CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 321Maternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsReproductive Health and ContraceptionGlobal Health and Surgery

Global increased cesarean section rates and public health implications: A call to action

Open access
Angolile, Cornel M., Max, Baraka L., Mushemba, Justice, Mashauri, Harold L.·2023·Health Science Reports
DOI 10.1002/hsr2.1274PMC PMC10196217
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Over the years; global caesarian section (CS) rates have significantly increased from around 7% in 1990 to 21% today surpassing the ideal acceptable CS rate which is around 10%–15% according to the WHO. However, currently, not all CS are done for medical reasons with rapidly increasing rate of nonmedically indicated CS and the so‐called “caesarian on maternal request.” These trends are projected to continue increasing over this current decade where both unmet needs and overuse are expected to coexist with the projected global rate of 29% by 2030. CS reduces both maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality significantly when it is done under proper indications while at the same time, it can be of harm to the mother and the child when performed contrary. The later exposes both the mother and the baby to a number of unnecessary short and long‐term complications and increase the chances of developing different noncommunicable diseases and immune‐related conditions among babies later in life. The implications of lowering SC rate will ultimately lower healthcare expenditures. This challenge can be addressed by several ways including provision of intensive public health education regarding public health implications of increased CS rate. Assisted vaginal delivery approaches like the use of vacuum and forceps and other methods should be considered and encouraged during delivery as long as their indications for implementation are met. Conducting frequent external review and audits to the health facilities and providing feedback regarding the rates of CS deliveries can help to keep in check the rising CS trends as well as identifying the settings with unmet surgical needs. Moreover, the public especially expectant mothers during clinic visits and clinicians should be educated and be informed on the WHO recommendations on nonclinical interventions towards reduction of unnecessary CS procedures.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hsr2.1274

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Factors contributing to the rise in cesarean section include variability in provider practice patterns, fear of malpractice litigation, and systemic organizational dynamics within health systems.

    “Several interconnected factors have contributed to this rise, including variability in provider practice patterns, fear of malpractice litigation, and systemic organizational dynamics within health systems [8, 9].”

    From Determinants of Delivery Mode Preferences and Decision‐Making Among Jordanian Women: A Cross‐Sectional Study (2025) · cites this paper as [8]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. [2]Rahman M, Khan N, Rahman A, Alam M, Khan A. Long‐term effects of caesarean delivery on health and behavioural outcomes of the mother and child in Bangladesh. J Health Popul Nutr. 2022; 41(1): 45. 36195965 PMC9531390
  2. [3]Keag OE, Norman JE, Stock SJ. Long‐term risks and benefits associated with cesarean delivery for mother, baby, and subsequent pregnancies: systematic review and meta‐analysis. PLoS Med. 2018; 15(1): e1002494. 29360829 PMC5779640
  3. [4]Blustein J, Liu J. Time to consider the risks of caesarean delivery for long term child health. BMJ. 2015; 350: h2410. https://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h2410 26063685 PMC4707565
  4. [5]Mylonas I, Friese K. Indications for and risks of elective cesarean section. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015; 112(29–30): 489‐ 495. 26249251 PMC4555060
  5. [6]WHO. WHO statement on caesarean section rates; 2015. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-RHR-15.02 26278843
  6. [7]Mancuso A, De Vivo A, Fanara G, et al. Caesarean section on request: are there loco‐regional factors influencing maternal choice? An Italian experience. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008; 28(4): 382‐ 385. 18604668
  7. [8]Plante LA. Public health implications of cesarean on demand. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2006; 61(12): 807‐ 815. 17107630
  8. [9]Christilaw JE. Cesarean section by choice: constructing a reproductive rights framework for the debate. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2006; 94(3): 262‐ 268. 16842789
  9. [10]Potter JE, Berquo E, Perpetuo IHO, et al. Unwanted caesarean sections among public and private patients in Brazil: prospective study. BMJ. 2001; 323(7322): 1155‐ 1158. 11711406 PMC59849
  10. [11]Rosenberg KR, Trevathan WR. Evolutionary perspectives on cesarean section. Evol Med Public Health. 2018; 2018(1): 67‐ 81.
  11. [12]Grant D. Physician financial incentives and cesarean delivery: new conclusions from the healthcare cost and utilization project. J Health Econ. 2009; 28(1): 244‐ 250. 19027184
  12. [13]Main EK, Morton CH, Melsop K, Hopkins D, Giuliani G, Gould JB. Creating a public agenda for maternity safety and quality in cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 120(5): 1194‐ 1198. 23090538
  13. [14]Mi J, Liu F. Rate of caesarean section is alarming in China. Lancet. 2014; 383(9927): 1463‐ 1464. 24766963
  14. [15]Shirzad M, Shakibazadeh E, Hajimiri K, et al. Prevalence of and reasons for women's, family members', and health professionals' preferences for cesarean section in Iran: a mixed‐methods systematic review. Reprod Health. 2021; 18(1): 1‐ 30. https://reproductive-health-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12978-020-01047-x 33388072 PMC7778821 · DOI · Paper page
  15. [16]Roudsari RL, Zakerihamidi M, Khoei EM. Socio‐cultural beliefs, values and traditions regarding women's preferred mode of birth in the north of Iran. Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2015; 3(3): 165‐ 176. 26171405 PMC4495324
  16. [17]Boerma T, Ronsmans C, Melesse DY, et al. Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. Lancet. 2018; 392(10155): 1341‐ 1348. http://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140673618319287/fulltext 30322584
  17. [18]Panda S, Begley C, Daly D. Clinicians' views of factors influencing decision‐making for CS for first‐time mothers—a qualitative descriptive study. PLoS One. 2022; 17(12): e0279403. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0279403 36576912 PMC9797090 · DOI
  18. [19]Minkoff H. Fear of litigation and cesarean section rates. Semin Perinatol. 2012; 36(5): 390‐ 394. 23009974
  19. [20]Elaraby S, Altieri E, Downe S, et al. Behavioural factors associated with fear of litigation as a driver for the increased use of caesarean sections: a scoping review. BMJ Open. 2023; 13(4): e070454. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/4/e070454 PMC10124311 37076154
  20. [21]Ionescu CA, Dimitriu M, Poenaru E, et al. Defensive caesarean section: a reality and a recommended health care improvement for Romanian obstetrics. J Eval Clin Pract. 2019; 25(1): 111‐ 116. 30178624 PMC6586009
  21. [22]Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Souza JP, Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Heal. 2021; 6(6): e005671. PMC8208001 34130991
  22. [23]Magne F, Puchi Silva A, Carvajal B, Gotteland M. The elevated rate of cesarean section and its contribution to non‐communicable chronic diseases in Latin America: the growing involvement of the microbiota. Front Pediatr. 2017; 5: 192. 28929093 PMC5591430
  23. [24]Ye J, Zhang J, Mikolajczyk R, Torloni M, Gülmezoglu A, Betran A. Association between rates of caesarean section and maternal and neonatal mortality in the 21st century: a worldwide population‐based ecological study with longitudinal data. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016; 123(5): 745‐ 753. PMC5014131 26331389
  24. [25]Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, et al. Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet. 2006; 367(9525): 1819‐ 1829. 16753484
  25. [26]Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L, et al. Short‐term and long‐term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children. Lancet. 2018;Oct 392(10155): 1349‐ 1357. 30322585
  26. [27]Frye RE, Sergi C, Godman B. The elevated rate of cesarean section and its contribution to non‐communicable chronic diseases in Latin America: the growing involvement of the microbiota. Front Pediatr. 2017; 5: 192. 28929093 PMC5591430
  27. [28]Pinto Coelho GD, Arial Ayres LF, Barreto DS, Henriques BD, Cardoso Prado MRM, Dos Passos CM. Acquisition of microbiota according to the type of birth: an integrative review. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2021; 29: e3446. 34287544 PMC8294792
  28. [29]Kim G, Bae J, Kim MJ, et al. Delayed establishment of gut microbiota in infants delivered by cesarean section. Front Microbiol. 2020; 11: 2099. 33013766 PMC7516058
  29. [30]Zhang C, Li L, Jin B, et al. The effects of delivery mode on the gut microbiota and health: state of art. Front Microbiol. 2021; 12: 4084. PMC8733716 35002992
  30. [31]Sanyaolu A, Okorie C, Qi X, Locke J, Rehman S. Childhood and adolescent obesity in the United States: a public health concern. Glob Pediatr Health. 2019; 6: 2333794X1989130. PMC6887808 31832491
  31. [32]Han JC, Lawlor DA, Kimm SY. Childhood obesity. Lancet. 2010; 375(9727): 1737‐ 1748. 20451244 PMC3073855
  32. [34]Rutayisire E, Wu X, Huang K, Tao S, Chen Y, Tao F. Cesarean section may increase the risk of both overweight and obesity in preschool children. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016; 16(1): 338. 27809806 PMC5094065
  33. [35]Epstein LH, Wing RR, Valoski A. Childhood obesity. Pediatr Clin North Am. 1985; 32(2): 363‐ 379. 3887305
  34. [36]Chu S, Zhang Y, Jiang Y, et al. Cesarean section and risks of overweight and obesity in school‐aged children: a population‐based study. Q J Med. 2018; 111(12): 859‐ 865. 30184122
  35. [37]Goldani MZ, Barbieri MA, Da Silva AAM, Gutierrez MRP, Bettiol H, Goldani HAS. Cesarean section and increased body mass index in school children: two cohort studies from distinct socioeconomic background areas in Brazil. Nutr J. 2013; 12(1): 104. 23886115 PMC3727942
  36. [38]Wang L, Alamian A, Southerland J, Wang K, Anderson J, Stevens M. Cesarean section and the risk of overweight in grade 6 children. Eur J Pediatr. 2013; 172(10): 1341‐ 1347. 23708216
  37. [39]Zhang S, Qin X, Li P, Huang K. Effect of elective cesarean section on children's obesity from birth to adolescence: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Front Pediatr. 2022; 9: 793400. 35155315 PMC8829565
  38. [40]Hobbs AJ, Mannion CA, Mcdonald SW, Brockway M, Tough SC. The impact of caesarean section on breastfeeding initiation, duration and difficulties in the first four months postpartum. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016; 16: 90. 27118118 PMC4847344
  39. [41]Sodeno M, Tappis H, Burnham G, Ververs M. Associations between caesarean births and breastfeeding in the Middle East: a scoping review. Eastern Mediterr Health J. 2021; 27(9): 931‐ 940. 34569049
  40. [42]Yisma E, Mol BW, Lynch JW, Smithers LG. Impact of caesarean section on breastfeeding indicators: within‐country and meta‐analyses of nationally representative data from 33 countries in sub‐Saharan Africa. BMJ open. 2019; 9: e027497. PMC6731935 31488470
  41. [43]Liu S, Liston RM, Joseph KS, Heaman M, Sauve R, Kramer MS. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low‐risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. Can Med Assoc J. 2007; 176(4): 455‐ 460. 17296957 PMC1800583
  42. [47]Brilhante AV, Augusto KL, Portela MC, et al. Endometriosis and ovarian cancer: an integrative review (Endometriosis and Ovarian Cancer). Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2017; 18(1): 11‐ 16. 28240000 PMC5563086
  43. [48]Ye J, Peng H, Huang X, Qi X. The association between endometriosis and risk of endometrial cancer and breast cancer: a meta‐analysis. BMC Womens Health. 2022; 22(1): 1‐ 21. https://bmcwomenshealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12905-022-02028-x 36401252 PMC9673303 · DOI
  44. [49]Petrou S, Henderson J, Glazener C. Economic aspects of caesarean section and alternative modes of delivery. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001; 15(1): 145‐ 163. 11359320
  45. [50]Rifat M, Id H, Rahman MM, et al. Ever‐increasing Caesarean section and its economic burden in Bangladesh. PloS One. 2018; 13: e0208623. 30532194 PMC6287834
  46. [51]Binyaruka P, Mori AT. Economic consequences of caesarean section delivery: evidence from a household survey in Tanzania. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021; 21: 1367. 34965864 PMC8715568
  47. [52]Gallagher L, Smith V, Carroll M, Hannon K, Lawler D, Begley C. What would reduce caesarean section rates?—Views from pregnant women and clinicians in Ireland. PLoS One. 2022; 17(4): e0267465. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0267465 35482745 PMC9049329 · DOI
  48. [53]Konlan KD, Baku EK, Japiong M, Dodam Konlan K, Amoah RM. Reasons for women's choice of elective caesarian section in Duayaw Nkwanta Hospital. J Pregnancy. 2019; 2019: 2320743. 31360548 PMC6642781

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Angolile, C. M., Max, B. L., Mushemba, J., & Mashauri, H. L.
Affiliations
Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre (TZ)
Corresponding author
Mashauri, Harold L.
ORCID
Venue
Health Science Reports
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-05
Volume
6
Issue
5
Pages
e1274-e1274
ISSN
2398-8835 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1002/hsr2.1274
PMC
PMC10196217
OpenAlex
W4377139298
Cited by
321
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 111 · 2025: 132 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 16
FWCI
100.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Health Science Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Health and Surgery
Keywords
cesarean section rate, maternal morbidity and mortality, neonatal outcomes, postpartum complications, health care expenditure, public health education, instrumental delivery, vacuum extraction, forceps delivery, unmet surgical need, WHO guidelines

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review