Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Susan F Murray Centre for
International Child Health, Institute of Child Health, University
College London, London WC1N 1EH
s.murray{at}ich.ucl.ac.uk
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objectives:
To explore the circumstances and factors
that explain the association between private health insurance cover and
a high rate of caesarean sections in Chile.
An ecological study of rates of caesarean sections in Latin
America reported that 12 countries, accounting for 81% of births in
the region, had caesarean rates of over 15%, the upper limit recommended by the World Health Organization.1 Chile had
the highest rate Until the 1980s all salaried workers in Chile subscribed to a unified
national health fund. With government encouragement, private health
insurance funds were launched in 1981.3 By 1994 a quarter
of healthcare users had joined such a
fund.2
Type of insurance cover has important implications for the type of
maternity care received. In Chile's public healthcare system (funded
through the national health insurance fund) women receive antenatal and
postnatal care at the local health centre, and intrapartum care at the
local hospital. Much of that care is provided by professional midwives.
Private health insurance, on the other hand, normally requires the
primary care provider to be an obstetrician.
I carried out a study of the day to day organisation, norms, and
relationships in private sector maternity care in Santiago, Chile's
capital city, to examine why private health insurance is associated
with high rates of caesarean section.
I obtained approval for the study from Chile's health ministry.
Data were collected between 1995 and 1997, in Santiago, where a third
of the country's population lives. As Chile had no tradition of large
scale postal questionnaires, a face to face interview survey of
postnatal women (women who had given birth in the previous 24-72 hours), plus a review of medical records, was used to provide quantifiable data on aspects of care management and women's
experiences of labour care. Qualitative data from the analysis of
in-depth audiotaped interviews with obstetricians and pregnant women
were used to develop an understanding of the day to day influences on
birth management in the private sector and to derive inferences about
underlying belief systems that drive professional behaviour in this setting.
Participants
Quantitative arm
Table 1.
Design:
Qualitative analysis of audiotaped in-depth interviews with obstetricians and pregnant women; quantitative analysis
of data from face to face semistructured interview survey conducted
postnatally (with women who had given birth in the previous 24-72 hours), and of a review of medical notes at a public hospital, a
university hospital, and a private clinic.
Setting:
Santiago, Chile.
Participants:
Qualitative arm: 22 obstetricians, 21 pregnant women; quantitative arm: 540 postnatal women.
Main outcome measures:
Rates of caesarean section in
different types of institutions; consultants' views on private
practice; work patterns in private practice; women's reasons for
choosing private care; women's preferences on method of delivery.
Results:
Private health insurance cover requires the primary maternity care provider to be an obstetrician. In the postnatal
survey, women with private obstetricians showed consistently higher
rates of caesarean section (range 57-83%) than those cared for by
midwives or doctors on duty in public or university hospitals (range
27-28%). Only a minority of women receiving private care reported that
they had wanted this method of delivery (range 6-32%). With the
diversification in the healthcare market, most obstetricians now have
demanding peripatetic work schedules. Private maternity patients are a
lucrative source of income. The obstetrician is committed to attend
these private births in person, and the "programming" (or
scheduling) of births is a common time management strategy. The rate of
elective caesarean sections was 30-68% in women with private
obstetricians and 12-14% in women not attended by private obstetricians.
Conclusions:
Policies on healthcare financing can
influence maternity care management and outcomes in unforeseen ways.
The prevailing business ethos in health care encourages such pragmatism among those doctors who do not have a moral objection to non-medical caesarean section.
![]()
Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Participants and methods
Results
Discussion
References
40% in 1997. In Chile, the rate of caesarean
sections in women with private health insurance is double that in women covered by the national health insurance fund.2
![]()
Participants and methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Participants and methods
Results
Discussion
References
Three sites were chosen to reflect the range of maternity care in
Santiago (table 1). Agreement to take part in the study was obtained
from each site's director. The private sector was the most difficult
site to gain access to, but the fourth private clinic approached agreed
to participate. All women with live births during two 14 day periods
were approached for interview, except at the public hospital, where
consecutive "time of birth" sampling of every third woman was used
to maintain a manageable number of interviews daily. This sampling was
continuous through all shifts for each fortnight, and the statistics
for method of delivery for this subset tally well with the hospital's annual statistics.
2 goodness of fit test. This confirmed
that the survey periods were unlikely to be atypical of the rest of the year.
Qualitative arm
Twenty three obstetricians were invited to participate; an
opportunistic maximum variation sampling approach was used to ensure an
extensive range of demographic characteristics, experiences, work
contexts, and attitudes to caesarean section (see table A on the
BMJ's website). One senior doctor declined to take part.
None of the 22 who agreed to participate refused audiotaping of the
interview. Only one female obstetrician took part, reflecting male
dominance in the profession in Chile.
Methods
Quantitative interviews took place in postnatal rooms 24-72 hours
after delivery. A semistructured questionnaire (previously piloted in
these settings) about women's expectations and experiences of
childbirth was administered by an experienced local social scientist.
Analysis
Data collected from the survey and the review of medical records
were entered on SPSS for Windows. The transcripts of the in-depth
interviews were analysed by using QSR NUD*IST software to facilitate
cross indexing. The entire Spanish text was entered. I carried out the
coding and analysis. I examined the transcripts closely for emerging
themes and coded the blocks of text into nine broad categories of
statement generated from the data (see below). I examined the
qualitative data for examples of "negative
instances"4 that might contradict these emerging themes, explored the reasons for these, and modified my interpretation accordingly. I used survey data and other institutional statistics to
test the qualitative conclusions and to examine possible
counter-explanations.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Obstetricians
Private obstetrician care was consistently associated with higher
rates of caesarean section in the subpopulations of the postnatal women
surveyed (difference in percentages was 55% (95% confidence interval
42% to 68%) for women in the public hospital and 30% (15% to 45%)
for women in the university hospital) (table 2).
|
Reasons for doing private practice
Private sector work was seen as a necessary element of income
generation. The balance and type of work might vary, but even trainee
specialists had private practices.
Work patterns in private practice
Most obstetricians had private maternity patients, who were viewed
as the most lucrative but most demanding part of private work. With the
growth in private insurance, and consequent increased opportunities,
private maternity facilities in Santiago have mushroomed, and
obstetricians can bring their patients to most of these for labour care
or operations. Public and teaching hospitals also have facilities for
private patients. But, although the obstetrician may state his or her
preference, the private patient chooses the facility. All but the most
favoured obstetricians have to be mobile, and have work commitments in
several scattered locations.
Problems generated by private maternity work
Many of the obstetricians felt vulnerable to the market nature of
their private work. They felt competitive pressures and a need to keep
patients happy. They also recognised women's expectations of personal
care: "I have to make the patient feel, once she is coming to me for
antenatal care, that I am permanently at her disposal, for whatever
emergency, whatever the hour, whatever the day." (Obstetrician 1)
Strategies for dealing with complex work patterns
Obstetricians reconciled the conflicting demands by
(a) opting out of private obstetric practice (although few felt they could afford to do this); (b) limiting the number
of private patients by increasing fees, accepting only early bookings, or limiting appointments; (c) centralising work over fewer
locations (or joining an exclusive private hospital and working only
there); or (d) "programming" (or scheduling) births
(box).
|
Programming (or scheduling) births*
Interviewer: "So you finish your day at about 8.30 pm more or less?" Obstetrician: "No, no then come the operations
. . . Our specialty has a high number of patients who
have surgery or some intervention . . . You try to
place the delivery care in this timetable in the evening *From audiotaped interview with obstetrician 14 |
elective caesarean section
is more
reliable and demands a shorter time commitment, and because of this is
more financially rewarding. Elective caesarean section is more common
among patients attended by private obstetricians (difference in
percentages was 56% (95% confidence interval 41% to 70%) for women
in the public hospital and 16% (3% to 29%) for women in the
university hospital) (table 3).
|
Attitudes to rates of caesarean section
The obstetricians interviewed knew that rates of caesarean section
were higher in much of the private sector and that the issue of a
"correct" rate was controversial; some suggested two schools of
obstetrician
"vaginalists" and "operators" (or
"caesareanists"). Vaginalists took more overtly advocatory positions
and voiced moral and ethical concerns over non-medical caesarean sections.
Women
Views on private maternity care
Most women with private obstetricians chose their doctor through
recommendation of a friend or relative (64% of the survey participants
from the private clinic; 80% from the public and university
hospitals). Table 4 shows the reasons for consulting
privately.
|
Expectation of personal commitment in a private care
relationship*
"I have all my doctor's phone numbers, and the
midwife's "I like him to do my scans, my own doctor. Not that he sends
me to someone else, but that he himself does the scans. I like the fact
that he makes me go [for a scan] once a month. I think all these
things show concern, and I like that "There is no alternative. I'd die. No, no, no, I can't
think anything else is possible. My doctor is going to get my baby
born "I've never asked Claudio if he is or is not going to be
there *From audiotaped interviews with 21 pregnant women |
|
Preferences for method of delivery
The postnatal women were asked if at any point in their pregnancy
they had wanted a caesarean section. Some reported that they had (range
6-32% of those receiving private care from obstetricians). At the
private clinic, where 70% of the women surveyed had had a caesarean
section, only 18% said that they had wanted one.
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In Brazil the absence of insurance cover for tubal ligation resulted in caesarean section being used as an opportunity for clandestine tubal ligation.5 In Chile, policies on healthcare financing have also influenced the management of maternity care and outcomes in unforeseen ways. Private health insurance cover in Chile normally requires the primary provider of maternity care to be an obstetrician, and women with private obstetricians showed consistently higher rates of caesarean section than those in the public sector. This cannot be explained simply as a reflection of patients' choice in the private sector. Patients' choice is always a complex issue,6-8 but there are few grounds for it being the sole explanation for Chile's high private sector rates of caesarean section.
|
What is already known on this topic
In 1997 Chile had the highest rate of caesarean sections (40%) in Latin America The rate in women with private health insurance in Chile is double that in women covered by the national health insurance fund What this study addsPatients' choice is unlikely to be the primary explanation for the high rate of caesarean sections in the private sector Key factors contributing to the high rate include the requirement by private health insurers that an obstetrician, rather than a midwife, should be the primary care provider; women's expectations of personalised private care relationships; and the peripatetic work schedules of many obstetricians |
Might the high rates in the private sector simply reflect a consensus
in the obstetric establishment in Chile
a belief that caesarean
section is now, because of advances in monitoring fetal wellbeing, the
optimal method of delivery for many women? Statistics from one of
Santiago's most exclusive hospitals, Clínica Las Condes, suggest
not
indeed, they add validity to the time management thesis. Since
1991, the Clínica Las Condes has reported a steady decline in rates
of caesarean section.9 By 1994 the rate among the women
who were attended there by staff obstetricians was 28%, well below the
national average. Just over a fifth of the 1200 births were attended by
visiting obstetricians, however, who work in several locations. Their
caesarean section rate was twice as high, at 57%.9
To discourage high rates of caesarean section, insurance schemes in Chile had not, for five years before the study, paid obstetricians more for performing caesarean sections than for vaginal deliveries. In the private sector, some other aspects of the care package are also standard, irrespective of type of delivery. Anaesthetists routinely provide epidurals for both vaginal and caesarean deliveries. Paediatricians are present at all births. Elective caesarean can, however, facilitate the coordination of this team (and maximise their efficient use of time). Women normally stay in hospital for three days after the birth (whether vaginal or caesarean). Patients incur extra costs, however, as a result of surgery, and hospitals can be expected to benefit from these, as well as from the higher bed occupancy rates that result from programming.
Obstetricians do private work to increase their income. Conflicting
demands arise from complex peripatetic work schedules and the need to
provide personalised care for private patients. These are resolved by
liberal use of caesarean section, which permits maximum efficiency
in use of time. The prevailing business ethos in health care encourages
such pragmatism among those doctors who do not have a moral
objection to non-medical caesarean section.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Contributors: SFM is the sole author of this paper. She initiated the research, designed the protocol and the data collection instruments, conducted the in-depth interviews, coded and analysed the qualitative and quantitative data and wrote the paper. Fanny Serani (lecturer at the University of Chile) participated in the piloting of the survey instrument and conducted the postnatal survey interviews. Mary Ann Elston (senior lecturer in the department of social and political science at Royal Holloway College, University of London) discussed core ideas and commented on an early draft of the paper. Angie Wade (senior lecturer, Institute of Child Health) provided statistical advice.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: The study was supported by grant RD352 from the UK Department for International Development (DFID). The views expressed, however, are those of the author and do not represent the views of the DFID.
Competing interests: None declared.
Two tables with data on the
characteristics of participating obstetricians and pregnant women
appear on the BMJ's website
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Bélizan JM, Althabe F, Barros FC, Alexander S.
Rates and implications of caesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study.
BMJ
1999;
319:
1397-1400 |
| 2. | Murray SF, Serani Pradenas F. Cesarean birth trends in Chile 1986 to 1994. Birth 1997; 24: 258-263[Medline]. |
| 3. | Miranda E, Scarpaci JL, Irarrázaval I. A decade of HMOs in Chile: market behaviour, consumer choice and the state. Health and Place 1995; 1: 51-59. |
| 4. | Seale C. The quality of qualitative research. London: Sage, 1999:1-210. |
| 5. |
Faúndes A, Cecatti JG.
Which policy for caesarean sections in Brazil? An analysis of trends and consequences.
Health Policy and Planning
1993;
8:
33-42 |
| 6. | Hopkins K. Are Brazilian women really choosing to deliver by cesarean? Soc Sci Med 2000; 51: 725-740. |
| 7. | Castro A. Commentary: increase in caesarean sections may reflect medical control not women's choice. BMJ 1997; 319: 1401-1402. |
| 8. | De Mello, Souza C. C-sections as ideal births: the cultural constructions of beneficence and patients' rights in Brazil. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 1994; 3: 358-366[Medline]. |
| 9. | Schnapp C, Sepulveda W. Rise in caesarean births in Chile. Lancet 1997; 349: 1029[Medline]. |
(Accepted 28 September 2000)
Read all Rapid Responses