High caesarean rates in Madras (India): A population-based cross sectional study

BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 110, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 106-111

  Sreevidya, S ^a,b   Sathiyasekaran, B W C ^b,c  

^a TATA INSTITUTE OF FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH   (India)

^b MADRAS MEDICAL COLLEGE   (India)

^c SRI RAMACHANDRA UNIVERSITY   (India)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DELIVERY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INDIA; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PARITY; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRIVATE HOSPITAL; PROBABILITY; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; RISK; SOCIAL WELFARE; SOCIOECONOMICS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; URBAN AREA;

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; CESAREAN SECTION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HOSPITALS, TEACHING; HUMANS; INDIA; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PREGNANCY; PRIVATE SECTOR; PUBLIC SECTOR; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; URBAN HEALTH;

EID: 0037331242     PISSN: 14700328     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1471-0528.2003.02006.x     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Notzon F.C., Placek P.J., Taffel S.M. Comparison of national caesarean-section rates. N Engl J Med. 316:1987;386-389.
2. Murray S.F., Serani Pradenas F. Caesarean birth trends in Chile, 1986-1994. Birth. 24:1997;258-263.
3. Nielsen T.F., Otterblad Olausson P., Ingemarsson I. The caesarean section rate in Sweden: the end of the rise. Birth. 21:1994;1. March.
4. Menard M.K. Caesarean delivery rates in the US - the 1990's. Controversies in Labor Management. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 26(2):1999;275-286.
5. US Department of Health and Human Services Task Force - 1981. Caesarean Childbirth. National Institutes of Health Publication No. 82-2067, p. 7.
6. Rao K.B. Global aspects of a rising caesarean section rate. Women's Health Today. 1994;65-70 Parthenon Publishers, London.
7. Bennet S et al. A simplified general method for cluster sample surveys of health in developing countries. World Health Stat Q. 44:1991;18.
8. MINITAB Statistical Software Release 13.31 for Windows, MINITAB.
9. Pai M., Sundaram P., Radhakrishnan K.K., Thomas K., Muliyil J.P. A high rate of caesarean section in an affluent section of Chennai: is it cause for concern? Natl Med J India. 12(4):1999;156-158.
10. Padmadas S.S., Kumar S., Nair S.B., Kumari A. Caesarean section delivery in Kerala, India: evidence from national family health survey. Soc Sci Med. 51(4):2000;511-521. August.
11. McCloskey L., Petitti D.B., Hobel C.J. Variations in the use of caesarean delivery for dystocia: lessons about the source of care. Med Care. 30(2):1992;126-135.
12. Haynes R.R., Minkoff H.L., Feldman J., Schwarz R.H. Relation of private or clinic care to the caesarean section birth rate. N Engl J Med. 315:1986;619-624.
13. Gregory, Emily Ramicone M.S., Chan L., Kahn Caesarean deliveries for Medicaid patients: a comparison in public and private hospitals in Los Angeles County. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 180:1999;1177-1184. May.
14. Chacham A.S., Perpetuo I.H. The incidence of caesarean deliveries in Belo Horizonte, Brazil: social and economic determinants. Am J Public Health. 88(5):1998;777-780.
15. Cary A.J. Intervention rates in spontaneous term labor in low risk nulliparous women. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynecol. 30(1):1990;46-51. February.
16. Macfarlane Birth Counts: Statistics of Pregnancy and Childbirth. 1984;HMSO, London.
17. Cai W.W., Marks J.S., Chen C.H., Zhuang Y.X., Morris L., Harris J.R. Increasing caesarean section rates and emerging patterns of health insurance in Shanghai, China. Am J Public Health. 88(5):1998;777-780. May.
18. Lent M. The medical and legal risks of the electronic foetal monitor. Stanford Law Rev. 51(4):1999;807-837. April.
19. Murray S.F. Relation between private health insurance and high rates of caesarean sections in Chile: qualitative and quantitative study. BMJ. 321:2000;1501-1505.
20. Faundes A., Cecatti J.G. Which policy for caesarean sections in Brazil? An analysis of trends and consequences. Health Policy Plan. 8(1):1993;33-42.
21. Rock S.M. Malpractice premiums and primary caesarean rates in New York and Illinois. Public Health Rep. 103(5):1988;459-463. September-October.
22. Duggal R., Amin S. Cost of Health Care - 'A Household Survey in an Indian District'. 1989;Foundation for Research in Community Health, Mumbai.
23. India: new directions - health sector developments at the state level: an operational perspective, Population and Human Resources Division, South Asia Country Department. World Bank 1997. Report No. 15753-IN, 1997, 20-21.
24. Nandraj S., Duggal R. Physical Standards in the Private Health Sector - a Case Study of Rural Maharashtra. 1997;CEHAT, Mumbai.
25. Nandraj S. Beyond law and the lord: quality of private health care. Econ Polit Wkly. 29(27):1994.
26. Uplekar M.W. Private health care. Soc Sci Med. 51(6):2000;897-904. September.
27. Shelton Brown H. Physician demand for leisure: implications for caesarean section rates. J Health Econ. 15:1996;233-242.
28. Fraser W., Usher R.H., McLean FH et al. Temporal variation in rates of caesarean section for dystocia: does 'convenience' play a role? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 156(2):1987;300-304.
29. Evans M.I., Richardson D.A., Scholl J.S., Johnson B.A. Caesarean section - assessment of the convenience factor. J Reprod Med. 29(9):1984;670-676.
30. Estrin D. High caesarean section rates in Brazil result in large part from non-clinical factors. Fam Plann Perspect Dig. 26(1):2000;. March.
31. WHO Consensus Conference on Appropriate Technology for Birth; Fortaleza, Brazil, 22-26 April 1985.
32. Petitti D.B. Maternal mortality and morbidity in caesarean section. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 28(4):1985;763-769. December.
33. Boehm F.H., Graves C.R. Caesarean birth. Rivlin M.E., Martin R.W. Manual of Clinical Problems in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1994;158-162 Little, Brown, Boston.
34. DeMuylder X. Caesarean section morbidity at district level in Zimbabwe. J Trop Med Hyg. 92(2):1989;89-92. April.
35. Bettiol H., Rona R.J., Chinn S., Goldani M., Barbieri M.A. Factors associated with preterm births in southeast Brazil: a comparison of two birth cohorts born 15 years apart. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 14(1):2000;30-38. January.
36. Caesarean section and perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 158:1987;449-452.
37. Pardes P., La Pena M., Flores Guerra E., Diaz J., Trostle J. Factors influencing physician's prescribing behavior in the treatment of childhood diarrhea: knowledge may not be the clue. Soc Sci Med. 42(8):1996;1185-1194.
38. Stephen A.M., Norbert G. A successful program to lower caesarean section rates. N Engl J Med. 316:1988;1511-1516.
39. Kabra S.G., Narayanan R., Chaturvedi M., Anand P., Mathur G. What is happening to caesarean section rates? Lancet. 343(8890):1994;179-180.
40. Phillips R.N., Thornton J., Gleicher N. Physician bias in caesarean section. JAMA. 248:1982;1082-1084.