skip to main content

Socioeconomic Roles in Cesarean Section Delivery in the Philippines: A Secondary Analysis of the 2022 National Demographic and Health Survey

*Diah Yunitawati orcid scopus  -  Research Center for Public Health and Nutrition, National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia
Agung Dwi Laksono  -  Research Center for Public Health and Nutrition, National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia
Ratna Dwi Wulandari  -  Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia
Leny Latifah  -  Research Center for Public Health and Nutrition, National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia
Diyan Ermawan Effendi  -  Research Center for Public Health and Nutrition, National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia
Taufiq Hidayat  -  Research Center for Public Health and Nutrition, National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia
Wahyu Pudji Nugraheni  -  Research Center for Public Health and Nutrition, National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia
Dennis B. Batangan  -  Institute of Philippine Culture, School of Social Sciences Ateneo de Manila University, Philippines
Open Access Copyright (c) 2025 by the Authors, Published by Department of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Background: Cesarean section (CS) delivery should only be performed when medically indicated. However, socioeconomic disparities continue to influence CS utilization in many countries, including the Philippines. Although previous studies have examined CS rates, there is limited evidence, based on the latest national data, on how socioeconomic factors shape CS use in the Philippines.

Purpose: This study aimed to analyze the socioeconomic roles in CS delivery in the Philippines.

Methods: This study used secondary data from the 2022 Philippines National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS). The cross-sectional study included 4,452 women aged 15–49 who had given birth within the previous three years. Seven control factors were examined: employment, antenatal care (ANC), age, education, marital status, residence, and parity. The mode of delivery was considered the outcome variable, while socioeconomic status was the exposure variable. Binary logistic regression was used for the final data analysis.  

Results: CS was performed in 18.45% of deliveries in the Philippines. Analysis of socioeconomic status indicated that women in the poorer group were 1.758 times more likely than those in the poorest group to undergo CS (AOR 1.758; 95% CI 1.757–1.758). Women in the middle group were 2.164 times more likely than the poorest to have a CS (AOR 2.164; 95% CI 2.163–2.165). Those in the richer group were 2.718 times more likely (AOR 2.718; 95% CI 2.717–2.719), and those in the richest group were 4.787 times more likely (AOR 4.787; 95% CI 4.785–4.789) to deliver by CS compared with the poorest.

Conclusion: Socioeconomic disparities are strongly associated with CS delivery in the Philippines. The wealthier the mother, the more likely she is to have a CS. ANC education should be optimized by addressing psychological needs, promoting positive values, and providing a sense of security and comfort in normal childbirth. At the same time, equitable access to CS should be ensured for the poorest groups through education and insurance coverage.

 

Fulltext View|Download
Keywords: Big data; cesarean section; maternal health; public health; reproductive health

Article Metrics:

  1. Adeline, A. B., Joseph, N., Gabriel, G., Magatte, M., Blair, J. W., & Khady, D. (2022). Review of quality of care metrics and targets for improvement. Seminars in Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 26(1), 101199 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2021.101199.Cesarean
  2. Ahmmed, F., Manik, M. M. R., & Jamal Hossain, M. (2021). Caesarian section (CS) delivery in Bangladesh: A nationally representative cross-sectional study. PLoS ONE, 16, e0254777. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254777
  3. Alonso-Colón, M., Pérez-Gómez, B., & Ramis, R. (2025). Determinants of cesarean section rates: A cross-sectional study of 4.9 million deliveries over 10 years. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 312, 114527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2025.114527
  4. Amjad, A., Amjad, U., Zakar, R., Usman, A., Zakar, M. Z., & Fischer, F. (2018). Factors associated with caesarean deliveries among child-bearing women in Pakistan: Secondary analysis of data from the Demographic and Health Survey, 2012-13. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 18, 113. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1743-z
  5. Angolile, C. M., Max, B. L., Mushemba, J., & Mashauri, H. L. (2023). Global increased cesarean section rates and public health implications: A call to action. Health Science Reports, 6(5), e1274. https://doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.1274
  6. Arunda, M. O, Agardh, A., & Asamoah, B. O. (2020). Cesarean delivery and associated socioeconomic factors and neonatal survival outcome in Kenya and Tanzania: Analysis of national survey data. Global Health Action, 13(1), 1748403. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2020.1748403
  7. Begum, T., Rahman, A., Nababan, H., Hoque, D. M. E., Khan, A. F., Ali, T., & Anwar, I. (2017). Indications and determinants of caesarean section delivery: Evidence from a population-based study in Matlab, Bangladesh. PLOS ONE, 12(11), e0188074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188074
  8. Beogo, I., Mendez Rojas, B., & Gagnon, M.-P. (2017). Determinants and materno-fetal outcomes related to cesarean section delivery in private and public hospitals in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol. Systematic Reviews, 6(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0402-6
  9. Betran, A. P., Ye, J., Moller, A.-B., Souza, J. P., & Zhang, J. (2021). Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: Global and regional estimates. BMJ Global Health, 6, 6. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671
  10. Chu, A., Kwon, S., & Cowley, P. (2019). Health financing reforms for moving towards Universal Health Coverage in the Western Pacific Region. Health Systems & Reform, 5, 1544029. https://doi.org/10.1080/23288604.2018.1544029
  11. Dayrit, M. M., Lagrada, L. P., Picazo, O. F., Pons, M. C., & Villaverde, M. C. (2018). The Philippines health system review. Health Systems in Transition, 8(2), 1-120. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Southeast Asia. https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/274579
  12. de Loenzien, M., Schantz, C., Luu, B. N., & Dumont, A. (2019). Magnitude and correlates of caesarean section in urban and rural areas: A multivariate study in Vietnam. PloS One, 14(7), e0213129. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213129
  13. Elnakib, S., Abdel-Tawab, N., Orbay, D., & Hassanein, N. (2019). Medical and non-medical reasons for cesarean section delivery in Egypt: A hospital-based retrospective study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 19(1), 411. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-019-2558-2
  14. Faruk, M. O., Sultana, S., Al-neyma, M., & Hossain, S. (2023). Socioeconomic, demographic, and nutritional factors associated with cesarean deliveries among childbearing women in Bangladesh. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 1, 100001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2023.100001
  15. Felipe-Dimog, E. B., Yu, C.-H., Tumulak, M.-A. J. R., Lu, T.-H., & Liang, F.-W. (2025). Temporal trends and associated factors in cesarean section use in the Philippines: An analysis of Demographic and Health Survey data from 1993 to 2017. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 25(1), 204. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-025-07298-5
  16. Firoozi, M., Tara, F., Mazloum, S. R., & Roudsari, R. L. (2021). A qualitative inquiry to explore why women with previous cesarean-section do not choose vaginal birth after cesarean. Journal of Midwifery and Reproductive Health, 9(2), 2753–2762. https://doi.org/10.22038/jmrh.2021.58760.1713
  17. Gallagher, L., Smith, V., Carroll, M., Hannon, K., Lawler, D., & Begley, C. (2022). What would reduce caesarean section rates? —Views from pregnant women and clinicians in Ireland. PLoS ONE, 17(4), e0267465. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267465
  18. Hanahoe, M. (2020). Midwifery-led care can lower caesarean section rates according to the Robson ten group classification system. European Journal of Midwifery, 4(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.18332/ejm/119164
  19. Ji, Y. J., Wang, H. B., Bai, Z., Long, D. J., Ma, K., Yan, J., Li, Y. X., Wu, Y. F., & Yang, H. (2021). Achieving WHO’s goal for reducing cesarean section rate in a Chinese hospital. Frontiers in Medicine, 8, 77487. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.774487
  20. Kim, M. K., Lee, S. M., Bae, S. H., Kim, H. J., Lim, N. G., Yoon, S. J., Lee, J. Y., & Jo, M. W. (2018). Socioeconomic status can affect pregnancy outcomes and complications, even with a universal healthcare system. International Journal for Equity in Health, 17(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0715-7
  21. Kumar, P., Srivastava, S., Chaudhary, P., & Muhammad, T. (2023). Factors contributing to socioeconomic inequality in utilization of caesarean section delivery among women in Indonesia: Evidence from Demographic and Health Survey. PLoS ONE, 18, e0291485. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0291485
  22. Lam, H., Vera, R. de, Rivera, A., Sy, T. R., Cheng, K. J. G., Farrales, D. B., & Miguel, R. T. D. (2018). Describing the health service delivery network of an urban poor area and a rural poor area. Acta Medica Philippina, 52(5), 438-446. https://www.herdin.ph/index.php/herdin-home?view=research&cid=70573
  23. Manyeh, A. K., Amu, A., Akpakli, D. E., Williams, J., & Gyapong, M. (2018). Socioeconomic and demographic factors associated with caesarean section delivery in Southern Ghana: evidence from INDEPTH Network member site. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 18(1), 405. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-2039-z
  24. Milcent, C., & Zbiri, S. (2018). Prenatal care and socioeconomic status: Effect on cesarean delivery. Health Economics Review, 8(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-018-0190-x
  25. Mishra, M., Parida, D., Murmu, J., Singh, D., Rehman, T., Kshatri, J. S., & Pati, S. (2023). Effectiveness of mHealth interventions for monitoring antenatal care among pregnant women in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Healthcare, 11(19), 2635. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11192635
  26. Moquillaza-Alcantara, V. H., & Palacios-Vivanco, D. P. (2023). Cesarean section prevalence based on prenatal care provider, location, and wealth index: A comparative analysis in Peru’s healthcare systems. Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare, 38, 100924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srhc.2023.100924
  27. Motomura, K., Ganchimeg, T., Nagata, C., Ota, E., Vogel, J. P., Betran, A. P., Torloni, M. R., Jayaratne, K., Jwa, S. C., Mittal, S., Dy Recidoro, Z., Matsumoto, K., Fujieda, M., Nafiou, I., Yunis, K., Qureshi, Z., Souza, J. P., & Mori, R. (2017). Incidence and outcomes of uterine rupture among women with prior caesarean section: WHO multicountry survey on maternal and newborn health. Scientific Reports, 7, 44093. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44093
  28. Mumtaz, Z., Bhatti, A., & Salway, S. (2020). Challenges to achieving appropriate and equitable access to caesarean section: Ethnographic insights from rural Pakistan. Journal of Biosocial Science, 52(4), 491–503. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021932019000567
  29. Mylonas, I., & Friese, K. (2015). Indications for and risks of elective cesarean section. Deutsches Arzteblatt International, 112, 29. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2015.0489
  30. Nsereko, E., Aline, U., Ornella, M., Henriette, U., Pierre, N., Léonard, T., Josee, M., Candide, M., & Patricia, M. (2024). Determinants of cesarean mode of childbirth among Rwandan women of childbearing age: Evidence from the 2019–2020 Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey (RDHS). Public Health Challenges, 3, 150 https://doi.org/10.1002/puh2.150
  31. Nugraheni, W. P., Mubasyiroh, R., & Hartono, R. K. (2020). The influence of Jaminan Kesehatan Nasional (JKN) on the cost of delivery services in Indonesia. PLoS ONE, 15, 7. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235176
  32. Pandey, A. K., Raushan, M. R., Gautam, D., & Neogi, S. B. (2023). Alarming trends of cesarean section? Time to rethink: Evidence From a large-scale cross-sectional sample survey in India. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, 41892. https://doi.org/10.2196/41892
  33. Philippine Statistics Authority. (2023). 2022 Philippine National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS). https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR381/FR381.pdf
  34. Rai, R. K., Barik, A., & Chowdhury, A. (2022). Use of antenatal and delivery care services and their association with maternal and infant mortality in rural India. Scientific Reports, 12, 16490. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-20951-9
  35. Rayhan, S., & Barua, S. (2020). Correlates of caesarean section delivery in West Bengal, India: An analysis based on DLHS-3. In Maternal and Child Health Matters Around the World. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.88838
  36. Sandall, J., Tribe, R. M., Avery, L., Mola, G., Visser, G. H., Homer, C. S., Gibbons, D., Kelly, N. M., Kennedy, H. P., Kidanto, H., Taylor, P., & Temmerman, M. (2018). Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children. Lancet, 392(10155), 1349–1357. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31930-5
  37. Seidu, A.-A., Hagan, J. E. J., Agbemavi, W., Ahinkorah, B. O., Nartey, E. B., Budu, E., Sambah, F., & Schack, T. (2020). Not just numbers: Beyond counting caesarean deliveries to understanding their determinants in Ghana using a population-based cross-sectional study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 20, 114. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-020-2792-7
  38. Sepehri, A., & Guliani, H. (2017). Regional gradients in institutional cesarean delivery rates: Evidence from five countries in Asia. Birth, 44(1), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.12265
  39. Shibre, G., Zegeye, B., Ahinkorah, B. O., Keetile, M., & Yaya, S. (2020). Magnitude and trends in socioeconomic and geographic inequality in access to birth by cesarean section in Tanzania: evidence from five rounds of Tanzania demographic and health surveys (1996-2015). Archives of Public Health, 78(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-020-00466-3
  40. Shobiye, D. M., Omotola, A., Zhao, Y., Zhang, J., Ekawati, F. M., & Shobiye, H. O. (2022). Infant mortality and risk factors in Nigeria in 2013–2017: A population-level study. EClinicalMedicine, 51, 101622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101622
  41. Singh, P., Hashmi, G., & Swain, P. K. (2018). High prevalence of cesarean section births in private sector health facilities- Analysis of district level household survey-4 (DLHS-4) of India. BMC Public Health, 18(1), 163. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5533-3
  42. Singh, S., Vishwakarma, D., & Sharma, S. (2020). Prevalence and determinants of voluntary caesarean deliveries and socioeconomic inequalities in India: Evidence from National Family Health Survey (2015-16). Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health, 8(2), 335–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cegh.2019.08.018
  43. Sizear, M. I., & Rashid, M. (2024). Urgent need to address increasing caesarean section rates in lower-middle-income countries like Bangladesh. Frontiers in Global Women’s Health, 5, 1365504. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgwh.2024.1365504
  44. Smith, K. T., Monti, D., Mir, N., Peters, E., Tipirneni, R., & Politi, M. C. (2018). Access is Necessary but not sufficient: Factors influencing delay and avoidance of health care services. MDM Policy and Practice, 3(1), 2381468318760298. https://doi.org/10.1177/2381468318760298
  45. Suwanrath, C., Chunuan, S., Matemanosak, P., & Pinjaroen, S. (2021). Why do pregnant women prefer cesarean birth? A qualitative study in a tertiary care center in Southern Thailand. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 21(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-020-03525-3
  46. Tegegne, T. K., Chojenta, C., Loxton, D., Smith, R., & Kibret, K. T. (2018). The impact of geographic access on institutional delivery care use in low and middle-income countries: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 13, 8. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203130
  47. The Lancet. (2018). Stemming the global caesarean section epidemic. The Lancet, 392(10155), 1279. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32394-8
  48. Tsegaye, H., Desalegne, B., Wassihun, B., Bante, A., Fikadu, K., Debalkie, M., & Yeheyis, T. (2019). Prevalence and associated factors of caesarean section in Addis Ababa hospitals, Ethiopia. Pan African Medical Journal, 34, 136. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2019.34.136.16264
  49. World Health Organization. (2015). Cæsarean section rates. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(80)91104-6
  50. World Health Organization. (2018). WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience: Summary. World Health Organization. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.14599
  51. World Health Organization. (2021). Caesarean section rates continue to rise, amid growing inequalities in access. https://www.who.int/news/item/16-06-2021-caesarean-section-rates-continue-to-rise-amid-growing-inequalities-in-access
  52. Wyatt, S., Silitonga, P. I. I., Febriani, E., & Long, Q. (2021). Socioeconomic, geographic and health system factors associated with rising C-section rate in Indonesia: A cross-sectional study using the Indonesian demographic and health surveys from 1998 to 2017. BMJ Open, 11(5), e045592. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045592
  53. Yadav, A. K., Sahni, B., & Jena, P. K. (2021). Education, employment, economic status and empowerment: Implications for maternal health care services utilization in India. Journal of Public Affairs, 21(3), e2259. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2259
  54. Yaya, S., Uthman, O. A., Amouzou, A., & Bishwajit, G. (2018). Disparities in caesarean section prevalence and determinants across sub-Saharan Africa countries. Global Health Research and Policy, 3, 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41256-018-0074-y
  55. Ye, X., Baker, P. N., & Tong, C. (2023). The updated understanding of advanced maternal age. Fundamental Research, 4(6), 1719–1728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fmre.2023.09.013
  56. Yunitawati, D., Latifah, L., Suryaputri, I. Y., & Laksono, A. D. (2024). A higher maternal education level could be a critical factor in the exceeded cesarean section delivery in Indonesia. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 53(1), 219–227. https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v53i1.14698
  57. Zahroh, R. I., Disney, G., Betrán, A. P., & Bohren, M. A. (2020). Trends and sociodemographic inequalities in the use of caesarean section in Indonesia, 1987-2017. BMJ Global Health, 5(12), e003844. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003844

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2025-12-16 05:57:31

No citation recorded.