O objetivo deste artigo é descrever os fatores referidos para a preferência pelo tipo de parto no início da gestação e reconstruir o processo de decisão pelo tipo de parto no Brasil. Dados de uma coorte de base hospitalar nacional com 23.940 puérperas, realizada em 2011-2012, foram analisados, segundo fonte de pagamento do parto e paridade, com utilização do teste χ2. A preferência inicial pela cesariana foi de 27,6%, variando de 15,4% (primíparas no setor público) a 73,2% (multíparas com cesariana anterior no setor privado). O principal motivo para a escolha do parto vaginal foi a melhor recuperação desse tipo de parto (68,5%) e para a cesariana o medo da dor do parto (46,6%). Experiência positiva com parto vaginal (28,7%), parto cesáreo (24,5%) e realização de laqueadura tubária (32,3%) foram citadas por multíparas. Mulheres do setor privado apresentaram 87,5% de cesariana, com aumento da decisão pelo parto cesáreo no final da gestação, independentemente do diagnóstico de complicações. Em ambos os setores, a proporção de cesariana foi muito superior ao desejado pelas mulheres.

BackgroundCesarean section (CS) rates are increasing worldwide but there is some concern with this trend because of potential maternal and perinatal risks. The Robson classification is the standard method to monitor and compare CS rates. Our objective was to analyze CS rates in Brazil according to source of payment for childbirth (public or private) using the Robson classification.MethodsData are from the 2011–2012 “Birth in Brazil” study, which used a national hospital-based sample of 23,940 women. We categorized all women into Robson groups and reported the relative size of each Robson group, the CS rate in each group and the absolute and relative contributions made by each to the overall CS rate. Differences were analyzed through chi-square and Z-test with a significance level of < 0.05.ResultsThe overall CS rate in Brazil was 51.9 % (42.9 % in the public and 87.9 % in the private health sector). The Robson groups with the highest impact on Brazil’s CS rate in both public and private sectors were group 2 (nulliparous, term, cephalic with induced or cesarean delivery before labor), group 5 (multiparous, term, cephalic presentation and previous cesarean section) and group 10 (cephalic preterm pregnancies), which accounted for more than 70 % of CS carried out in the country. High-risk women had significantly greater CS rates compared with low-risk women in almost all Robson groups in the public sector only.ConclusionsPublic policies should be directed at reducing CS in nulliparous women, particularly by reducing the number of elective CS in these women, and encouraging vaginal birth after cesarean to reduce repeat CS in multiparous women.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12978-016-0228-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundThe rate of preterm birth has been increasing worldwide, including in Brazil. This constitutes a significant public health challenge because of the higher levels of morbidity and mortality and long-term health effects associated with preterm birth. This study describes and quantifies factors affecting spontaneous and provider-initiated preterm birth in Brazil.MethodsData are from the 2011–2012 “Birth in Brazil” study, which used a national population-based sample of 23,940 women. We analyzed the variables following a three-level hierarchical methodology. For each level, we performed non-conditional multiple logistic regression for both spontaneous and provider-initiated preterm birth.ResultsThe rate of preterm birth was 11.5 %, (95 % confidence 10.3 % to 12.9 %) 60.7 % spontaneous - with spontaneous onset of labor or premature preterm rupture of membranes - and 39.3 % provider-initiated, with more than 90 % of the last group being pre-labor cesarean deliveries. Socio-demographic factors associated with spontaneous preterm birth were adolescent pregnancy, low total years of schooling, and inadequate prenatal care. Other risk factors were previous preterm birth (OR 3.74; 95 % CI 2.92–4.79), multiple pregnancy (OR 16.42; 95 % CI 10.56–25.53), abruptio placentae (OR 2.38; 95 % CI 1.27–4.47) and infections (OR 4.89; 95 % CI 1.72–13.88). In contrast, provider-initiated preterm birth was associated with private childbirth healthcare (OR 1.47; 95 % CI 1.09–1.97), advanced-age pregnancy (OR 1.27; 95 % CI 1.01–1.59), two or more prior cesarean deliveries (OR 1.64; 95 % CI 1.19–2.26), multiple pregnancy (OR 20.29; 95 % CI 12.58–32.72) and any maternal or fetal pathology (OR 6.84; 95 % CI 5.56–8.42).ConclusionThe high proportion of provider-initiated preterm birth and its association with prior cesarean deliveries and all of the studied maternal/fetal pathologies suggest that a reduction of this type of prematurity may be possible. The association of spontaneous preterm birth with socially-disadvantaged groups reaffirms that the reduction of social and health inequalities should continue to be a national priority.

As evidências sobre os benefícios do apoio contínuo durante o parto levou à recomendação de que este apoio deve ser oferecido a todas as mulheres. No Brasil, ele é garantido por lei desde 2005, mas os dados sobre a sua implementação são escassos. Nosso objetivo foi estimar a frequência e fatores sociodemográficos, obstétricos e institucionais associados à presença de acompanhantes durante o parto na pesquisa Nascer no Brasil. Foi feita análise estatística descritiva para a caracterização dos acompanhantes (em diferentes momentos do tempo da internação), fatores maternos e institucionais; as associações foram investigadas em modelos bi e multivariada. Vimos que 24,5% das mulheres não tiveram acompanhante algum, 18,8% tinham companhia contínua, 56,7% tiveram acompanhamento parcial. Preditores independentes de não ter algum, ou parcial, foram: menor renda e escolaridade, cor parda da pele, usar o setor público, multiparidade e parto vaginal. A implementação do acompanhante foi associada com ambiência adequada e regras institucionais claras sobre os direitos das mulheres ao acompanhante.

BackgroundCaesarean section rates in Brazil have been steadily increasing. In 2009, for the first time, the number of children born by this type of procedure was greater than the number of vaginal births. Caesarean section is associated with a series of adverse effects on the women and newborn, and recent evidence suggests that the increasing rates of prematurity and low birth weight in Brazil are associated to the increasing rates of Caesarean section and labour induction.MethodsNationwide hospital-based cohort study of postnatal women and their offspring with follow-up at 45 to 60 days after birth. The sample was stratified by geographic macro-region, type of the municipality and by type of hospital governance. The number of postnatal women sampled was 23,940, distributed in 191 municipalities throughout Brazil. Two electronic questionnaires were applied to the postnatal women, one baseline face-to-face and one follow-up telephone interview. Two other questionnaires were filled with information on patients’ medical records and to assess hospital facilities. The primary outcome was the percentage of Caesarean sections (total, elective and according to Robson’s groups). Secondary outcomes were: post-partum pain; breastfeeding initiation; severe/near miss maternal morbidity; reasons for maternal mortality; prematurity; low birth weight; use of oxygen use after birth and mechanical ventilation; admission to neonatal ICU; stillbirths; neonatal mortality; readmission in hospital; use of surfactant; asphyxia; severe/near miss neonatal morbidity. The association between variables were investigated using bivariate, stratified and multivariate model analyses. Statistical tests were applied according to data distribution and homogeneity of variances of groups to be compared. All analyses were taken into consideration for the complex sample design.DiscussionThis study, for the first time, depicts a national panorama of labour and birth outcomes in Brazil. Regardless of the socioeconomic level, demand for Caesarean section appears to be based on the belief that the quality of obstetric care is closely associated to the technology used in labour and birth. Within this context, it was justified to conduct a nationwide study to understand the reasons that lead pregnant women to submit to Caesarean sections and to verify any association between this type of birth and it’s consequences on postnatal health.

Social inequalities and women's satisfaction with childbirth care in Brazil: a national hospital-based surveyDesigualdades sociais e satisfação das mulheres com o atendimento ao parto no Brasil: estudo nacional de base hospitalar Diferencias sociales y satisfacción de las mujeres con la atención al parto en Brasil: estudio nacional de base hospitalaria

Resumo: Este artigo tem como objetivo descrever os primeiros resultados de dois estudos avaliativos, um sobre a Rede Cegonha e outro sobre o projeto Parto Adequado, denominados, respectivamente, de avaliação da Rede Cegonha e Nascer Saudável, e identificar possíveis melhorias em comparação ao estudo Nascer no Brasil. Ambos os estudos têm desenho seccional, realizados em 2017. O estudo avaliação da Rede Cegonha incluiu todas as 606 maternidades públicas e mistas envolvidas na Rede Cegonha e um total de 10.675 puérperas. O estudo Nascer Saudável incluiu uma amostra de conveniência de 12 hospitais da rede privada e um total de 4.798 mulheres. Os indicadores de atenção ao parto e nascimento avaliados foram: presença de acompanhante, atendimento por enfermeira obstétrica, preenchimento de partograma, uso de métodos não farmacológicos, deambulação, alimentação, uso de cateter venoso periférico, analgesia, posição da mulher para o parto, episiotomia e manobra de Kristeler. Esses indicadores foram comparados aos encontrados no Nascer no Brasil, estudo de base nacional realizado em 2011-2012, antes do início dos dois programas de intervenção. Para as comparações utilizamos o teste do qui-quadrado para amostras independentes e nível de 95% de confiança. Houve um aumento significativo do número de mulheres com acesso à tecnologia apropriada ao parto entre os anos de 2011 e 2017 e redução de práticas consideradas prejudiciais. No setor privado, observou-se também redução nas taxas de cesariana e aumento da idade gestacional ao nascer. Os resultados deste estudo mostram que políticas públicas bem conduzidas podem mudar o cenário da atenção ao parto e nascimento, promovendo a redução de desfechos maternos e neonatais negativos.

BackgroundThe participation of nurses and midwives in vaginal birth care is limited in Brazil, and there are no national data regarding their involvement. The goal was to describe the participation of nurses and nurse-midwives in childbirth care in Brazil in the years 2011 and 2012, and to analyze the association between hospitals with nurses and nurse-midwives in labor and birth care and the use of good practices, and their influence in the reduction of unnecessary interventions, including cesarean sections.MethodsBirth in Brazil is a national, population-based study consisting of 23,894 postpartum women, carried out in the period between February 2011 and October 2012, in 266 healthcare settings. The study included all vaginal births involving physicians or nurses/nurse-midwives. A logistic regression model was used to examine the association between the implementation of good practices and suitable interventions during labor and birth, and whether care was a physician or a nurse/nurse-midwife led care. We developed another model to assess the association between the use of obstetric interventions during labor and birth to the personnel responsible for the care of the patient, comparing hospitals with decisions revolving exclusively around a physician to those that also included nurses/nurse-midwives as responsible for vaginal births.Results16.2 % of vaginal births were assisted by a nurse/nurse-midwife. Good practices were significantly more frequent in those births assisted by nurses/nurse-midwives (ad lib. diet, mobility during labor, non-pharmacological means of pain relief, and use of a partograph), while some interventions were less frequently used (anesthesia, lithotomy position, uterine fundal pressure and episiotomy). In maternity wards that included a nurse/nurse-midwife in labour and birth care, the incidence of cesarean section was lower.ConclusionsThe results of this study illustrate the potential benefit of collaborative work between physicians and nurses/nurse-midwives in labor and birth care. The adoption of good practices in managing labor and birth could be the first step toward more effective obstetric and midwifery care in Brazil. It may be easier to introduce new approaches rather than to eliminate old ones, which may explain why the reduction of unnecessary interventions during labor and birth was less pronounced than the adoption of new practices.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12978-016-0236-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.