Cited by 576Maternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsReproductive Health and ContraceptionAnesthesia and Pain Management

Contemporary cesarean delivery practice in the united states

Open access
Zhang, Jun, Troendle, James, Reddy, Uma M., Laughon, S. Katherine, Branch, D. Ware, Burkman, Ronald, Landy, Helain J., Hibbard, Judith U. +10 more·2010·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objective To describe contemporary cesarean delivery practice in the United States.Study design Consortium on Safe Labor collected detailed labor and delivery information from 228,668 electronic medical records from 19 hospitals across the United States, 2002-2008.Results The overall cesarean delivery rate was 30.5%. The 31.2% of nulliparous women were delivered by cesarean section. Prelabor repeat cesarean delivery due to a previous uterine scar contributed 30.9% of all cesarean sections. The 28.8% of women with a uterine scar had a trial of labor and the success rate was 57.1%. The 43.8% women attempting vaginal delivery had induction. Half of cesarean for dystocia in induced labor were performed before 6 cm of cervical dilation.Conclusion To decrease cesarean delivery rate in the United States, reducing primary cesarean delivery is the key. Increasing vaginal birth after previous cesarean rate is urgently needed. Cesarean section for dystocia should be avoided before the active phase is established, particularly in nulliparous women and in induced labor.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.06.058

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Enrollment criteria targeting seemingly healthy pregnancy increased the ability to observe spontaneously initiated birth, with a lower induction/pre-labor cesarean rate than the U.S. overall.

    “our enrollment criteria, which targeted seemingly healthy pregnancy, did increase our ability to observe spontaneously-initiated birth, as the rate of induction of labor/pre-labor cesarean was 40% in our sample compared to an overall U.S. rate of greater than 50% (Laughon et al., 2012; Zhang et al., 2010).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 37 · Cited by 576

Authors
Zhang, J., Troendle, J., Reddy, U. M., Laughon, S. K., Branch, D. W., Burkman, R., Landy, H. J., Hibbard, J. U., Haberman, S., Ramirez, M. M., Bailit, J. L., Hoffman, M. K., Gregory, K. D., Gonzalez-Quintero, V. H., Kominiarek, M., Learman, L. A., Hatjis, C. G., & van Veldhuisen, P.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Intermountain Healthcare (US)
  • Baystate Medical Center (US)
  • MedStar Georgetown University Hospital (US)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
  • Maimonides Medical Center (US)
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
  • MetroHealth Medical Center (US)
  • Christiana Care Health System (US)
  • Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US)
  • Indiana University Health (US)
  • Summa Health System (US)
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-10
Volume
203
Issue
4
Pages
326.e1-326.e10
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2143472466
Cited by
576
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 53 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 42 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 56 · 2012: 51
FWCI
61.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HHSN267200603425C, ZIAHD008794)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anesthesia and Pain Management
Keywords
cesarean section, cesarean section rate, repeat cesarean section, uterine scar, trial of labor, vaginal birth after cesarean, labor induction, dystocia, nulliparous women, active phase of labor, primary cesarean delivery
MeSH terms
Adult, Cesarean Section, Cicatrix, Dystocia, Female, Fetal Distress, Gestational Age, Humans, Labor Presentation, Labor Stage, First, Labor, Induced, Maternal Age, Obesity, Parity, Pregnancy, Pregnancy, Multiple, Trial of Labor, United States, Databases, Factual, Cesarean Section, Repeat

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review