Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes.

Reproductive Statistics Branch, Division of Vital Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 3311 Toledo Road, Room 7318, Hyattsville, MD 20782, USA.
Clinics in Perinatology (Impact Factor: 2.58). 07/2008; 35(2):293-307, v. DOI: 10.1016/j.clp.2008.03.007
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The percentage of United States cesarean births increased from 20.7% in 1996 to 31.1% in 2006. Cesarean rates increased for women of all ages, race/ethnic groups, and gestational ages and in all states. Both primary and repeat cesareans have increased. Increases in primary cesareans in cases of "no indicated risk" have been more rapid than in the overall population and seem the result of changes in obstetric practice rather than changes in the medical risk profile or increases in "maternal request." Several studies note an increased risk for neonatal and maternal mortality for medically elective cesareans compared with vaginal births.

1 Bookmark
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: How do malpractice lawsuits affect physician behavior? Despite the central im-portance of this question in understanding the design of malpractice law, empir-ical evidence on this question remains limited. In this paper, I study the impact of malpractice claims against obstetricians, a specialty that is regarded as par-ticularly subject to malpractice concerns, on their choice of whether to perform C-sections, a common procedure that is thought to be sensitive to physician incentives. I find that immediately after an adverse event (defined as an ob-stetrical procedure that ultimately leads to a malpractice claim), C-section rates jump discontinuously by 4%. The increase in C-section rates persists even 4.5 years after the adverse event. Several other findings provide support to the view that fear of litigation and damage to reputation explain the results, rather than a mere response to the negative outcome that brought about the malpractice claim. First, unsuccessful claims, which, at the time of the adverse event, are perceived as less harmful to physicians' reputation, do not lead to an increase in C-section rates. Second, the impact on C-section rates is larger for patients insured by a commercial insurance provider, for which reputational concerns are likely to be stronger, since they are less constrained in their choice of physicians. In addition, the impact is smaller for experienced physicians, but not for those with a prior history of litigation claims. I also find evidence of peer effects: fol-lowing an adverse event, a physician's colleagues also have higher C-section rates. Overall, this study shows that following an adverse event physicians adopt more conservative and costly treatment strategies and that their response is likely to be related to fear of litigation and damage to reputation.
  • Source
    The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist 10/2011; 13(4).
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention to adjust the indications for caesarean delivery in a Brazilian teaching hospital in accordance with a specific protocol. Methods The present before-and-after study was carried out in three stages. In stages 1 and 3, data were obtained for 160 cesarean deliveries that occurred between May 20 and July 10 in 2011 and 2012, respectively. For stage 2, the protocol was implemented for 12 months. The deliveries in stages 1 and 3 were classified as high or low risk, and as consistent or inconsistent clinical cases on the basis of the protocol. Results A total of 160 (61.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 55.2–67.0) of 262 deliveries in stage 1 were by cesarean, compared with 160 (71.4%; 95% CI 65.5–77.3) of 224 in stage 3 (P = 0.67). In stage 1, 125 (78.1%; 95% CI 71.7–84.5) showed indications consistent with the protocol, compared with 136 (85.0%; 95% CI 79.5–90.5) in stage 3 (P = 0.11). Among the low-risk cesarean deliveries, 27 (51.9%; 95% CI 38.3–65.5) of 52 were consistent with the protocol in stage 1, compared with 49 (72.1%; 95% CI 61.4–86.1) of 68 in stage 3 (P = 0.02). Conclusion The proposed intervention improved the suitability of indications for cesarean delivery among low-risk pregnancies only.
    International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 01/2014;


Available from