When mom requests a cesarean

Contemporary Ob/Gyn

Volumn 51, Issue 12, 2006, Pages 38-50

  Hibbard, Judith U ^a   Della Torre, Micaela ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846447433     PISSN: 00903159     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. CDC, National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol 54, No 4; Trends in cesarean rates for first birth and repeat cesarean rates for low-risk women: United States, 1990-2003. September 22, 2005.
2. Behague DP, Victoria CG, Barros FC. Consumer demand for caesarean sections in Brazil: informed decision making, patient choice, or social inequality? A population-based birth cohort study linking ethnographic and epidemiological methods. BMJ. 2002;324:942-945.
3. Hopkins K. Are Brazilian women really choosing to deliver by cesarean? Soc Sci Med. 2000;51:725-740.
4. Donati S, Andreozzi S, Grandolfo ME. Do Italian mothers prefer cesarean delivery? Birth. 2003;30:89-93.
5. Lin HC, Xirasagar S. Institutional factors in cesarean delivery rates: policy and research implications. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:128-136.
6. Feldman GB, Freiman JA. Prophylactic cesarean section at term? N Engl J Med. 1985;312:1264-1267.
7. Wax JR, Cartin A, Pinette M, et al. Patient choice cesarean: an evidence-based review. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2004;59:601-616.
8. Tranquilli AL, Giannubilo SR. Cesarean delivery on maternal request in Italy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2004;84:169-170.
9. Meikle SF, Steiner CA, Zhang J, et al. A national estimate of the elective primary cesarean delivery rate. Obstet Gyencol. 2005;105:751-756.
10. Declercq E, Menacker F, MacDorman M. Rise in "no indicated risk" primary caesareans in the United States, 1991-2001: cross sectional analysis. BMJ. 2005;330:71-72.
11. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference statement: Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request, March 27-29, 2006. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:1386-1397.
12. Gonen R, Tami A, Degani S. Obstetricians opinions regarding patient choice in cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;99:577-580.
13. MacDonald C, Pinion SB, MacLeod UM. Scottish female obstetricians views on elective cesarean section and personal choice for delivery. J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;22:586-589,
14. Dickson MJ, Willet M. Midwives would prefer a vaginal delivery. BMJ. 1999;319:1008.
15. Al-Mutti R, McCarthy A, Fisk NM. Obstetricians personal choice and mode of delivery. Lancet. 1996;347:544.
16. Cotzias CS, Paterson-Brown S, Fisk NM. Obstetricians say yes to maternal request for elective cesarean section: a survey of current opinions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;97:15-16.
17. Mc Gurgan P, Coulter-Smith S, O'Donovan PJ. A national confidential survey of obstetricians personal preferences regarding mode of delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;97:17-19.
18. Lilford RJ, van Coeverden de Groot HA, Moore PJ, et al. The relative risks of caesarean section (intrapartum and elective) and vaginal delivery: a detailed analysis to exclude the effects of medical disorders and acute preexisting physiological disturbances. Br J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;97:883-892.
19. Lavender T, Kindon C, Hart A, et al. Could a randomized trial answer the controversy relating to elective caesarean section? National survey of consultant obstetricians and heads of midwifery. BMJ. 2005;331:490-491.
20. Kenton K, Brincat C, Mutone M, et al. Repeat cesarean section and primary elective cesarean section: recently trained ob-gyn practice patterns and opinion. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:1872-1876.
21. Wu JM, Hundley AF, Visco AG. Elective primary cesarean delivery: attitudes of urogynecology and maternal-fetal medicine specialists. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105:301-306.
22. Wright JB, Wright AL, Simpson NA, et al. A survey of trainee obstetricians preferences for childbirth. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;97:23-25.
23. Chang J, Elam-Evans LD, Berg CJ, et al. Pregnancy -related mortality surveillance - United States, 1991-1999. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2003;52:1-8.
24. Hall MH. Enquiry into maternal deaths: Why mothers die, 1997-1999. London: RCOG Press. Accessed at www.rcog.org.uk
25. Schuitemaker N, Van Roosmalen J, Dekker G, et al. Underreporting of maternal mortality in The Netherlands. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90:78-82.
26. Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TR, et al. Cesarean delivery and postpartum mortality among primiparas in Washington State, 1987-1996. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97:169-174.
27. Wen SW, Rusen ID, Walker M, et al. Maternal Health Study Group Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System Comparison of maternal mortality and morbidity between trial of labor and elective cesarean section among women with previous cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:1263-1269.
28. Lewis G, ed. Why Mothers Die 1997-1999. Fifth Report of Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths in UK. London: RCOG Press, 2001.
29. Hannah Me, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, et al. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomized multicentre trial. The Lancet. 2000;56:1375-1383.
30. Hofmeyr GJ, Hannah ME. Planned caesarean section for term breech delivery (Cochrane Review). 2003; CD000166. DOI:10.1002/14651858.
31. Allen VM, O'Connell CM, Liston RM, et al. Maternal morbidity associated with cesarean delivery without labor compared with spontaneous onset labor at term. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102:477-482.
32. Mozurkewich EL, Hutton EK. Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus trial of labor: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1989 to 1999. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:1187-1197.
33. Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TR, et al. First birth cesarean and placental abruption or previa at second birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97:765-769.
34. Miller DA, Chollet JA, Goodwin TM. Clinical risk factors for placenta previa-placenta accreta. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177:210-214.
35. Getahun D, Oyelese Y, Salihu HM, et al. Previous cesarean delivery and risk of placenta previa and placental abruption. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:771-778
36. Gilliam M, Rosenberg D, Davis F. The likelihood of placenta previa with greater number of cesarean deliveries and higher parity. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;99:967-980.
37. Wu S, Kocherginsky M, Hibbard JU. Abnormal placentation: twenty year analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:1458-1461.
38. Rooney CM, Crawford AT, Vassallo BJ, et al. Is previous cesarean section a risk for incidental cystotomy at the time of hysterectomy? A case-controlled study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193:2041-2044.
39. Boukerrou M, Lambaudie E, Collinet P, et al. A history of cesareans is a risk factor in vaginal hysterectomies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003;82:1135-1139.
40. Sheth SS, Malpani AN, Vaginal hysterectomy following previous cesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1995;50:165-169.
41. Gunes M, Kayikdoglu F, Ozturkoglu E, et al. Incisional endometriosis after cesarean section, episiotomy, and other gynecologic procedures. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2005;31:471-475.
42. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, et al. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:501-506.
43. Allen RE, Hoslker GL, Smith AR, et al. Pelvic floor damage and childbirth: a neurophysiological study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1990;97:770-779.
44. MacLennan AH, Taylor AW, Wilson DH, et al. The prevalence of pelvic floor disorders and their relationship to gender, age, parity and mode of delivery. BJOG. 2000;107:1460-1470.
45. Buchsbaum GM, Chin M, Glantz C, et al. Prevalence of urinary incontinence and associated risk factors in a cohort of nuns. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;100:226-229.
46. Goldberg RP, Abramov Y, Botros S, et al. Delivery mode is a major environmental determinant of stress urinary incontinence: results of the Evanston-Northwestern Twin Sisters Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193:2149-2153.
47. Hannah ME, Whyte H, Hannah WJ, et al. Maternal outcomes at 2 years after planned cesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: the international randomized Term Breech Trial. Am J Obstet Gyencol. 2004;191:917-927.
48. Rortveit G, Dalveit AK, Hannestad YS, Norwegian EPINCONT Study, et al. Urinary incontinence after vaginal delivery or cesarean section. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:900-907.
49. Viktrup L, Lose G, Rolff M, et al. The symptom of stress incontinence caused by pregnancy or delivery in primiparas. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;79:945-949.
50. Wilson PD, Herbison RM, Herbison GP. Obstetric practice and prevalence of urinary incontinence three months after delivery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996;103:154-161.
51. Handa VL, Harris TA, Ostergard DR. Protecting the pelvic floor: obstetric management to prevent incontinence and pelvic organs prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;88:470-478.
52. Farrell SA, Allen VM, Baskett TF. Anal incontinence in primiparas. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2001;23:321-326.
53. Eason E, Labrecque M, Marcoux S, et al. Anal incontinence after childbirth. CMAJ. 2002;166:326-330.
54. Uustal Fornell E, Wingren G, Kjolhede P. Factors associated with pelvic floor dysfunction and emphasis on urinary and fecal incontinence and genital prolapse: an epidemiological study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004;83:383-389.
55. Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hodnett ED, et al. Outcomes at 3 months after planned cesarean vs. planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term: the international randomized Term Breech Tirai. JAMA. 2002;287:1822-31.
56. Bost BW. Cesarean delivery on demand: what will it cost? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188:1418-1421.
57. National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, accessed at www.rcog.org.uk.
58. Chervenak FA, McCullough LB. An ethically justified algorithm for offering, recommending, and performing cesarean delivery and its application in managed care practice. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;87:302-305