{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,4]],"date-time":"2025-10-04T07:53:45Z","timestamp":1759564425565},"reference-count":37,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2011,1,7]],"date-time":"2011-01-07T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1294358400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":6184,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[1994,2]]},"abstract":"<jats:p><jats:italic>Objective.<\/jats:italic> Based on a comparison of the clinical indications for cesarean section (CS) in two Danish counties and a review of the literature regarding this issue the aim of this study was to discuss possible explanations for variations in CS rates in twin pregnancies. The comparison of indications for CS in twin pregnancies was made between two Danish counties, one with a high and one with a low overall CS rate in twin deliveries, taking into account the distribution of parity, mother's age, gestational age at birth, and birth weight.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Design.<\/jats:italic> A population based, historic follow\u2010up study based on antecedent data.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Setting.<\/jats:italic> Two Danish counties, with a CS rate in twin pregnancies of 57% and 28%, respectively.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Subjects.<\/jats:italic> All women with twin pregnancies who delivered in 1989 in the two counties.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Main outcome measures.<\/jats:italic> Comparison of the CS rates in the two counties according to indications and fetal presentation.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Secondary measures.<\/jats:italic> Perinatal and maternal outcome.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Results.<\/jats:italic> The difference in CS rates between the two counties could not be explained by different distributions of background characteristics. Different attitudes were found towards CS in cases with previous CS, with twin A in breech presentation and in cases with vertex\u2010breech deliveries. These differences could explain less than two thirds of the overall 29% (CI: 12\u201046%) difference in risk of CS between the two counties, indicating more subtle reasons for the discrepancy. No difference between the two counties in perinatal morbidity and mortality was seen.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Conclusion.<\/jats:italic> In order to understand and discuss regional variations in the use of CSs in twin deliveries the subjects must be addressed in different ways: the unequivocal indications related to fetal presentations and previous CS can be subjected to randomised controlled trials or large scaled follow\u2010up studies regarding maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Other more subtle determinants of the physicians\u2019 and the pregnant women's attitude towards CS, however, seem quantitatively important, and these can only be evaluated in observational studies and through discussions.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3109\/00016349409013414","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2007,11,13]],"date-time":"2007-11-13T19:10:25Z","timestamp":1194981025000},"page":"123-128","update-policy":"http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":14,"title":["Cesarean section in twin pregnancies in two Danish counties with different cesarean section rates"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"73","author":[{"given":"Tine B.","family":"Henriksen","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Lene","family":"Sperling","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Morten","family":"Hedegaard","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Helle","family":"Ulrichsen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Bjarni","family":"\u00d8vlisen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Niels J\u00f8rgen","family":"Secher","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2011,1,7]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_1_2_1","first-page":"463","article-title":"Twin pregnancies \u2014 a continuing perinatal challenge","volume":"59","author":"Hawrylyshyn P. A.","year":"1982","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(85)90456-9"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_4_1","first-page":"618","article-title":"The epidemiology of perinatal mortality in multiple births","volume":"66","author":"Kiely J. L.","year":"1990","journal-title":"Bull N Y Acad Med"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00003081-198006000-00022"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_6_1","first-page":"153","article-title":"A review of twin pregnancy and perinatal mortality","volume":"144","author":"Farooqui M. O.","year":"1973","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol Surv"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"207","DOI":"10.1017\/S000156600000475X","article-title":"Do breech presentations in twins and singletons run different risks?","volume":"34","author":"Buekens P.","year":"1985","journal-title":"Acta Genet Med Gemellol Roma"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(88)90364-X"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_9_1","first-page":"1334","article-title":"Discussion","volume":"158","author":"Casperson L. S.","year":"1988","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_10_1","article-title":"Indications for cesarean section in singleton pregnancies in two Danish counties with different cesarean section rates","author":"Sperling L. S.","journal-title":"Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJM198410043111405"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_12_1","first-page":"719","article-title":"Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease","volume":"22","author":"Mantel N.","year":"1959","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_13_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.1992.tb14499.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1365-2044.1987.tb02942.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(86)90490-4"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_16_1","first-page":"119","article-title":"Intrapartum management of twin gestation","volume":"65","author":"Chervenak F. A.","year":"1985","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1523-536X.1989.tb00898.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_18_1","volume-title":"One birth in Nine \u2014 Caesarean section trends since 1978","author":"Maternity Alliance","year":"1983"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_19_1","first-page":"1182","volume-title":"Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth","author":"Lomas J.","year":"1989"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_20_1","first-page":"1211","volume-title":"Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth","author":"Enkin M.","year":"1989"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_21_1","first-page":"1348","article-title":"Panel. Indications for cesarean section: Final statement of the panel of the National Consensus Conference on aspects of cesarean birth","volume":"134","year":"1986","journal-title":"Can Med Assoc J"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0095-5108(18)30609-2"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_23_1","first-page":"39","article-title":"The controversy of mode of delivery in twins: the intrapartum management of twin gestation (Part I)","volume":"10","author":"Cetrulo C. L.","year":"1986","journal-title":"Semin Perinatol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_24_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(65)90257-7"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_25_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0095-5108(18)30728-0"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_26_1","first-page":"710","article-title":"The demise of vaginal operative obstetrics: a suggested plan for its revival","volume":"75","author":"Seiler J. S.","year":"1990","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_27_1","first-page":"498","article-title":"Editorial","volume":"39","author":"Taylor E. S.","year":"1984","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol Surv"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_28_1","first-page":"710","article-title":"Delivery of the second twin","volume":"59","author":"Acker D.","year":"1982","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_29_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(84)80022-8"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_30_1","first-page":"774","article-title":"Vaginal delivery of the second twin in breech presentation","volume":"69","author":"Blickstein I.","year":"1987","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_31_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0028-2243(86)90091-2"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_32_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(91)90216-E"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_33_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(87)90201-8"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_34_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(89)90245-7"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_35_1","first-page":"383","article-title":"Management of the nonvertex second twin","volume":"172","author":"Wells S. R.","year":"1991","journal-title":"Surg Gynecol Obstet"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_36_1","first-page":"253","article-title":"Explaining variations in cesarean section rates: patients, facilities, or policies?","volume":"132","author":"Anderson G. M.","year":"1985","journal-title":"Can Med Assoc J"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_37_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(89)90252-4"},{"issue":"5","key":"e_1_2_1_38_1","first-page":"210","article-title":"Why women choose trial of labor or repeat cesarean section","volume":"21","author":"McClain C. S.","year":"1985","journal-title":"J Fam Pract"}],"container-title":["Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.3109%2F00016349409013414","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.3109\/00016349409013414","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,23]],"date-time":"2023-10-23T23:27:00Z","timestamp":1698103620000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.3109\/00016349409013414"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[1994,2]]},"references-count":37,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[1994,2]]}},"alternative-id":["10.3109\/00016349409013414"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3109\/00016349409013414","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0001-6349","1600-0412"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0001-6349","type":"print"},{"value":"1600-0412","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[1994,2]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2011-01-07","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}