Caesarean section and neonatal outcomes in private hospitals in Brazil: comparative study of two different perinatal models of care

Jacqueline Alves Torres, Rosa Maria Soares Madeira Domingues, Jane Sandall, Zulmira Hartz, Silvana Granado Nogueira da Gama, Mariza Miranda Theme Filha, Arthur Orlando Correa Schilithz, Maria do Carmo Leal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

This study aims at comparing caesarean section rates and neonatal outcomes of two perinatal models of care provided in private hospitals in Brazil. Birth in Brazil data, a national hospital-based cohort conducted in the years 2011/2012 was used. We analysed 1,664 postpartum women and their offspring attended at 13 hospitals located in the South-east region of Brazil, divided into a "typical"--standard care model and "atypical"--Baby-Friendly hospital with collaborative practices between nurse-midwives and obstetricians on duty to attend deliveries in an alternative labour ward. The Robson's classification system was used to compare caesarean sections, which was lower in the atypical hospital (47.8% vs. 90.8%, p<0.001). Full term birth, early skin-to-skin contact, breastfeeding in the first hour, rooming-in care, and discharge in exclusive breastfeeding were more frequent in the atypical hospital. Neonatal adverse outcome did not differ significantly between hospitals. The atypical hospital's intervention should be further evaluated since it might reduce caesarean section prevalence and increase good practices in neonatal care.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)S1-S12
JournalCadernos de saúde pública
Volume30
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2014

Keywords

  • Cesarean Section
  • Parturition
  • Maternal and Child Health
  • Breast Feeding

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  • SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-Being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Caesarean section and neonatal outcomes in private hospitals in Brazil: comparative study of two different perinatal models of care'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this