<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJOG</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2160-8792</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojog.2023.131005</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJOG-122600</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Analysis of the Caesarean Section Rate in Armenia for the Period 2016-2021 Based on the Results of a Single Center Study
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Norayr</surname><given-names>Nver Ghukasyan</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sub>1</sub></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><addr-line>Erebouni Medical Center, Yerevan, Armenia</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>16</day><month>01</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>13</volume><issue>01</issue><fpage>47</fpage><lpage>52</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>13,</day>	<month>December</month>	<year>2022</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>17,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2023</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>20,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2023</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Background:
   The caesarean section rate is an important factor that characteriz
  es
   the effectiveness of the obstetric service. The large variability of the initial state of women in labor and the variety of indications for surgery do
  es
   not allow us to identify the main determinants. We attempted to determine and analyzed the first data on the structure and frequency of caesarean section in Armenia in the hospital of the Ereb
  о
  uni multidisciplinary clinic before the introduction of the M. Robson scale. <b>Methodology:</b> We conducted a retrospective study of the history of childbirth in 38
  ,
  111 patients registered at the Erebouni Medical Center for the period 2016-2021. The materials of the study were case histories, hospitalization materials and annual reports. <b>Results:</b> According to the obtained data, 80.5% of caesarean section operations were performed as planned. Only 14% of pregnant women were delivered by caesarean section according to absolute indications, the frequency of that in this maternity hospital increased from 36.77% to 44.95% over the analyzed period <b>Conclusion: </b>Thorough psychoprophylactic preparation of pregnant women for childbirth, including those with a scar on the uterus after a previous cesarean section, can ensure a steady desire of women in labor for vaginal delivery, full mobilization of their own capabilities, and more trusting cooperation with medical staff.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Caesarean Section Rates</kwd><kwd> Armenia</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Caesarean section (CS) is currently the most frequently performed operation in the world, and the trend is steadily increasing. In particular, in Armenia there is an upward trend in the CS increased from 7.2% in 2000 to 31.0% in 2017 [Tadevosyan M., Ghazaryan A., et al., 2019]. According to the latest data, every fifth woman gives birth by surgery [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122600-ref1">1</xref>]. However, the percentage of abdominal delivery is an important global indicator for measuring access to obstetric services [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122600-ref2">2</xref>].</p><p>According to the literature data [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122600-ref1">1</xref>] - [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122600-ref10">10</xref>], an increase in the frequency of CS significantly reduced perinatal morbidity and mortality, but negative consequences are also possible. They are connected with the fact that subsequent pregnancy and childbirth in women with a scar on the uterus are associated with a high risk. In these patients, such complications of pregnancy as the threat of miscarriage, placental insufficiency, placenta previa and ingrowth, antenatal fetal death are more common. At the same time, vaginal delivery in patients with a uterine scar is extremely risky due to the high probability of uterine rupture, bleeding, intrapartum fetal death, and even death of the patient herself [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122600-ref1">1</xref>].</p><p>The aim of this work was to analyze the frequency of CS operations in Armenia in the dynamics of 2016-20211 using the data of the Erebouni Medical Center and to identify the main reserves for reducing the frequency of abdominal delivery in IIIA level institutions.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Material and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Study Setting</title><p>This study was conducted at the Maternity house of Erebouni Medical center, a referral and teaching public health facility in Armenia. It is one of the largest hospitals in Armenia and offers a wide range of outpatient and inpatient comprehensive services. Being a teaching and referral hospital, it receives many high-risk pregnancies and their outcomes. The Maternity House is one of the busiest wards in the hospital, rendering service under critical newborn care unit and kangaroo mother care. It is staffed with trained nurses, general practitioners, pediatricians, and neonatologists.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Study Design, Sampling Method, and Respondents</title><p>A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted a retrospective study of the history of childbirth in 38,111 patients registered at the Maternity House of Erebouni Medical Center for the period 2016-2021.</p><p>A systematic random sampling method was used to select the study participants. The inclusion criteria were a live birth, a gestational age of at least 28 weeks of amenorrhea (AW) or a birth weight of at least 1000 g. The data were extracted from the women’s medical records or birth room registers according to the media, and annual reports used by this health facility. They covered parity, number of fetuses, past history of cesarean section, term of pregnancy, presentation of the fetus, mode of entry into labour. A pregnancy was said to be at term for a gestational age &gt; 36AW6 days or, if there was no gestational age, for a fetal weight &gt; 2500 g. The data thus collected were transferred and compiled for processing.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Ethical Consideration</title><p>Ethical approval to conduct the study was obtained from Erebouni Medical center of Armenian Ethical Review Committee. Consent was obtained from the study participants before data collection after an explanation of the study objectives.</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Data Analyses</title><p>Statistical analyses were performed using the statistical package for the Social Sciences (SPSS: version 22). The chi-square test of independence and binary logistic regression was employed to determine associations between the dependent and independents variables. Maternal and neonatal continuous variables were compared using Student’s t-tests. Two binary logistic regression models (infant and maternal variables) with backward conditional were used to determine the variables independently contributed to preterm neonatal mortality. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered to be significant.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><p>According to the obtained data, in recent years there has been a significant (by 15%) increase in the number of pregnant women in the Erebouni Medical Center (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>), mainly due to an increase in the number of pregnant women from the regions.</p><p>The frequency of CS in this maternity hospital increased from 36.77% to 44.95% over the analyzed period. This number includes both operations performed for the first time, and repeated ones due to a previously transferred one (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>).</p><p>According to the results of our study, 80.5% of CS operations were performed as planned. Only 14% of pregnant women were delivered by caesarean section according to absolute indications (fetal distress, placenta previa, eclampsia, premature detachment of a normally located placenta). In other cases, caesarean section was performed according to the sum of relative indications.</p><p>The main indications for operative delivery were fetal hypoxia (16.7%), labor anomalies (15.8%), extragenital pathology (32.9%), aggravated obstetric and gynecological history/repeated pregnancy scar/(12.74%), breech presentation of the fetus (10.3%), preeclampsia (6.2%) and premature pregnancy (5.86%) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>).</p><p>In 74.5% of cases, caesarean section passed without complications. In the postpartum period, 0.8% of women noted thrombosis, 0.2%—mastitis, 3.8%—an increase in body temperature of unknown origin.</p><p>Despite the fact that patterns of natural childbirth are common among the women surveyed, among the indications for repeated caesarean section, there is a refusal of the woman herself to give birth through the natural birth canal.</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Frequency of CS in % for 2016-2021 at Erebouni medical center</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2016</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2017</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2018</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2019</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2020</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2021</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >М</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of births</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4579</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4589</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4445</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4812</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5115</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5281</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4804</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >premature</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >477 (10.4%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >503 (10.96%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >510 (11.47%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >577 (11.99%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >626 (12.2%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >701 (13.27%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >566 (11.7%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >multiple twins triplets five</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >108 104 4 -</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100 94 5 1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >108 104 4 -</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >103 101 2 -</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >97 96 1 -</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >119 116 3 -</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >106 103 3 -</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >preeclampsia</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >65.8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >116</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >122</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >181</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >164</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >149</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >146</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >C-section</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1684 (36.77%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1786 (38.9%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1849 (41.6%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2048 (42.56%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2282 (44.6%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2374 (44.95%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2003 (41.6%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >planned</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1316 (78.1%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1438 (80.5%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1443 (78%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1876 (82.2%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1994 (84%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1613.4 (80.5%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >urgent</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >368</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >348</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >406</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >406</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >380</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >382</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Termination of pregnancy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >609</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >802</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >741</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >746</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >694</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >842</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >739</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >artificial</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >385</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >595</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >593</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >584</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >502</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >656</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >553</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >miscarriage</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >114</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >63</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >for medical reasons</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >110</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >144</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >131</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >154</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >172</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >157</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >144 (19.5%)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Analysis of the incidence of postpartum complications and maternal and perinatal mortality</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2016</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2017</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2018</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2019</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2020</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2021</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Postpartum infections</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Endometritis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Lochiometra</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >111</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >52</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Bleeding</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Maternal mortality</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Number of newborns</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4691</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4697</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4557</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4917</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5213</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5403</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >live birth</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4593</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4600</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4451</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4802</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5120</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5296</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >stillbirth</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >93</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >96</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >109</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >92</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >106</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >newborn death</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>In the present study, the odds of neonatal and infant death associated with childbirth were assessed. In general, there were no changes in the percentage of women, as well as in the characteristics of these women, including age, educational level and origin. Advances in obstetrics and changes in practice, and perhaps also changes in women, are some of the driving forces behind this discovery, meaning that neonatal mortality rates are currently not significantly different over time. We did not find an increase in the likelihood of late neonatal or infant death.</p><p>There are benefits and harms associated with each mode of birth, and the evidence for this comes from observational (non-randomized) studies, which may be biased. Any results and conclusions should be interpreted with caution, although large population-based studies, including the present one, offer the best method for risk assessment in women with a single prior CS.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>Thorough psychoprophylactic preparation of pregnant women for childbirth, including those with a scar on the uterus after a previous cesarean section, can ensure a steady desire of women in labor for vaginal delivery, full mobilization of their own capabilities, and more trusting cooperation with medical staff. This is seen as a reserve for reducing obstetric aggression in childbirth and reducing the number of maternal and perinatal complications.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Ghukasyan, N.N. (2023) Analysis of the Caesarean Section Rate in Armenia for the Period 2016-2021 Based on the Results of a Single Center Study. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 13, 47-52. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2023.131005</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.122600-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Anggondowati, T., El-Mohandes, A.A.E., Qomariyah, S.N., et al. (2017) Maternal Characteristics and Obstetrical Complications Impact Neonatal Outcomes in Indonesia: A Prospective Study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 17, Article No. 100.  
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1280-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122600-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Madaj, B., Smith, H., et al. (2017) Developing Global Indicators for Quality of Maternal and Newborn Care: A Feasibility Assessment. Bull World Health Organ, 95, 445-452. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.16.179531</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122600-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Smith, G.C., Pell, J.P. and Dobbie, R. (2003) Caesarean Section and Risk of Unexplained Stillbirth in Subsequent Pregnancy. Lancet, 362, 1779-1784.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14896-9</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122600-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tadevosyan, M., Ghazaryan, A., et al. (2019) Factors Contributing to Rapidly Increasing Rates of Cesarean Section in Armenia: A Partially Mixed Concurrent Quantitative-Qualitative Equal Status Study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 19, Article No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-2158-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122600-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zanardi, D.M., Parpinelli, M.A., Haddad, S.M., et al. (2018) Adverse Perinatal Outcomes Are Associated with Severe Maternal Morbidity and Mortality: Evidence from a National Multicentre Cross-Sectional Study. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 299, 645-654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-018-5004-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122600-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Maier, B., Georgoulopoulos, A., Zajc, M., et al. (2011) Fetal Outcome for Infants in Breech by Method of Delivery: Experiences with a Stand-By Service System of Senior Obstetricians and Women’s Choices of Mode of Delivery. Journal of Perinatal Medicine, 39, 385-390. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm.2011.044</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122600-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Semyonovna, V., Orlova, I., et al. (2013) Abdominal Delivery as a Medical and Social Problem of Contemporary Obstetrics. Journal of Obstetrics and Women’s Diseases, 62, 6-14. https://doi.org/10.17816/JOWD6246-14</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122600-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bogner, G., Strobl, M., Schausberger, C., Fischer, T., Reisenberger, K. and Jacobs, V.R. (2015) Breech Delivery in the All Fours Position: A Prospective Observational Comparative Study with Classic Assistance. Journal of Perinatal Medicine, 43, 707-713. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2014-0048</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122600-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Macharey, G., Ulander, V.M., Heinonen, S., et al. (2016) Risk Factors and Outcomes in “Well-Selected” Vaginal Breech Deliveries: A Retrospective Observational Study. Journal of Perinatal Medicine, 45, 291-297. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2015-0342</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122600-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Macharey, G., Gissler, M., Rahkonen, L., et al. (2017) Breech Presentation at Term and Associated Obstetric Risks Factors—A Nationwide Population Based Cohort Study. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 295, 833-838.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4283-7</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>