{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,2]],"date-time":"2026-07-02T18:15:24Z","timestamp":1783016124369,"version":"3.54.6"},"reference-count":30,"publisher":"Georg Thieme Verlag KG","issue":"S 01","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Am J Perinatol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,5]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>\n            Objective\u2003This study aimed to describe cesarean delivery rates and indications at a single center in order to assess the impact of the guidelines published by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine on trends in labor management.<\/jats:p><jats:p>\n            Study Design\u2003This is a retrospective cohort study of patients \u226523 weeks' gestation delivering at a single tertiary care referral center from 2013 to 2018. Demographic characteristics, mode of delivery, and main indication for cesarean delivery were ascertained by individual chart review. Cesarean delivery indications (mutually exclusive) were the following: repeat cesarean delivery, nonreassuring fetal status, malpresentation, maternal indications (e.g., placenta previa or genital herpes simplex virus), failed labor (any stage labor arrest), or other (i.e., fetal anomaly and elective). Polynomial (cubic) regression models were used to model rates of cesarean delivery and indications over time. Subgroup analyses further examined trends in nulliparous women.<\/jats:p><jats:p>\n            Results\u2003Of the 24,637 patients delivered during the study period, 24,050 were included in the analysis; 7,835 (32.6%) had a cesarean delivery. The rates of overall cesarean delivery were significantly different over time (p\u2009&lt;\u20090.001), declining to a minimum of 30.9% in 2014 and peaking at 34.6% in 2018. With regard to the overall cesarean delivery indications, there were no significant differences over time. When limited to nulliparous patients, the rates of cesarean delivery were also noted to be significantly different over time (p\u2009=\u20090.02) nadiring at 30% in 2015 from 35.4% in 2013 and then rising up to 33.9% in 2018. As for nulliparous patients, there was no significant difference in primary cesarean delivery indications over time except for nonreassuring fetal status (p\u2009=\u20090.049).<\/jats:p><jats:p>\n            Conclusion\u2003Despite changes in labor management definitions and guidelines encouraging vaginal birth, the rates of overall cesarean delivery did not decrease over time. The indications for delivery, particularly failed labor, repeat cesarean delivery, and malpresentation have not significantly changed over time.<\/jats:p><jats:p>\n            Key Points\n          <\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1055\/a-2097-1958","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,22]],"date-time":"2023-05-22T23:07:52Z","timestamp":1684796872000},"page":"e2026-e2033","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":5,"special_numbering":"S","title":["Contemporary Trends in Cesarean Delivery Rates and Indications"],"prefix":"10.1055","volume":"41","author":[{"given":"Sara","family":"Jaber","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beaumont Hospital Royal Oak, Royal Oak, Michigan"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Christina T.","family":"Blanchard","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"},{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Michelle Y.","family":"Lu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"},{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-7164-9489","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Gabriella D.","family":"Cozzi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"},{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Brian M.","family":"Casey","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"},{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Alan T.","family":"Tita","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"},{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Dhong-Jin","family":"Kim","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"},{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jeff M.","family":"Szychowski","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"},{"name":"Department of Biostatistics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Akila","family":"Subramaniam","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"},{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"194","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2023,6,26]]},"reference":[{"issue":"35","key":"ref1","first-page":"1","article-title":"Recent trends in cesarean delivery in the United States","author":"F Menacker","year":"2010","journal-title":"NCHS Data Brief"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"179","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2014.01.026","article-title":"Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery","volume":"210","author":"A B Caughey","year":"2014","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"13","key":"ref3","first-page":"1","article-title":"Births: final data for 2018","volume":"68","author":"J A Martin","year":"2019","journal-title":"Natl Vital Stat Rep"},{"key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1349","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(18)31930-5","article-title":"Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children","volume":"392","author":"J Sandall","year":"2018","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"issue":"06","key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1226","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.84","article-title":"Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries","volume":"107","author":"R M Silver","year":"2006","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"262.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2011.06.035","article-title":"Impact of multiple cesarean deliveries on maternal morbidity: a systematic review","volume":"205","author":"N E Marshall","year":"2011","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"05","key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"571","DOI":"10.1515\/jpm-2013-0199","article-title":"Cesarean section and placental disorders in subsequent pregnancies\u2013a meta-analysis","volume":"42","author":"M Klar","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Perinat Med"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S2","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2011.09.028","article-title":"Long-term maternal morbidity associated with repeat cesarean delivery","volume":"205","author":"E A Clark","year":"2011","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"56.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2009.04.039","article-title":"Adhesion development and morbidity after repeat cesarean delivery","volume":"201","author":"T Tulandi","year":"2009","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"09","key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"815","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0034-1543952","article-title":"Cesarean delivery and risk for subsequent ectopic pregnancy","volume":"32","author":"Z S Bowman","year":"2015","journal-title":"Am J Perinatol"},{"key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"88","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2018.08.013","article-title":"Previous cesarean delivery associated with subsequent preterm birth in the United States","volume":"229","author":"C M Williams","year":"2018","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"issue":"06","key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1281","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e3181fdef6e","article-title":"Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes","volume":"116","author":"J Zhang","year":"2010","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"192","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e3181aef106","article-title":"ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 106: intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: nomenclature, interpretation, and general management principles","volume":"114","author":"ACOG Practice Bulletin No","year":"2009","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e60","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000002755","article-title":"ACOG Committee Opinion No. 745: mode of term singleton breech delivery","volume":"132","author":"ACOG Committee Opinion No","year":"2018","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e110","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000003078","article-title":"ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 205: vaginal birth after cesarean delivery","volume":"133","author":"ACOG Practice Bulletin No","year":"2019","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref16","first-page":"530","article-title":"Evaluation of a risk-stratified, heparin-based, obstetric thromboprophylaxis protocol","volume":"138","author":"M Y Lu","year":"2021","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"49","key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"6084","DOI":"10.1016\/j.vaccine.2016.03.043","article-title":"Non-reassuring fetal status: case definition & guidelines for data collection, analysis, and presentation of immunization safety data","volume":"34","author":"C Gravett","year":"2016","journal-title":"Vaccine"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"124","DOI":"10.1097\/GCO.0b013e32835e0ef5","article-title":"Hypertensive disease of pregnancy and maternal mortality","volume":"25","author":"J O Lo","year":"2013","journal-title":"Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"21","key":"ref19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2263","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2015.15553","article-title":"Relationship between cesarean delivery rate and maternal and neonatal mortality","volume":"314","author":"G Molina","year":"2015","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"655","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ogc.2017.08.006","article-title":"Vaginal birth after cesarean trends: which way is the pendulum swinging?","volume":"44","author":"J Sargent","year":"2017","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am"},{"issue":"06","key":"ref21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"513","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1800566","article-title":"Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women","volume":"379","author":"W A Grobman","year":"2018","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"304","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1479-828X.1987.tb01014.x","article-title":"Augmentation of labour: mode of delivery related to cervimetric progress","volume":"27","author":"S Arulkumaran","year":"1987","journal-title":"Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref23","first-page":"323","article-title":"Active-phase labor arrest: oxytocin augmentation for at least 4\u2009hours","volume":"93","author":"D J Rouse","year":"1999","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"165","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajogmf.2019.05.002","article-title":"Indications contributing to the decreasing cesarean delivery rate at an academic tertiary center","volume":"1","author":"S N Cross","year":"2019","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM"},{"issue":"13","key":"ref25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1296","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0040-1710543","article-title":"Resident operative vaginal delivery volume after educational curriculum implementation","volume":"37","author":"D A Becker","year":"2020","journal-title":"Am J Perinatol"},{"issue":"05","key":"ref26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1239","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000003838","article-title":"External cephalic version: ACOG practice bulletin summary, number 221","volume":"135","author":"External Cephalic Version","year":"2020","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"05","key":"ref27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"855","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000003250","article-title":"Role of external cephalic version in reducing the cesarean delivery rate","volume":"133","author":"G Olson Koutrouvelis","year":"2019","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"06","key":"ref28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"371","DOI":"10.5468\/ogs.2019.62.6.371","article-title":"Reviving external cephalic version: a review of its efficacy, safety, and technical aspects","volume":"62","author":"G J Kim","year":"2019","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol Sci"},{"key":"ref29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"4","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2393-13-4","article-title":"A qualitative interview study exploring pregnant women's and health professionals' attitudes to external cephalic version","volume":"13","author":"R Say","year":"2013","journal-title":"BMC Pregnancy Childbirth"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"154","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0040-1714422","article-title":"Term labor induction and cesarean delivery risk among obese women with and without comorbidities","volume":"39","author":"K B Glazer","year":"2022","journal-title":"Am J Perinatol"}],"container-title":["American Journal of Perinatology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/products\/ejournals\/pdf\/10.1055\/a-2097-1958.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,5]],"date-time":"2024-11-05T13:33:13Z","timestamp":1730813593000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/DOI\/DOI?10.1055\/a-2097-1958"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,22]]},"references-count":30,"journal-issue":{"issue":"S 01","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,13]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,5]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1055\/a-2097-1958","archive":["Portico","CLOCKSS"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0735-1631","1098-8785"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0735-1631","type":"print"},{"value":"1098-8785","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published-other":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,22]]},"published":{"date-parts":[[2023,5,22]]}}}