Rising caesarean section rates: Can evolution and ecology explain some of the difficulties of modern childbirth?

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine

Volumn 96, Issue 11, 2003, Pages 559-561

  Liston, W A ^a  

^a ROYAL INFIRMARY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CESAREAN SECTION; CHILDBIRTH; DIETARY INTAKE; ECOLOGY; EMERGENCY TREATMENT; EVOLUTION; EXERCISE; FETUS DISTRESS; HUMAN; POPULATION DENSITY; REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 0345527982     PISSN: 01410768     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/jrsm.96.11.559     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Parajothy S, Thomas J. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. National Sentinel Caesarean Audit Report. London: RCOG Press, 2001
2. Expert Advisory Group on Caesarean section in Scotland. Scottish Programme for Clinical Effectiveness in Reproductive Health. Edinburgh: Clinical Resource and Audit Group, Scottish Executive Health Department, 2001
3. Ontario Women's Health Council. Attaining and Maintaining Best Practices in the Use of Cesarean Sections. Toronto, Ontario: Ontario Women's Health Council, 2000
4. Cnattinguis R, Cnattinguis S, Notzon FC. Obstacles to reducing cesarean rates in a low cesarean setting: the effect of maternal age, height and weight. Obstet Gynecol 1998;92:501-6
5. Dawkins R. The Blind Watchmaker. London: Penguin Books, 1988
6. Cavalli-Sforza LL. Genes, People and Languages (Transl. by M Seilstad). London: Allen Lane Penguin Press, 2000
7. Boyden S. Western Civilisation in Biological Perspective. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987
8. Eaton SB, Eaton SB III, Konner MJ. Paleolithic nutrition revisited; a twelve-year retrospective on its nature and implications. Europe J Clin Nutr 1997;51:207-16
9. Bogin B. The evolution of human nutrition. In: Romanucci-Ross L, Moerman DE, Tancredi LR, eds. The Anthropology of Medicine, 3rd edn. Westport: Bergin and Garvey, 1997
10. McMichael AJ. Human Frontiers, Environments and Disease: Past Patterns, Uncertain Futures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001
11. Ettinger RL. Epidemiology of dental caries. Dent Clin N Am 1999;43:679-94
12. Formicola V, Giannecchini M. Evolutionary trends of stature in the upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europe. J Hum Evol 1999;36:319-33
13. Nickens J. Stature response as an adaptive response to food production in Mesoamerica. J Archaeol Sci 1976;3;31-41
14. Stini WA. Evolutionary implications of changing nutritional patterns in human populations. Am Anthropol 1971;71:1019-30
15. Angel JL. Paleoecology, paleodemography and health. In: Polgar S, ed. Population Ecology and Social Evolution. The Hague: Mouton, 1975:667-79
16. Bock RD, Sykes RC. Evidence for continuing secular increase in height within families in the United States. Am J Hum Biol 1989;1:143-8
17. Cameron M. The caesarean section: with notes of a successful case. BMJ 1889;i:180-2
18. Baird D. Social factors in obstetrics. Lancet 1949;1:1079-83
19. Read AW, Prendiville WJ, Dawes VP, Stanley FJ. Cesarean section and operative vaginal delivery in low risk primiparous women, Western Australia. Am J Publ Health 1994;84:37-42
20. Kuczmarski RJ, Flegal KM, Campbell SM, Johnson LL. Increasing prevalence of overweight among US adults. JAMA 1994;272:205-15
21. Baeten JM, Bukusi EA, Lambe M. Pregnancy complications among overweight and obese nulliparous women. Am J Pub Health 2001;91:436-40
22. Hiernaux J, Hartono DB. Physical measurements of the adult Hadza of Tanzania. Ann Hum Biol 1980;7:339-46
23. Galtier-Dereure F, Boegner C, Bringer J. Obesity and pregnancy: complications and cost. Am J Clin Nutr 2000;71(suppl):1242S-85S
24. Susser M. Maternal weight gain, infant birth weight, and diet: causal sequences. Am J Clin Nutr 1991;53:1384-96
25. Bonelli SR, Raab GM. Why are babies getting heavier? Comparison of Scottish birth from 1980-1992. BMJ 1997;315:1205
26. Smith GCS. A population study of birth weight and the risk of caesarean section; Scotland 1980-1996. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2000;107:740-4
27. Liu S, Yao L, Chen Y, Liu Z, Sun M. Study on the trend of changes in fetal macrosomia in Yantai during the past 30 years. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi 2002;37:469-71
28. Parrish KM, Holt VC, Easterling TR, Connell FA, Logerfo JP. The effect of changes in maternal age parity and birth weight distribution on primary cesarean delivery. JAMA 1994;271:443-7
29. Leeman L, Leeman R. A native American community with a 7% cesarean delivery rate: does case mix, ethnicity, or labor management explain the low rate? Ann Fam Med 2003;1:36-43
30. Government Statistic Service. NHS Maternity Statistics, England 1998-99 to 2000-01
31. Dietl J. Trends in birth statistics in Europe. Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol 2002;206:48-50
32. Context data; demography, [www.childpolicyintl.org] Table 2.12 2003
33. Roberts ADG, Cordiner JW, Hart DM, Barlow DH, MacRae D, Leggate I. The variation in cervical hydroxyproline and cervical water with age. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1988;95:1159-64
34. Morrison J, Mackenzie IZ. Cesarean section on demand. Semin Perinatol 2003;27:20-33
35. Smith GC, Pell JP, Cameron AD, Dobbie R. Risk of perinatal death associated with labor after previous cesarean delivery in uncomplicated term pregnancies. JAMA 2002;287:2684-90