Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Determinants of Cesarean Delivery in the US: A Lifecourse Approach

  • Published:
Maternal and Child Health Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study takes a lifecourse approach to understanding the factors contributing to delivery methods in the US by identifying preconception and pregnancy-related determinants of medically indicated and non-medically indicated cesarean section (C-section) deliveries. Data are from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort, a nationally representative, population-based survey of women delivering a live baby in 2001 (n = 9,350). Three delivery methods were examined: (1) vaginal delivery (reference); (2) medically indicated C-section; and (3) non-medically indicated C-sections. Using multinomial logistic regression, we examined the role of sociodemographics, health, healthcare, stressful life events, pregnancy complications, and history of C-section on the odds of medically indicated and non-medically indicated C-sections, compared to vaginal delivery. 74.2 % of women had a vaginal delivery, 11.6 % had a non-medically indicated C-section, and 14.2 % had a medically indicated C-section. Multivariable analyses revealed that prior C-section was the strongest predictor of both medically indicated and non-medically indicated C-sections. However, we found salient differences between the risk factors for indicated and non-indicated C-sections. Surgical deliveries continue to occur at a high rate in the US despite evidence that they increase the risk for morbidity and mortality among women and their children. Reducing the number of non-medically indicated C-sections is warranted to lower the short- and long-term risks for deleterious health outcomes for women and their babies across the lifecourse. Healthcare providers should address the risk factors for medically indicated C-sections to optimize low-risk delivery methods and improve the survival, health, and well-being of children and their mothers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We estimated the total number of C-sections attributable to PSLEs by differencing the average marginal effect of PSLEs on C-sections under the assumption that all women with any PSLE became unexposed (note that this estimate amounts to 11 % of all C-sections among women exposed to any PSLEs, or 2.8 % of all C-sections). We then multiplied this number by the difference in allowed paid amount between vaginal and C-section delivery cited by Truven Health Analytics [6] ($3,691 per delivery) to obtain the total C-section-related expenditures associated with these deliveries.

References

  1. MacDorman, M. F., Menacker, F., & Declercq, E. (2008). Cesarean birth in the United States: Epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clinics in Perinatology, 35(2), 293–307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hamilton, B., Martin, J., & Ventura, S. (2011). Births: Preliminary data for 2010. National Vital Statistics Report, 60(2), 3.

  3. Boutsikou, T., & Malamitsi-Puchner, A. (2011). Caesarean section: Impact on mother and child. Acta Paediatrica, 100(12), 1518–1522.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pai, M. (2000). Unnecessary medical interventions: Caesarean sections as a case study. Economic and Political Weekly, 35(31), 2755–2761.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Soet, J. E., Brack, G. A., & DiIorio, C. (2003). Prevalence and predictors of women’s experience of psychological trauma during childbirth. Birth (Berkeley, Calif.), 30(1), 36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. The cost of having a baby in the United States. Ann Arbor, MI: Truven Health Analytics; (2013). http://transform.childbirthconnection.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Cost-of-Having-a-Baby1.pdf.

  7. Declercq, E., Barger, M., Cabral, H. J., et al. (2007). Maternal outcomes associated with planned primary cesarean births compared with planned vaginal births. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 109(3), 669–677.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Liu, T. C., Chen, C. S., & Lin, H. C. (2008). Does elective caesarean section increase utilization of postpartum maternal medical care? Medical Care, 46(4), 440–443.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Halfon, N., & Hochstein, M. (2002). Life course health development: An integrated framework for developing health, policy, and research. Milbank Quarterly, 80(3), 433–479.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort, nine-month data collection. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics; (2001). Washington, DC.

  11. Kalish, R. B., McCullough, L., Gupta, M., et al. (2004). Intrapartum elective cesarean delivery: A previously unrecognized clinical entity. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 103(6), 1137–1141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Johnson, E. M, & Rehavi, M. M. (2013). Physicians treating physicians: Information and incentives in childbirth. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w19242.

  13. Chu, S., Kim, S., Schmid, C., et al. (2007). Maternal obesity and risk of cesarean delivery: A meta-analysis. Obesity Reviews, 8(5), 385–394.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bansil, P., Kuklina, E. V., Meikle, S. F., et al. (2010). Maternal and fetal outcomes among women with depression. Journal of Women’s Health, 19(2), 329–334.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Khashan, A., McNamee, R., Abel, K., et al. (2009). Rates of preterm birth following antenatal maternal exposure to severe life events: A population-based cohort study. Human Reproduction, 24(2), 429–437.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Khashan, A. S., McNamee, R., Abel, K. M., et al. (2008). Reduced infant birthweight consequent upon maternal exposure to severe life events. Psychosomatic Medicine, 70(6), 688–694.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Class, Q. A., Khashan, A. S., Lichtenstein, P., et al. (2013). Maternal stress and infant mortality: The importance of the preconception period. Psychological Science, 24(7), 1309–1316.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Witt, W. P., Cheng, E. R., Wisk, L. E., et al. (2014). Maternal stressful life events prior to conception and the impact on infant birth weight in the United States. AJPH, 104(S1), S81–S89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Witt, W. P., Cheng, E. R., Wisk, L. E., et al. (2014). Preterm birth in the United States: The impact of stressful life events prior to conception and maternal age. AJPH, 104(S1), S73–S80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cohen, S., & Williamson, G. M. (1987). Perceived stress in a probability sample of the United States. In S. Spacapan & S. Oskamp (Eds.), The social psychology of health: Claremont symposium on applied social psychology (pp. 31–49). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dunkel-Schetter, C. (2011). Psychological science on pregnancy: Stress processes, biopsychosocial models, and emerging research issues. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 531–558.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McEwen, B. S. (2006). Stress, adaptation, and disease: Allostasis and allostatic load. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 840(1), 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wadhwa, P. D., Culhane, J. F., Rauh, V., et al. (2001). Stress, infection and preterm birth: A biobehavioural perspective. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 15(S2), 17–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Seng, J. S., Oakley, D. J., Sampselle, C. M., et al. (2001). Posttraumatic stress disorder and pregnancy complications. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 97(1), 17–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Da Costa, D., Larouche, J., Dritsa, M., et al. (2000). Psychosocial correlates of prepartum and postpartum depressed mood. Journal of Affective Disorders, 59(1), 31–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kramer, M. R., Hogue, C. J., Dunlop, A. L., et al. (2011). Preconceptional stress and racial disparities in preterm birth: An overview. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 90(12), 1307–1316.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) committee opinion no. 559. (2013). Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 121(4), 904–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Grobman, W. A., Gersnoviez, R., Landon, M. B., et al. (2007). Pregnancy outcomes for women with placenta previa in relation to the number of prior cesarean deliveries. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 110(6), 1249–1255.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Silver, R. M., Landon, M. B., Rouse, D. J., et al. (2006). Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 107(6), 1226–1232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2014). Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 123, 693–711.

  31. Cunningham, F. G., Bangdiwala, S., Brown, S., et al. (2010). Vaginal birth after cesarean: New insights. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference. pp. 1279–1295.

  32. Leeman, L. M., Beagle, M., Espey, E., et al. (2013). Diminishing availability of trial of labor after cesarean delivery in New Mexico hospitals. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 122 (2, Part 1), 242–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Roberts, R. G., Deutchman, M., King, V. J., et al. (2007). Changing policies on vaginal birth after cesarean: Impact on access. Birth (Berkeley, Calif.), 34(4), 316–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Northam, S., & Knapp, T. R. (2006). The reliability and validity of birth certificates. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic and Neonatal Nursing, 35(1), 3–12.

  35. Wakeel, F., Wisk, L., Gee, R., et al. (2013). The balance between stress and personal capital during pregnancy and the relationship with adverse obstetric outcomes: Findings from the 2007 Los Angeles Mommy and Baby (LAMB) study. Archives of Women’s Mental Health, 16(6), 435–451.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project was made possible by a Health Resources and Services Administrative (HRSA) (W.P.W., L.E.W., and D.C.: R40MC23625; PI: W.P. Witt) grant. Additional funding for this research was provided by grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (K.M. and L.E.W.: T32 HS00083; PI: M. Smith), the Health Disparities Research Scholars Program (F.W.: T32 HD049302; PI: G. Sarto), the 2012–2013 Herman I. Shapiro Distinguished Graduate Fellowship (L.E.W.), and the Science and Medicine Graduate Research Scholars Fellowship from the University of Wisconsin in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and the School of Medicine and Public Health (ERC).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Whitney P. Witt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Witt, W.P., Wisk, L.E., Cheng, E.R. et al. Determinants of Cesarean Delivery in the US: A Lifecourse Approach. Matern Child Health J 19, 84–93 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-014-1498-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-014-1498-8

Keywords

Navigation