Use of induction of labour and emergency caesarean section and perinatal outcomes in English maternity services: a national hospital-level study

ABSTRACT Objectives – To assess the association between hospital-level rates of induction of labour and emergency caesarean section, as measures of “practice style”, and rates of adverse perinatal outcomes. Design – National study using electronic maternity records. Setting – English National Health Service. Participants – Hospitals providing maternity care to women between April 2015 and March 2017. Main outcome measures – Stillbirth, admission to a neonatal unit, and babies receiving mechanical ventilation. Results – Among singleton term births, the risk of stillbirth was 0.15%; of admission to a neonatal unit 5.4%; and of mechanical ventilation 0.54%. There was considerable between-hospital variation in the induction of labour rate (minimum 17.5%, maximum 40.7%) and the emergency caesarean section rate (minimum 5.6%, maximum 17.1%). Women who gave birth in hospitals with a higher induction of labour rate had better perinatal outcomes. For each 5%-point increase in induction, there was a decrease in the risk of term stillbirth by 9% (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.85 to 0.97) and mechanical ventilation by 14% (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94). There was no significant association between hospital-level induction of labour rates and neonatal unit admission at term (p>0.05). There was no significant association between hospital-level emergency caesarean section rates and adverse perinatal outcomes (p always >0.05). Conclusions – There is considerable between-hospital variation in the use of induction of labour and emergency caesarean section. Hospitals with a higher induction rate had a lower risk of adverse birth outcomes. A similar association was not found for caesarean section.