Health consequences of the increasing caesarean section rates

Epidemiology

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 485-486

  Belizán, José M ^a,c   Althabe, Fernando ^a   Cafferata, María Luisa ^b  

^a INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS AND HEALTH POLICY   (Argentina)

^b Unidad de Investigacion Clinica y Epidemiologica Montevideo   (Uruguay)

^c NONE   (Argentina)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CESAREAN SECTION; HEALTH CARE; HONG KONG; HUMAN; MORBIDITY; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OBSTETRIC CARE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; VAGINAL DELIVERY; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; MATERNAL MORTALITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PREGNANCY; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, ELECTIVE; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

EID: 34250701778     PISSN: 10443983     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e318068646a     Document Type: Review

References (13)

1. Leung GM, Ho LM, Schooling CM, et al. Health care consequences of caesarean birth during the first 18 months of life: the 1997 Hong Kong Birth Cohort. Epidemiology. 2007;18:479-484.
2. Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, et al. Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet. 2006;367:1819-1829.
3. What is the right number of caesarean sections? Lancet. 1997;349:815
4. Osis MJD, Padua KS, Duarte GA, et al. The opinion of Brazilian women regarding vaginal labor and caesarean section. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2001;75:S59-S66.
5. Potter JE, Berquo E, Perpetuo IH, et al. Unwanted caesarean sections among public and private patients in Brazil: prospective study. BMJ. 2001;323:1155-8.
6. World Health Organization.Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2:436-437.
7. Althabe F, Sosa C, Belizán JM, et al. Caesarean section rates and maternal and neonatal mortality in low-, medium-, and high-income countries: an ecological study. Birth. 2006;33:270-277.
8. Belizán JM, Althabe F, Barros FC, et al. Rates and implications of caesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study. BMJ. 1999;319:1397-1402.
9. National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health. Commissioned by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Caesarean Section Clinical Guideline, April 2004. Available at http:// www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o=113190. Accessed April 11, 2007.
10. Belizán JM, Cafferata ML, Althabe F, et al. Risk of patient choice caesarean. Birth. 2006;33:167-169.
11. Barros FC, Victora CG, Barros AJ, et al. The challenge of reducing neonatal mortality in middle income countries: findings from three Brazilian birth cohorts in 1982, 1993, and 2004. Lancet. 2005;365:847-854.
12. Althabe F, Belizán JM, Villar J, et al. Mandatory second opinion to reduce rates of unnecessary caesarean sections in Latin America: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2004;363:1934-1940.
13. Lavender T, Kingdon C, Hart A, et al. Could a randomised trial answer the controversy relating to elective caesarean section? National survey of consultant obstetricians and heads of midwifery. BMJ. 2005;331:490-491.