Health Service Focus

19.10.16

Caesarean rates don’t indicate quality of care and targets are dangerous

Pauline Hull from electivecesarean.com looks at whether the aim of reducing caesarean rates is improving outcomes. 

Caesareans save lives, but for several decades, NHS maternity policy has focused on reducing caesarean rates and increasing rates of ‘normal’ birth, without communicating evidence of improved outcomes for babies with intervention, fewer stillbirths and less pelvic floor injury for mothers. 

Warnings from charities, maternity care organisations and doctors, that imposing arbitrary caesarean rates is dangerous and costly, have been ignored, with NHS hospitals assessed, criticised and celebrated according to their annual number of surgeries; the flawed assumption being that a low percentage is commensurate with high-quality care and low cost. 

It took the Report of the Morecambe Bay Investigation and Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board Supreme Court judgment in 2015 to finally challenge this status quo; criticising the “inappropriate pursuit of normal childbirth” and awarding £5.25m for the 1999 birth of a baby who ”would have been born uninjured” with a caesarean.

The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) press office has said Montgomery “will have a significant influence on obstetrics and gynaecology practice in the UK, with potential impacts on doctor-patient communications, information sharing and informed consent.” 

But nevertheless, and despite strong opposition, the latest NICE intrapartum care guidance still recommends: “Advise low risk nulliparous women that planning to give birth in a midwifery led unit…is particularly suitable for them… and the outcome for the baby is no different compared with an obstetric unit.” And RCOG still recommends: “One strategy for reducing the overall CS rate is the promotion of VBAC, where appropriate.” 

One other step in the right direction, given the obfuscation and under-reporting of many adverse outcomes, is RCOG’s decision to begin counting (some) babies’ deaths, but without retracting its 2012 recommendation for 20% caesarean rates, it’s failing to prevent more babies’ deaths too. 

Perhaps nowhere is this failing more evident than in the investigative reports published by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), an independent body charged with monitoring maternity providers, “to make sure they meet fundamental standards of quality and safety”. 

Specific data on hospitals’ rates of stillbirth, perinatal and neonatal mortality, intrapartum death and injury, maternal mortality and morbidity (including pelvic floor) are not reported, but caesarean versus ‘normal’ or vaginal birth rates are always cited, and presented as key performance indicators. 

A 2016 report of the Royal Berkshire Hospital, for example, found the trust “performed above or near their target of 60% for vaginal birth after caesarean”, yet six years earlier, £7.85m was awarded to a child injured during a VBAC (a £3.66m lump sum with index linked annual payments of £140,000, rising to £225,000 from 2019, for life). 

There is absolutely no consideration of the impact such targets might have on families’ lives or NHS litigation costs

Similarly, at North Middlesex University Hospital, baby Kristian died in 2015 after his mother’s caesarean request was denied, another baby died in 2009 after a planned caesarean for suspected macrosomia was cancelled, and another baby died in 2004 when a caesarean was not performed for breech presentation. These are cases that made it into the media. 

Yet under the heading ‘Patient outcomes’, a 2014 CQC Quality Report praised the trust because its “normal birth delivery rate was 65%, higher than the England average of 60.7%.” 

The CQC said, “This was positive given the high-risk population.”  One year later, baby Kristian died during a forced normal birth. 

Unsurprisingly, the trust’s website still boasts of a caesarean rate that’s “relatively low compared to other London maternity units”, and is still “Promoting normality”. 

Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHSFT website offers another example, boasting that “at King’s Mill Hospital, we are proud to have one of the highest percentages of normal births in the country, one of the lowest caesarean rates at just 18% and a home birth rate way above the national average.” 

A recent CQC report rated the hospital as “requiring improvement” on safety, effectiveness and responsiveness, with patients “not always protected from the risk of avoidable harm”, but on this key point, the CQC remained positive: “Caesarean section rates and natural birth rates were better than the national averages.” 

And these examples are just the tip of the iceberg… 

It is worth clarifying the definition of ‘normal’ birth here, given the pressure on hospitals to increase their rates – it is one without induction or epidural, and can include “antenatal, delivery or postnatal complications (including for example postpartum haemorrhage, perineal tear, repair of perineal trauma, admission to SCBU or NICU).” 

This is the pinnacle of care that hospitals are told to achieve. 

Worse still, recommendations published by the RCOG, RCM and NCT in 2012 impressed that it “is important to try to increase this rate as well as that of vaginal birth, which includes delivery by forceps and ventouse” – regardless of the damage forceps can do to babies and to women. 

Why? Because “Every potential caesarean section that is enabled to be a normal birth saves £1200 in tariff price alone.”  Except the cost of subsequent attempts to repair pelvic floor damage or to counsel women for birth trauma are not factored into this statement. 

As long as maternity care continues to focus more on the birth process than the birth outcome, all these anomalies will continue to occur, and the NHS litigation bill will continue to grow. 

Stillbirth rates remain high; and more parents are asking why. Forceps rates are increasing, silence of the pelvic floor taboo is breaking, and more women are asking why no one told them of the risks. 

Bad outcomes, not high caesarean rates, are what’s fuelling the ever-increasing NHS litigation bill, and the highest payouts of all are a direct result of failures to carry out timely caesareans. 

The NHS can’t afford the mistakes it’s already made, so why is it being told to make more of the same? 

Have you got a story to tell? Would you like to become an NHE columnist? If so, click here.

Comments

Birth Trauma Canada   19/10/2016 at 18:12

Ms. Hull is correct. The same 'Normal' birth policy in Canada is also responsible for so much maternal / neonatal morbidity and mortality over the decades at enormous cost to both mothers, their babies and health care systems. It is long past time that obstetrics gives full disclosure about the risks of planned vaginal births. Hopefully Montgomery v Lanarkshire is the impetus needed to make that happen.

Abby   19/10/2016 at 19:04

Uh yeah... time to step out of idealism and fantasy and into the reality of what these moms and babies go through, physically and psychologically.

Add your comment

 

national health executive tv

more videos >

latest healthcare news

Workforce strategy: DH has ‘turned on all the taps’, but can still do more

13/12/2017Workforce strategy: DH has ‘turned on all the taps’, but can still do more

Health Education England (HEE) has released a draft of its 10-year workforce strategy which is looking to create a long-term staffing p... more >
London trust fined after worker is killed by liquid nitrogen

13/12/2017London trust fined after worker is killed by liquid nitrogen

The death of a worker who was asphyxiated by liquid nitrogen in London in 2011 could have been prevented, says the Health and Safety Executive (H... more >
Access to treatments could reduce post-Brexit

13/12/2017Access to treatments could reduce post-Brexit

UK patients are at risk of missing out on new treatments after Brexit if a deal is not struck, experts have warned. Speaking at a Health Com... more >

editor's comment

25/09/2017A hotbed of innovation

This edition of NHE comes hot on the heels of this year’s NHS Expo which, once again, proved to be a huge success at Manchester Central. A number of announcements were made during the event, with the health secretary naming the second wave of NHS digital pioneers, or ‘fast followers’, which follow the initial global digital e... read more >

last word

The Refugee Doctor Initiative

The Refugee Doctor Initiative

Terry John, co-chair of the BMA & BDA Refugee Doctors and Dentists Liaison Group and chair of the union’s international committee, talks about a brilliant initiative that is proving mut... more > more last word articles >
681 149x260 NHE Subscribe button

the scalpel's daily blog

Ten lessons to support new care models locally

29/11/2017Ten lessons to support new care models locally

Anna Starling, policy fellow at the Health Foundation, offers the top 10 lessons for local leaders seeking to make systematic improvements across services, all based on first-hand accounts from vanguard officials. Redesigning health and social care services across traditional boundaries is not easy. Making change in complex environments, with differing professional viewpoints and varying organisational priorities while getting on with t... more >
read more blog posts from 'the scalpel' >

comment

Strategic investment planning

13/12/2017Strategic investment planning

Paul Turton, head of solutions development at NHS Supply Chain, looks at how trusts can unlock investment in medical equipment to alleviate finan... more >
A fight worth fighting

13/12/2017A fight worth fighting

Professor Wendy Burn, president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych), laments the current lack of public understanding about severe me... more >
Developing a wellness workforce

13/12/2017Developing a wellness workforce

The entire health and care sector needs to come together to prepare for a shift towards health creation, writes Merron Simpson, chief executive o... more >
The future of the nursing workforce: what next?

13/12/2017The future of the nursing workforce: what next?

Janet Davies, chief executive and general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing (RCN), argues that the evidence of the importance of prioriti... more >
Strategic commissioning: what the future holds

13/12/2017Strategic commissioning: what the future holds

Julie Wood, chief executive of NHS Clinical Commissioners, looks at how the clinical commissioning landscape will change in the future after havi... more >

interviews

Cutting through the fake news

22/11/2017Cutting through the fake news

In an era of so-called ‘fake news’ growing alongside a renewed focus on reducing stigma around mental health, Paul Farmer, chief exec... more >
Tackling infection prevention locally

04/10/2017Tackling infection prevention locally

Dr Emma Burnett, a lecturer and researcher in infection prevention at the University of Dundee’s School of Nursing and Midwifery and a boar... more >
Scan4Safety: benefits across the whole supply chain

02/10/2017Scan4Safety: benefits across the whole supply chain

NHE interviews Gillian Fox, head of eProcurement (Scan4Safety) programme at NHS Supply Chain. How has the Scan4Safety initiative evolved sin... more >
Simon Stevens: A hunger for innovation

25/09/2017Simon Stevens: A hunger for innovation

Simon Stevens, chief executive of NHS England, knows that the health service is already a world leader when it comes to medical advances – ... more >
Improving care at the touch of a screen

08/08/2017Improving care at the touch of a screen

When it comes to dementia, having a calm and safe environment can have a substantial impact on a patient’s quality of life. NHE’s Jos... more >