Surveillance of cesarean section deliveries, New Jersey, 1999-2004

被引:26
作者
Denk, Charles E. [1 ]
Kruse, Lakota K. [1 ]
Jain, Neetu J. [1 ]
机构
[1] New Jersey Dept Hlth & Senior Serv, MCH Epidemiol Program, Trenton, NJ 08625 USA
来源
BIRTH-ISSUES IN PERINATAL CARE | 2006年 / 33卷 / 03期
关键词
cesarean section; population surveillance; practice patterns; patient preference;
D O I
10.1111/j.1523-536X.2006.00105.x
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Background: Nationally and in New Jersey, the cesarean delivery rate has been increasing steadily for nearly a decade, and especially since 1999. The purpose of this study was to describe recent trends in cesarean section delivery in New Jersey. Methods: Data on delivery method, medical indications and patient characteristics were extracted from electronic birth certificate files. Results: Cesarean section deliveries increased as a proportion of live births by 6 percent annually. Growth was roughly uniform across Robson's clinical classification. Repeat cesareans contributed only proponionately to the overall trend. The greatest acceleration was observed for procedures without trial of labor and in medical situations where cesarean delivery had been relatively rare. Conclusions: Medical indications recorded on the birth certificate explained little of the rapid growth in utilization of cesarean delivery, since trends were comparable in most categories we examined. A sustained autonomous shift in practice patterns, patient preferences, or both seems the most likely driver of the overall trend.
引用
收藏
页码:203 / 209
页数:7
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]   Maternal morbidity associated with cesarean delivery without labor compared with spontaneous onset of labor at term [J].
Allen, VM ;
O'Connell, CM ;
Liston, RM ;
Baskett, TF .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2003, 102 (03) :477-482
[2]   Rising cesarean rates: Are patients sicker? [J].
Bailit, JL ;
Love, TE ;
Mercer, B .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2004, 191 (03) :800-803
[3]   Why are cesarean delivery rates so high in diabetic pregnancies? [J].
Blackwell, SC ;
Hassan, SS ;
Wolfe, HW ;
Michaelson, J ;
Berry, SM ;
Sorokin, Y .
JOURNAL OF PERINATAL MEDICINE, 2000, 28 (04) :316-320
[4]  
Coco AS, 2000, FAM MED, V32, P639
[5]   Rise in "no indicated risk" primary caesareans in the United States, 1991-2001: cross sectional analysis [J].
Declercq, E ;
Menacker, F ;
MacDorman, M .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2005, 330 (7482) :71-72
[6]   Differences between hospitals in cesarean rates for term primigravidas with cephalic presentation [J].
Fischer, A ;
LaCoursiere, DY ;
Barnard, P ;
Bloebaum, L ;
Varner, M .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2005, 105 (04) :816-821
[7]   Obstetricians' opinions regarding patient choice in cesarean delivery [J].
Gonen, R ;
Tamir, A ;
Degani, S .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2002, 99 (04) :577-580
[8]   Cesarean delivery rates and neonatal morbidity in a low-risk population [J].
Gould, JB ;
Danielsen, B ;
Korst, LM ;
Phibbs, R ;
Chance, K ;
Main, E ;
Wirtschafter, DD ;
Stevenson, DK .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2004, 104 (01) :11-19
[9]   Using administrative data to identify indications for elective primary cesarean delivery [J].
Gregory, KD ;
Korst, LM ;
Gornbein, JA ;
Platt, LD .
HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2002, 37 (05) :1387-1401
[10]  
Guihard P, 2001, BRIT J OBSTET GYNAEC, V108, P48, DOI 10.1016/S0306-5456(00)00009-7