A root cause analysis of increasing caesarean section rates in a tertiary care private hospital in North India

Background: Increase in the incidence of caesarean section is a matter of concern worldwide. Robson’s criteria which is universally accepted now as a way for calculating caesarean rates takes into account only the obstetrical consideration, however, it is noteworthy that many socioeconomic and cultural factors also have a role to play. This study takes into account both Robson’s criteria and common socio-cultural factors which lead to increased caesarean rates with an attempt to suggest ways to curtail this trend.Methods: The study was a hospital based cross-sectional study at a private tertiary care hospital in New Delhi. 1200 consecutive live births after 34 weeks of gestation were analysed over a period of one year.Results: LSCS was the most common mode of delivery 733 (61.1%). 329 (27.4%) had induced labour of which 260 (76.2%) had LSCS. 333 women had elective LSCS. Rates of CDMR were 185 (25.2%) which is very significant. As per Robson’s criteria maximum number of women (318) were in group 2, of which 226 (71.1%) underwent caesarean section.Conclusions: High caesarean rates can be attributed to a multitude of factors. Robson’s criteria are an effective way for analysis of obstetric indications. Other added factors include comorbidities, CDMR, fear of litigations, etc which were analysed

A prospective randomized comparative study of the efficacy of sustained release vaginal insert versus intracervical gel in primigravidae at term pregnancy

vBackground: Induction of labour is the intentional initiation of labour before spontaneous onset for the purpose of delivery of fetoplacental unit. Failure of induction is responsible for increased incidence of caesarean delivery. This study performed to assess and compare the clinical effects of sustained release vaginal insert versus intracervical gel in primiparous women with term pregnancy in terms of improvement of Bishop’s score, Induction delivery interval, incidence of hyperstimulation, maternal and neonatal outcomes.Methods: A total 100 consecutive term pregnant women who underwent labor induction for fetal or maternal indications were divided randomly into two groups. Group A - sustained release Vaginal insert and Group B - Intracervical gel. Informed consent was taken from each patient.Results: Statistically significant increase in final Bishop’s score (p=0.008) and hyperstimulation (p=0.04) was seen in Vaginal insert group as compared to Intracervical gel group, while there were no statistically significant differences in maternal outcomes, neonatal outcomes and need for oxytocin augmentation in both groups.Conclusions: In this study we found that insert did not improve the induction delivery interval or rate of successful induction, nor did it have any advantage in terms of neonatal outcome although it did improve the Bishops score – Its advantage was in terms of single application, few prevaginal examinations, longer duration of action and immediate retrieval in case of hyperstimulation. Its main drawback remained the maintenance of cold chain without which its efficacy decreases. Another significant observation was the dropout rate of insert (16%)

A randomized double-blind study to evaluate asurgeon-based technique to reduce post-operative pain in minimal gynecological surgery

Background: The study aims to evaluate whether instillation of levo-bupivacaine intraperitoneally decreases post-operative pain after laparoscopic gynaecological surgeries, using VAS pain Scale. Methods: Randomized placebo controlled double blinded study conducted at tertiary care hospital in New Delhi. 90 ASA I & II women scheduled to undergo elective laparoscopic gynaecological surgeries. 20 ml 0.5% levo-bupivacaine diluted with 40ml normal saline (total 60ml) intraperitoneally at the end of surgery before closure of ports along with port site infiltration of levo-bupivacaine (3-5 ml) in intervention group and 60 ml normal saline intraperitoneally in control group. Results: Mean pain scores were significantly lower (p<0.01) in the intervention group when compared to the control group for initial 4 hours of the study after that mean pain score was lower in intervention group than control group but it was statistically not significant. The requirement of rescue analgesia was also significantly lesser in intervention group compared to control group. Conclusions: Levo-bupivacaine is an easy, cheap and non-invasive method which provides good analgesia in the immediate postoperative period after laparoscopic gynaecological surgery, without adverse effects, especially in the early postoperative period. This improves patients experience and should be made an integral part of all minimal gynaecological endoscopic surgery