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

Doctors call for ‘black alert’ to be introduced in general practice

26/06/2017Doctors call for ‘black alert’ to be introduced in general practice

Doctors have called on the government to introduce a “black alert” for GPs so that clinicians can alert authorities when surgeries ar... more >
Surgeons back proposals to improve regulation of cosmetic surgery

26/06/2017Surgeons back proposals to improve regulation of cosmetic surgery

Surgeons have this week backed a private members’ bill that has been tabled and seeks to improve the regulation of cosmetic surgery. I... more >
BMA: Government wants world-class NHS with a third-class settlement

26/06/2017BMA: Government wants world-class NHS with a third-class settlement

Public satisfaction rates with the NHS has plummeted, the BMA has today stated as a survey found that more people were dissatisfied with the heal... more >

editor's comment

13/06/2017Tackling the major challenges facing the NHS

As you will have gathered from the front cover, a theme that runs throughout this edition of NHE is about empowering and involving the workforce in order to deliver innovative change across the system.  Professor Jane Dacre, president of the Royal College of Physicians, highlights on page 16 the importance of sustainability and trans... read more >

last word

A clear strategy for change is needed for health and social care

A clear strategy for change is needed for health and social care

Nigel Edwards, CEO at the Nuffield Trust, argues that it would be a lost opportunity if the next government does not seek to put both health and social care funding on a more sustainable footing.... more > more last word articles >
681 149x260 NHE Subscribe button

the scalpel's daily blog

Confed17 open its doors in Liverpool today

14/06/2017Confed17 open its doors in Liverpool today

Confed 17, the major annual NHS Confederation conference, has kicked off today in ACC Liverpool, inviting in more than 1,000 health and care leaders to discuss and review the long-term demand patterns needed in the sector. Highlights of the two-day conference will be a keynote address from NHS England’s chief executive Simon Stevens, as well as health secretary Jeremy Hunt’s first major public appearance since he was reappoi... more >
read more blog posts from 'the scalpel' >

comment

A hub for healthy communities

23/06/2017A hub for healthy communities

Mark Robinson, New NHS Alliance pharmacy lead, discusses why pharmacy is at the heart of healthy living in communities – and explains how p... more >
Do something different

23/06/2017Do something different

Jill DeBene, chief executive of Institute of Healthcare Management (IHM), considers what workforce optimisation really means and the importance o... more >
The now and the future of infection prediction

23/06/2017The now and the future of infection prediction

Marco-Felipe King, an infection control postdoctoral researcher at the Institute for Public Health and Environmental Engineering at the Universit... more >
Prime for transformation?

20/06/2017Prime for transformation?

The sustainability and transformation partnerships (STPs) programme should harness and drive digital innovation as a positive force to help overc... more >
The meanings of value

20/06/2017The meanings of value

Professor Sir Muir Gray, director of Better Value Healthcare, considers the meaning of value in NHS commissioning for both the system and patient... more >

interviews

Working collectively to improve cancer outcomes for patients

20/06/2017Working collectively to improve cancer outcomes for patients

Last year, the cancer vanguard established the Pharma Challenge. Rob Duncombe, pharmacy director at the Christie NHS FT, gives NHE an update on t... more >
A great place to work

16/06/2017A great place to work

The Walton Centre NHS FT has been identified by NHS England as one of only 12 exemplar organisations in the NHS for its work in health and wellbe... more >
A fork in the road for the NHS

06/06/2017A fork in the road for the NHS

Niall Dickson, chief executive of NHS Confederation, talks to NHE’s Josh Mines ahead of Confed2017 about the organisation’s 10-p... more >
Tight timetable for nursing associate  regulation

28/03/2017Tight timetable for nursing associate regulation

Jackie Smith, chief executive at the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), talks to NHE’s David Stevenson about the challenges her organisat... more >
Improving the flow

13/02/2017Improving the flow

Glen Burley, chief executive of South Warwickshire NHS FT, explains how his organisation has been able to improve patient flow through its emerge... more >