Skip Navigation

Strengthen the Evidence for Maternal and Child Health Programs

Sign up for MCHalert eNewsletter

Search Results: MCHLine

Items in this list may be obtained from the sources cited. Contact information reflects the most current data about the source that has been provided to the MCH Digital Library.

Displaying records 1 through 6 (6 total).

Osterman, Michelle J.K. 2022. Changes in primary and repeat cesarean delivery: United States, 2016–2021. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics., 11 pp. (Vital Statistics Rapid Release)

Annotation: This report presents trends in primary and repeat Cesarian delivery from 2016 to 2021, using data from the National Vital Statistics System. It finds that, although repeat Cesarian delivery decreased each year from 2016 to 2021, primary Cesarian rates increased for women under 40, for most race and Hispanicorigin groups, and for all gestational age. Color graphs and maps illustrate the changes by age, race, gestational age, US state, etc.

Keywords: Cesarean section, Gestational age, Hispanic Americans, Race, Repeat cesarean birth

Guise J, Eden K, Emeis C, Denman MA, Marshall N, Fu R, Janik R, Nygren P, Walker M, McDonagh M. 2010. Vaginal birth after cesarean: New insights. Rockville, MD: U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, ca. 400 pp. (Evidence report/technology assessment; no. 191)

Annotation: This systematic review was conducted to inform the 2010 National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference on emerging issues relating to vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). The report reviews two background questions: (1) what are the rates and patterns of utilization of trial labor after prior cesarean, VBAC, and repeat cesarean deliveries in the United States? and (2) what are the nonmedical factors that influence the patterns and utilization of trial labor after prior cesarean? The report also addresses four key questions: (1) Among women who attempt trial of labor after prior cesarean, what is the vaginal delivery rate, and what are the factors that influence it? (2) What are the short- and long-term benefits and harms to the mother of attempting trial of labor after prior cesarean vs. elective repeat cesarean, and what factors influence benefits and harms? (3) What are the short- and long-term benefits and harms to the infant of maternal attempt at trial of labor after prior cesarean vs. elective repeat cesarean, and what factors influence benefits and harms? And (4) what are the critical gaps in the evidence for decision-making, and what are the priority investigations needed to address these gaps?

Keywords: Cesarean section, Childbirth, Pregnancy, Repeat cesarean birth, Research, Vaginal birth after cesarean

National Institutes of Health. 2006. NIH State-of-the-Science Conference: Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, 115 pp.

Annotation: This document comprises advance materials for the NIH State-of-the-Science Conference: Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request, held on March 27-29, 2006, in Bethesda, MD. It includes a conference agenda; lists of panel members, speakers, and planning committee members; and abstracts of proposed presentations, which are divided into the following categories: (1) trends and incidence of cesarean delivery over time and (2) short- and long-term benefits and harms to the mother and the baby.

Keywords: Cesarean section, Infant health, Pregnancy outcome, Repeat Cesarean birth, Reproductive health, Trends, Vaginal birth, Vaginal birth after Cesarean, Women's health

National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Program. 2006. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference statement: Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Program, 21 pp.

Annotation: This statement reflects the panel's assessment of medical knowledge available at the conference held on March 27-29, 2006, in Bethesda, MD by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) and the Office of Medical Applications of Research (OMAR). Topics include trends and incidence of cesarean delivery over time, short- and long-term benefits and harms to the mother and the baby, what factors influence benefits and harms, and what future research directions need to be considered. Rosters of panel members and the planning committee are included.

Keywords: Cesarean section, Conferences, Infant health, Pregnancy outcome, Repeat Cesarean birth, Reproductive health, Trends, Vaginal birth, Vaginal birth after Cesarean, Women's health

U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2003. Vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC): Summary. Rockville, MD: U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 8 pp. (Evidence report/technology assessment; no. 71)

Van Tuinen I, Wolfe SM. 1992. Unnecessary cesarean sections: Halting a national epidemic. Washington, DC: Public Citizen's Health Research Group, 184 pp.

Annotation: This report analyzes the cesarean section rate in the United States for the period 1989-1990. It includes discussions of cesarean safety for both the mother and child, the clinical reasons given for performing cesareans, the nonmedical factors linked to cesarean operations, and the development of clinical guidelines for both cesarean sections and vaginal births after cesarean sections. Charts list cesarean rates for 48 states plus the District of Columbia as well as the number of cesarean operations performed at 2,657 U.S. hospitals during that time period. Sets of questions for consumers to use with obstetricians and hospital administrators are included along with a model for maternity information legislation.

Keywords: Cesarean section, Childbirth, Cost containment, Dystocia, Fetal distress, Guidelines, Legislation, Malpractice insurance, Maternal health, Mortality, Newborn infants, Repeat cesarean birth, Vaginal birth after cesarean
   

The MCH Library is one of six special collections at Georgetown University, the nation's oldest Jesuit institution of higher education. The library is supported through foundation, private, university, state, and federal funding. This information or content and conclusions are those of the authors and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by Georgetown University or the U.S. Government. Note: web pages whose development was supported by federal government grants are being reviewed to comply with applicable Executive Orders.