8. Guendelman et al., “Prevalence, Disparities, And Determinants Of Primary Cesarean Births Among First-Time Mothers In Mexico,” Health Aff. (Millwood), vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 714–722, Apr. 2017, doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2016.1084.
  9. Gebreegziabher Hailu et al., “Determinants of Cesarean Section Deliveries in Public Hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2018/19: A Case-Control Study,” Obstet. Gynecol. Int., vol. 2020, p. e9018747, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1155/2020/9018747.
  10. R. Haider, M. M. Rahman, M. Moinuddin, A. E. Rahman, S. Ahmed, and M. M. Khan, “Ever-increasing Caesarean section and its economic burden in Bangladesh,” PLOS ONE, vol. 13, no. 12, p. e0208623, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208623.
  11. R. Jahnke, K. M. Houck, M. E. Bentley, and A. L. Thompson, “Rising rates of cesarean delivery in Ecuador: Socioeconomic and institutional determinants over two decades,” Birth, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 335–343, 2019, doi: 10.1111/birt.12421.
  12. Maroufizadeh et al., “Determinants of Cesarean Section among Primiparas: A Comparison of Classification Methods,” Iran. J. Public Health, vol. 47, no. 12, pp. 1913–1922, Dec. 2018.
  13. Kumar and S. Lakhtakia, “Rising cesarean deliveries in India: medical compulsions or convenience of the affluent?,” Health Care Women Int., vol. 42, no. 4–6, pp. 611–635, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1080/07399332.2020.1798963.
  14. N. Mia, M. Z. Islam, M. R. Chowdhury, A. Razzaque, B. Chin, and M. S. Rahman, “Socio-demographic, health and institutional determinants of caesarean section among the poorest segment of the urban population: Evidence from selected slums in Dhaka, Bangladesh,” SSM – Popul. Health, vol. 8, p. 100415, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2019.100415.
  15. Karim et al., “Prevalence and factors associated with caesarean section in four Hard-to-Reach areas of Bangladesh: Findings from a cross-sectional survey,” PLOS ONE, vol. 15, no. 6, p. e0234249, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234249.
  16. M. Islam and F. M. Noor, “Prevalence and factors of cesarean delivery among Bangladeshi reproductive aged women: evidence from multiple Indicator cluster survey 2019 data,” J. Public Health, vol. 30, no. 9, pp. 2103–2112, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10389-021-01551-9.
  17. Amjad, U. Amjad, R. Zakar, A. Usman, M. Z. Zakar, and F. Fischer, “Factors associated with caesarean deliveries among child-bearing women in Pakistan: secondary analysis of data from the Demographic and Health Survey, 2012–13,” BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 113, 2018, doi: 10.1186/s12884-018-1743-z.
  18. O. Faruk, M. E. Arafat, and S. H. Shanta, “Socioeconomic, demographic, and cultural determinants of delivery by caesarian section in Ethiopia: Evidence from Ethiopia Mini Demographic and Health Survey 2019,” PLOS ONE, vol. 18, no. 7, p. e0288022, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288022.
  19. Verma, R. K. Vishwakarma, D. C. Nath, H. T. A. Khan, R. Prakash, and O. Abid, “Prevalence and determinants of caesarean section in South and South-East Asian women,” PLOS ONE, vol. 15, no. 3, p. e0229906, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229906.
  20. F. Abdul-Rahim, N. “Mohammad E. Abu-Rmeileh, and L. Wick, “Cesarean section deliveries in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt): An analysis of the 2006 Palestinian Family Health Survey,” Health Policy, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 151–156, Dec. 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.07.006.
  21. Dankwah, S. Kirychuk, W. Zeng, C. Feng, and M. Farag, “Socioeconomic inequalities in the use of caesarean section delivery in Ghana: a cross-sectional study using nationally representative data,” Int. J. Equity Health, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 162, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1186/s12939-019-1063-6.
  22. M. Rahman, M. R. Haider, M. Moinuddin, A. E. Rahman, S. Ahmed, and M. M. Khan, “Determinants of caesarean section in Bangladesh: Cross-sectional analysis of Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2014 Data,” PLOS ONE, vol. 13, no. 9, p. e0202879, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202879.
  23. Sarkar, “Prevalence and determinants of the use of caesarean section (CS) in the dichotomy of ‘public’ and ‘private’ health facilities in West Bengal. India,” Clin. Epidemiol. Glob. Health, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1377–1383, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.cegh.2020.05.017.
  24. S. M. Shahabuddin, T. Delvaux, B. Utz, A. Bardají, and V. D. Brouwere, “Determinants and trends in health facility-based deliveries and caesarean sections among married adolescent girls in Bangladesh,” BMJ Open, vol. 6, no. 9, p. e012424, Sep. 2016, doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012424.
  25. Mikki, N. Abu-Rmeileh, N. Asab, S. Hassan, and L. Wick, “Caesarean delivery rates, determinants and indications in Makassed Hospital, Jerusalem 1993 and 2002,” Jul. 2009, Accessed: Jun. 23, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://fada.birzeit.edu/handle/20.500.11889/1971
  26. C. Jolly, N. Sebire, J. Harris, S. Robinson, and L. Regan, “Obstetric risks of pregnancy in women less than 18 years old,” Obstet. Gynecol., vol. 96, no. 6, pp. 962–966, Dec. 2000, doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(00)01075-9.
  27. M. Callaghan and C. J. Berg, “Pregnancy-related mortality among women aged 35 years and older, United States, 1991–1997,” Obstet. Gynecol., vol. 102, no. 5, Part 1, pp. 1015–1021, Nov. 2003, doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(03)00740-3.
  28. D. Fajarwati and N. Sari, “Determinants of cesarean delivery in Indonesia: An analysis of the 2017 Indonesia demographic and health survey,” Malahayati Int. J. Nurs. Health Sci., vol. 5, no. 2, Art. no. 2, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.33024/minh.v5i2.9573.
  29. K. Pandey, M. R. Raushan, D. Gautam, and S. B. Neogi, “Alarming Trends of Cesarean Section—Time to Rethink: Evidence From a Large-Scale Cross-sectional Sample Survey in India,” J. Med. Internet Res., vol. 25, no. 1, p. e41892, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.2196/41892.
  30. C. Prakash and S. Neupane, “Cesarean deliveries among Nepalese mothers: changes over time 2001–2011 and determinants,” Arch. Gynecol. Obstet., vol. 289, no. 2, pp. 421–427, Feb. 2014, doi: 10.1007/s00404-013-2976-8.
  31. O. Adewuyi, A. Auta, V. Khanal, S. J. Tapshak, and Y. Zhao, “Cesarean delivery in Nigeria: prevalence and associated factors―a population-based cross-sectional study,” BMJ Open, vol. 9, no. 6, p. e027273, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027273.
  32. Roy, P. Paul, P. Chouhan, M. Rahaman, and N. Kapasia, “Geographical variability and factors associated with caesarean section delivery in India: a comparative assessment of Bihar and Tamil Nadu,” BMC Public Health, vol. 21, no. 1, p. 1715, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11750-4.
  33. Kumar and H. Sharma, “Prevalence and determinants of socioeconomic inequality in caesarean section deliveries in Bangladesh: an analysis of cross-sectional data from Bangladesh Demographic Health Survey, 2017-18,” BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, vol. 23, no. 1, p. 492, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-05782-4.

How to Cite :

Regional Differences and Sociodemographic Factors Associated with Cesarean Section Delivery in Bangladesh through Multilevel Poisson Regression Model. Md. Mamunur Rashid, Md. Saiful Islam, Mostafizur Rahman, Tapan Kumar Roy , 6(8), 5494-5502. Retrieved from https://ijcsrr.org/single-view/?id=12058&pid=11944

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Md. Mamunur Rashid, Md. Saiful Islam, Mostafizur Rahman, Tapan Kumar Roy,

View

185

Citation

Downloads

Article Details