Indications for cesarean section in singleton pregnancies in two Danish counties with different cesarean section rates

References

• Notzon F C, Placek P J, Taffel S M. Comparisons of national cesarean-section rates. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 386–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergsjô P, Schmidt E, Pusch D. Differences in the reported frequencies of some obstetrical interventions in Europe. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1983; 90: 628–32
   Google Scholar
• Taffel S M. Cesarean section in America: dramatic trends, 1970 to 1987. Stat Bull Metrop Insur Co 1989; 70: 2–11
   Google Scholar
• Lomas J, Enkin M. Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth, I Chalmers, M Enkin, M JNC Keirse. Oxford University Press, Oxford 1989; 1182–95
   Google Scholar
• Rancke-Madesen A. [Variations in frequency of Cesarean sections in Denmark 1980–1989]. Ugeskr Laeger 1991; 154: 29–30
   Google Scholar
• Lilford R J, van-Coeverden-de-Groot H A, Moore P J, Bingham P. The relative risks of caesarean section (intrapartum and elective) and vaginal delivery: a detailed analysis to exclude the effects of medical disorders and other acute pre-existing physiological disturbances. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97: 883–92
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sperling L S, Knudsen L B, Secher N J, Kristensen F B. [Variations in frequency of Cesarean sections in Denmark]. Ugeskr Laeger 1990; 152: 3152–5, In Danish
   Google Scholar
• Anderson G M, Lomas J. Determinants of the increasing cesarean birth rate. Ontario data 1979 to 1982. N Engl J Med 1984; 311: 887–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yudkin P L, Redman C W. Caesarean section dissected, 1978–1983. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1986; 93: 135–44
   Google Scholar
• Shiono P H, McNellis D, Rhoads G G. Reasons for the rising cesarean delivery rates: 1978–1984. Obstet Gynecol 1987; 69: 696–700
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakobi P, Weissman A, Paldi E. Uniform presentation of data concerning cesarean sections. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1987; 66: 657–8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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; 77: 955–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borthen I, Lossius P, Skjaerven R, Bergsja P. Changes in frequency and indications for cesarean section in Norway 1967–1984. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1989; 68: 589–93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiery M, Derom R, Buekens P. Frequency of cesarean deliveries in Belgium. Biol Neonate 1989; 55: 90–6
   Google Scholar
• Nilsen S T, Bergsjô P, Lôkling A, Skarsten K W, Johannessen K H, Blaas H G. A comparison of cesarean section frequencies in two Norwegian hospitals. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1983; 62: 555–61
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Driscoll K, Foley M. Correlation of decrease in perinatal mortality and increase in cesarean section rates. Obstet Gynecol 1983; 61: 1–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leveno K J, Cunningham F G, Pritchard J A. Cesarean section: an answer to the House of Home. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 153: 838–44
   Google Scholar
• O'Driscoll K, Foley M, MacDonald D, Stronge J. Cesarean section and perinatal outcome: response from the House of Horne. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988; 158: 449–52
   Google Scholar
• Leveno K J, Cunningham F G, Pritchard J A. Cesarean section: the House of Horne revisited. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 160: 78–9
   Google Scholar
• Baruffi G, Strobino D M, Paine L L. Investigation of institutional differences in primary cesarean birth rates. J Nurse Midwifery 1990; 35: 274–81
   Google Scholar
• National Board of Health in Denmark, Vital Statistics. Medical Birth Statistics 1989 1991a; I: 28
   Google Scholar
• Bottoms S F, Rosen M G, Sokol R J. The increase in the cesarean birth rate. N Engl J Med 1980; 302: 559–63
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mor-Yosef S, Samueloff A, Modan B, Navot D, Schenker J G. Ranking the risk factors for cesarean: logistic regression analysis of a nationwide study. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 75: 944–7
   Google Scholar
• Goyert G L, Bottoms S F, Treadwell M C, Nehra P C. The physician factor in cesarean birth rates. N Engl J Med 1989; 320: 706–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeMott R K, Sandmire H F. The Green Bay cesarean section study. I. The physician factor as a determinant of cesarean birth rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 162: 1593–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rosen M. NIH Consensus Development Task Force statement on cesarean childbirth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981; 139: 902–5
   Google Scholar
• National Board of Health in Denmark, Vital Statistics. Causes of Death in Denmark 1989. 1991b; I: 27
   Google Scholar