Comparative analysis of cesarean delivery rates over a 10-year period in a single Institution using 10-class classification

References

• Brennan DJ, Robson MS, Murphy M, O’Herlihy C. Comparative analysis of international cesarean delivery rates using 10-group classification identifies significant variation in spontaneous labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;201:308.e1–308.e8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet 1985;2:436–437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Istituto Superiore di Sanità. Ministero della Salute. Sistema nazionale per le Linee Guida. Linea guida 19. Taglio Cesareo: una scelta appropriata e consapevole. Gennaio 2010. http://www.salute.gov.it/imgs/C_17_pubblicazioni_1330_allegato.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Zeitlin J, Mohangoo A, Cuttini M, Alexander S, Barros H, Blondel B, Bouvier-Colle MH, et al.; EUROPERISTAT Report Writing Committee. The European Perinatal Health Report: comparing the health and care of pregnant women and newborn babies in Europe. J Epidemiol Community Health 2009;63:681–682.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacDorman MF, Menacker F, Declercq E. Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clin Perinatol 2008;35:293–307, v.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canadian Institute for Health Information. Giving birth in Canada: Regional trends from 2001-2002 to 2005-2006. https://secure.cihi.ca/free_products/childbirth_aib_070725_e.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Althabe F, Belizán JM, Villar J, Alexander S, Bergel E, Ramos S, Romero M, et al.; Latin American Caesarean Section Study Group. Mandatory second opinion to reduce rates of unnecessary caesarean sections in Latin America: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004;363:1934–1940.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bickell NA, Zdeb MS, Applegate MS, Roohan PJ, Sui AL. Effect of external peer review on cesarean delivery rates: a statewide program. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87:664–667.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang WH, Yuan CC, Hung JH, Yang ML, Yang MJ, Chen YJ, Yang TS. Effect of peer review and trial of labor on lowering cesarean section rates. J Chin Med Assoc 2004;67:281–286.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Robson MS, Scudamore IW, Walsh SM. Using the medical audit cycle to reduce cesarean section rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174:199–205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frigoletto FD Jr, Lieberman E, Lang JM, Cohen A, Barss V, Ringer S, Datta S. A clinical trial of active management of labor. N Engl J Med 1995;333:745–750.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• López-Zeno JA, Peaceman AM, Adashek JA, Socol ML. A controlled trial of a program for the active management of labor. N Engl J Med 1992;326:450–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Homer CS, Davis GK, Brodie PM, Sheehan A, Barclay LM, Wills J, Chapman MG. Collaboration in maternity care: a randomised controlled trial comparing community-based continuity of care with standard hospital care. BJOG 2001;108:16–22.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Socol ML, Garcia PM, Peaceman AM, Dooley SL. Reducing cesarean births at a primarily private university hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;168:1748–1754; discussion 1754.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poma PA. Effect of departmental policies on cesarean delivery rates: a community hospital experience. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91:1013–1018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagrew DC Jr, Morgan MA. Decreasing the cesarean section rate in a private hospital: success without mandated clinical changes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174:184–191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaillet N, Dumont A. Evidence-based strategies for reducing cesarean section rates: a meta-analysis. Birth 2007;34:53–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robson M. Classification of cesarean section. Fetal Matern Med Rev 2001;12:23–29
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy FP, Rigg L, Cady L, Cullinane F. A new way of looking at Caesarean section births. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2007;47:316–320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Florica M, Stephansson O, Nordström L. Indications associated with increased cesarean section rates in a Swedish hospital. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2006;92:181–185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan DJ, Murphy M, Robson MS, O’Herlihy C. The singleton, cephalic, nulliparous woman after 36 weeks of gestation: contribution to overall cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:273–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolås T, Hofoss D, Daltveit AK, Nilsen ST, Henriksen T, Häger R, Ingemarsson I, Øian P. Indications for cesarean deliveries in Norway. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:864–870.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denk CE, Kruse LK, Jain NJ. Surveillance of cesarean section deliveries, New Jersey, 1999-2004. Birth 2006;33:203–209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zanetta G, Tampieri A, Currado I, Regalia A, Nespoli A, Midwife T, Fei F, et al. Changes in cesarean delivery in an Italian university hospital, 1982-1996: a comparison with the national trend. Birth 1999;26:144–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynch CM, Sexton DJ, Hession M, Morrison JJ. Obesity and mode of delivery in primigravid and multigravid women. Am J Perinatol 2008;25:163–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treacy A, Robson M, O’Herlihy C. Dystocia increases with advancing maternal age. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;195:760–763.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford J, Grewal J, Mikolajczyk R, Meikle S, Zhang J. Primary cesarean delivery among parous women in the United States, 1990-2003. Obstet Gynecol 2008;112:1235–1241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong LF, Caughey AB, Nakagawa S, Kaimal AJ, Tran SH, Cheng YW. Perinatal outcomes among different Asian-American subgroups. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:382.e1–382.e6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monari F, Di Mario S, Facchinetti F, Basevi V. Obstetricians’ and midwives’ attitudes toward cesarean section. Birth 2008;35:129–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACOG Practice Bulletin number 115. Vaginal Birth after previous caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:450–463.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Verheijen EC, Raven JH, Hofmeyr GJ. Fundal pressure during the second stage of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;CD006067.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders NJ, Spiby H, Gilbert L, Fraser RB, Hall JM, Mutton PM, Jackson A, Edmonds DK. Oxytocin infusion during second stage of labour in primiparous women using epidural analgesia: a randomised double blind placebo controlled trial. BMJ 1989;299:1423–1426.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar