Skip to main content
NCBI home page
American Journal of Public Health logoLink to American Journal of Public Health
. 1998 Sep;88(9):1384–1387. doi: 10.2105/ajph.88.9.1384

Changes in indications for cesarean delivery: United States, 1985 and 1994.

K D Gregory 1, S C Curtin 1, S M Taffel 1, F C Notzon 1
PMCID: PMC1509079  PMID: 9736883

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The percentages of cesarean deliveries attributable to specific indications (breech, dystocia, fetal distress, and elective repeat cesarean) were computed for 1985 and 1994. METHODS: Data were derived from the 1985 and 1994 National Hospital Discharge Surveys. RESULTS: Dystocia was the leading indication for cesarean delivery in both years. In comparison with 1985, cesareans performed in 1994 that were attributable to dystocia and breech presentation increased, those attributable to fetal distress did not change significantly, and elective repeat cesareans declined. CONCLUSIONS: Studying indications for cesareans can be useful for hospitals, clinicians, and researchers in determining strategies to lower primary and repeat cesarean rates.

Full text

PDF
1384

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Anderson G. M., Lomas J. Determinants of the increasing cesarean birth rate. Ontario data 1979 to 1982. N Engl J Med. 1984 Oct 4;311(14):887–892. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198410043111405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Clarke S. C., Taffel S. M. State variation in rates of cesarean and VBAC delivery: 1989 and 1993. Stat Bull Metrop Insur Co. 1996 Jan-Mar;77(1):28–36. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Graves E. J. 1991 summary: National Hospital Discharge Survey. Adv Data. 1993 Mar 3;(227):1–12. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gregory K. D., Henry O. A., Gellens A. J., Hobel C. J., Platt L. D. Repeat cesareans: how many are elective? Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Oct;84(4):574–578. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hanley M. L., Smulian J. C., Lake M. F., McLean D. A., Vintzileos A. M. Analysis of repeat cesarean delivery indications: implications of heterogeneity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Oct;175(4 Pt 1):883–888. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(96)80018-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Lagrew D. C., Jr, Morgan M. A. Decreasing the cesarean section rate in a private hospital: success without mandated clinical changes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Jan;174(1 Pt 1):184–191. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(96)70392-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Notzon F. C., Cnattingius S., Bergsjø P., Cole S., Taffel S., Irgens L., Daltveit A. K. Cesarean section delivery in the 1980s: international comparison by indication. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Feb;170(2):495–504. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(94)70217-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Paul R. H., Miller D. A. Cesarean birth: how to reduce the rate. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Jun;172(6):1903–1911. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(95)91430-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Sanchez-Ramos L., Kaunitz A. M., Peterson H. B., Martinez-Schnell B., Thompson R. J. Reducing cesarean sections at a teaching hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Sep;163(3):1081–1088. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(90)91132-v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Socol M. L., Garcia P. M., Peaceman A. M., Dooley S. L. Reducing cesarean births at a primarily private university hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993 Jun;168(6 Pt 1):1748–1758. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90686-d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Taffel S. M., Placek P. J., Liss T. Trends in the United States cesarean section rate and reasons for the 1980-85 rise. Am J Public Health. 1987 Aug;77(8):955–959. doi: 10.2105/ajph.77.8.955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Taffel S. M., Placek P. J., Moien M., Kosary C. L. 1989 U.S. cesarean section rate steadies--VBAC rate rises to nearly one in five. Birth. 1991 Jun;18(2):73–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-536x.1991.tb00063.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from American Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of American Public Health Association

RESOURCES