IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/19988891384-1387_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory, K.D.
  • Curtin, S.C.
  • Taffel, S.M.
  • Notzon, F.C.

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory, K.D. & Curtin, S.C. & Taffel, S.M. & Notzon, F.C., 1998. "Changes in indications for cesarean delivery: United States, 1985 and 1994," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 88(9), pages 1384-1387.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1998:88:9:1384-1387_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hsu, Kuang-Hung & Liao, Pei-Ju & Hwang, Chorng-Jer, 2008. "Factors affecting Taiwanese women's choice of cesarean section," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 201-209, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1998:88:9:1384-1387_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.