Skip to main content
NCBI home page
American Journal of Public Health logoLink to American Journal of Public Health
. 1998 May;88(5):777–780. doi: 10.2105/ajph.88.5.777

Increased cesarean section rates and emerging patterns of health insurance in Shanghai, China.

W W Cai 1, J S Marks 1, C H Chen 1, Y X Zhuang 1, L Morris 1, J R Harris 1
PMCID: PMC1508965  PMID: 9585744

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the trend in cesarean section deliveries and the factors associated with it in the Minhang District of Shanghai, China. METHODS: A representative sample of the members of 2716 households in the district were interviewed in the fall of 1993. This study analyzed the data from 1959 married women of reproductive age with at least one live birth. RESULTS: During the past 3 decades, the proportion of infants born by cesarean section increased from 4.7% to 22.5%. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the highest cesarean section rate, which occurred in the most recent period of 1988 through 1993, was associated with form of medical payment, self-reported complications during pregnancy, higher birthweight, and maternal age. Government insurance pays all costs of cesarean sections and accounted for the highest proportion of the cesarean section rate. CONCLUSIONS: The high rates of cesarean sections in China are surprising given the lack of the factors that usually lead to cesarean sections. The increasing cesarean section rates may be an early indication that emerging forms of health insurance and fee-for-service payments to physicians will lead to an excessive emphasis on costly, high-technology medical care in China.

Full text

PDF
777

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Adashek J. A., Peaceman A. M., Lopez-Zeno J. A., Minogue J. P., Socol M. L. Factors contributing to the increased cesarean birth rate in older parturient women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993 Oct;169(4):936–940. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90030-m. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson G. M., Lomas J. Determinants of the increasing cesarean birth rate. Ontario data 1979 to 1982. N Engl J Med. 1984 Oct 4;311(14):887–892. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198410043111405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Barros F. C., Vaughan J. P., Victora C. G., Huttly S. R. Epidemic of caesarean sections in Brazil. Lancet. 1991 Jul 20;338(8760):167–169. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(91)90149-j. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gould J. B., Davey B., Stafford R. S. Socioeconomic differences in rates of cesarean section. N Engl J Med. 1989 Jul 27;321(4):233–239. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198907273210406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Keeler E. B., Brodie M. Economic incentives in the choice between vaginal delivery and cesarean section. Milbank Q. 1993;71(3):365–404. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. King J. F. Obstetric intervention and the economic imperative. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993 Apr;100(4):303–304. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1993.tb12967.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Lam S. K. Caesarean on request. Lancet. 1993 Mar 20;341(8847):763–763. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)90540-w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Macfarlane A., Chamberlain G. What is happening to caesarean section rates? Lancet. 1993 Oct 23;342(8878):1005–1006. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)92874-s. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Notzon F. C., Cnattingius S., Bergsjø P., Cole S., Taffel S., Irgens L., Daltveit A. K. Cesarean section delivery in the 1980s: international comparison by indication. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Feb;170(2):495–504. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(94)70217-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Notzon F. C. International differences in the use of obstetric interventions. JAMA. 1990 Jun 27;263(24):3286–3291. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Notzon F. C., Placek P. J., Taffel S. M. Comparisons of national cesarean-section rates. N Engl J Med. 1987 Feb 12;316(7):386–389. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198702123160706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Parazzini F., Pirotta N., La Vecchia C., Fedele L. Determinants of caesarean section rates in Italy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992 Mar;99(3):203–206. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1992.tb14499.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Savage W., Francome C. British caesarean section rates: have we reached a plateau? Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993 May;100(5):493–496. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1993.tb15280.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Stafford R. S., Sullivan S. D., Gardner L. B. Trends in cesarean section use in California, 1983 to 1990. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993 Apr;168(4):1297–1302. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90384-u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Taffel S. M. Cesarean section in America: dramatic trends, 1970 to 1987. Stat Bull Metrop Insur Co. 1989 Oct-Dec;70(4):2–11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Tay S. K., Tsakok F. H., Ng C. S. The use of intradepartmental audit to contain cesarean section rate. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1992 Oct;39(2):99–103. doi: 10.1016/0020-7292(92)90904-w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from American Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of American Public Health Association

RESOURCES