Methods: This study compares women’s self-report of the timing of the decision for cesarean and other indications regarding cesarean delivery against hospital-based data, considered the gold standard. Data were abstracted from individual medical records and interviews with women having undergone cesarean within specified dates in the hospital were conducted just prior to their hospital discharge. The study assessed sensitivity and specificity of self-reported responses to questions regarding emergency versus non-emergency cesarean delivery, and estimates the percent of emergency cesarean deliveries that would be obtained from a survey, given the observed percent, sensitivity and specificity resulting from this study.
Results: Hospital data were matched with exit interviews for 659 women delivered via cesarean. Sensitivity and specificity were 79% and 82%, respectively, for emergency cesarean delivery; 95% and 98% , respectively, for previous cesarean delivery; 84% and 74%, respectively, for spontaneous labor and 67% and 95% respectively for labor induction. The percent of emergency cesareans estimated from a survey would be only 7% higher than the true rate, would nearly replicate the rate for previous cesarean and would be 17% and 33% higher for spontaneous labor and labor induction, respectively.
Conclusions: Population-based surveys are promising sources for data on emergency cesarean and some other indicators related to cesarean delivery and intrapartum care.
Learning Objectives: 1. Define emergency and non-emergency C-sections in an urban African facility setting. 2. Evaluate the validity of indicators related to C-Section and their population level estimates. 3. Assess the feasibility of using emergency C-section indicator in sub-Saharan African setting.