Father Loses 2 Young Children In Tornado
Why It's Hard To Get Along With Your In-Laws
Scientists Expect C-Section Rate to Keep Rising
Filed under: In The News, Delivery, Research Reveals: Babies, Research Reveals
C-sections rates have increased by more than half since the mid-1990s. Credit: Getty Images
Overall, cesarean deliveries account for about a third of births in the U.S. While much attention has recently focused on women having repeat C-sections, researchers with the National Institutes of Health found that nearly one third of first-time moms delivered by cesarean.
That is "somewhat surprising," said Dr. Jun Zhang, lead author of a study that looked at nearly 230,000 deliveries in 19 hospitals around the country. "It has consequences for future pregnancies."
Many doctors and hospitals follow a policy of "once a cesarean, always a cesarean."
The study also suggested a link between chemically induced labor and higher likelihood of a C-section. Women whose labor was induced were twice as likely to have a cesarean. The authors said more research is needed to clarify if there's a cause-and-effect relationship.
Many medical experts consider cesarean deliveries to be a major component of "overtreatment" in the U.S. - procedures and tests that provide little or no benefit while subjecting patients to additional risks. Indeed, new clinical recommendations say vaginal birth is safe for most women who've had a first C-section.
But the trend does not appear likely to reverse. Since the mid-1990s, the C-section rate in the U.S. has increased by more than 50 percent.
How low should it be? In Scandinavian countries it hovers in the 20 percent range, with no evidence of ill-effects for mothers or babies, Zhang said. How high can it go? In some countries 60 percent to 70 percent of babies are now delivered surgically.
"I hope that we won't get there," said Zhang. "The upward trajectory seems likely to continue in the near future."
Explaining the increase in C-sections is no simple matter. The study found a variety of reasons, some related, including heavier moms and babies, women giving birth later in life, an increase the number of twins and multiple births, and evidence that doctors may be opting for a cesarean if women encounter difficulties in the early stages of labor.
One factor that made no difference was whether the mother had private health insurance or was covered through a government program like Medicaid.
The study was published in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology.
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL. This article was written by RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer.
Related: Pregnancy: Week by Week
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
Recently Asked
TheTalkies:RelatedVideos
-
Hypno-Birthing: Childbirth Alternative
If you're pregnant, chances are your baby will be born via c-section. According to the CDC, the c-section rate is at an all-time high of 33%. The alternative to surgery and pain medications? For some, it's hypno-birthing.
-
C-Section Birth
In this video, we see how the baby is immediately taken away for Nurse Kara Schafer to check his vitals.
-
Amazing - Baby Grabs Doctor's Hand During C-Section
A photograph taken by a father in the US state of Arizona of his daughter's C-section birth has become an internet sensation. The photograph shows the baby's hand reaching out while she is still in the womb and grabbing the doctor's finger.
-
Pregnancy and Birth: Cesarian Section
Not all women chose or can give birth naturally and opt to have a Cesarian section.
SitesWeLove
- Site Map
- |
- Staff
- |
- Terms of Service
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Trademarks
- |
- Advertise With Us
- |
- About Our Ads
- |
- AOL Downloads
- |
- Contact Us
- |
© Copyright 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Aol Family
ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
8-31-2010 @ 10:02AM
Meg McSherry said...I experienced a long labor in anticipation of a vaginal delivery. After 36 hours my son was delivered via C-section. He weighed 11lbs, 22" long. The ultra sound did not show an 11 pound baby with the way he was positioned. I nor he are diabetic nor was gestational diabetes involved. I think vaginal delivery would have been fine if that was safest for baby and Mom. What your article and many others does not tell is the complications that can occur with a vaginal birth. One month before I delivered my son my friend had a 6 pound baby boy with some difficulties that resulted in the baby laying on the cord in the birth canal and depriving himself of oxygen. From birth he has had mental and physical challenges. It would have been safer for the baby if someone had forseen that these difficulties showed a need for C-section. I think American women have been sold a bill of spoiled goods in these articles warning of the ill effects of C-section and not saying what occurs with a difficult vaginal birth. The full story is not being told. In this millenium many women wear their vaginal births as badges of honor - I did it natural. Well, I am happy for you but in the playground no child can be identified by vaginal or C-section delivery. Please stop undermining C-sections and promoting V-backs. 90% of the doctors in my area ( world class metropolitan teaching hospitals) are NOT doing Vbacks because there are problems with them. For my second delivery I had the choice and I chose C-section which turned out to be the best for Mom and baby as my son was a preemie at 8.5 pounds and 21 inches long so going to term he would have been heavier. I never cared what my child weighed or the sex but I prayed for a safe delivery for Mom and baby. Please provide more education on the pros and cons on C-sections, vaginal birth, and V-backs. This is a narrow minded article citing C-sections only. With all the medical advances today, I would hope you would use your medium of information to be all chioces, pros and cons.
Reply
8-31-2010 @ 4:25PM
michelle said...The problem with your statement is that you are just as bad as the rabid "natural birth" pushers! There are much more serious health risks to c-sections and repeat c-sections that with Vbacs and vaginal birth...but what everyone seems to forget is that ANY birth has a slight chance of risk! The 2 biggest risks in c-section? deadly infections for mom and immature ability to breathe for baby. The vaginal birth you spoke of...that is an extremely rare issue to occur should that make her have a c-section next time? I hope not. Honestly read the book Pushed, by Jennifer Block. She like, everyone else, has her preferences. However they are backed by studies, statistics, and truth. C-sections hold the highest risk for women with low risk pregnancies and so do unductions. Your situation were you just have ginormous babies, that is definitely not the norm and you should NEVER place your situation onto other mothers. C-sections should be used in situations like yours, EMERGENCIES not just because someone felt it was convenient (that is doctor or patient) it is usually better for your body to do what it made to do naturally.
Reply
12-17-2010 @ 4:46PM
Jani said...I strongly dislike these kinds of articles. It provides bias without evidence. here's a few things:
"new clinical recommendations say vaginal birth is safe for most women who've had a first C-section." Being a woman who had to deliver her child by c-section, I can say a) it was not the plan and b) we had to get that baby out somehow, as he was NOT coming out on his own.
If I ever had a second child, it would be all well and good if the kid decided to come out on his own. But seeing as how the first one did not, I would strongly suspect the 2nd one would not either. If that kid is not out on his own at 42 weeks (yes, i went until 42 weeks waiting for nature to take its course) c-section it is.
I refuse to put my child and my body through that tremendous stress/strain of induction, epidural to ease the tremendously painful contractions I suffered for 9+ hours, all to end in c-section. Forget that.
Honestly, if I had a second kid, he better get out at 40 weeks if he wants to arrival 'naturally', otherwise schedule that c-section and lets get this thing done.
Another item in the article:
"Explaining the increase in C-sections is no simple matter." Well, no doubt. Is it increased because women who have one, then always have c-section? Additionally, many of the women in my family have had to have c-section. Perhaps its a hereditary trait.
Do what you need to do to get your kid out safe and healthy.
Reply