373 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26922481)
41. The impact of fetal growth restriction on latency in the setting of expectant management of preeclampsia.
McKinney D; Boyd H; Langager A; Oswald M; Pfister A; Warshak CR
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Mar; 214(3):395.e1-7. PubMed ID: 26767794
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Effect of combined spinal-epidural analgesia in labor on frequency of emergency cesarean delivery among nulliparous Chinese women.
Wang F; Cao YX; Ke SG; Zhu TH; Zhang M
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2016 Dec; 135(3):259-263. PubMed ID: 27692473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Assessing first-stage labor progression and its relationship to complications.
Hamilton EF; Warrick PA; Collins K; Smith S; Garite TJ
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Mar; 214(3):358.e1-8. PubMed ID: 26478103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. A re-evaluation of the role of rotational forceps: retrospective comparison of maternal and perinatal outcomes following different methods of birth for malposition in the second stage of labour.
Tempest N; Hart A; Walkinshaw S; Hapangama DK
BJOG; 2013 Sep; 120(10):1277-84. PubMed ID: 23906197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Does epidural increase the incidence of cesarean delivery or instrumental labor in Saudi populations?
Bakhamees H; Hegazy E
Middle East J Anaesthesiol; 2007 Oct; 19(3):693-704. PubMed ID: 18044297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Differences in obstetrical care and outcomes associated with the proportion of the obstetrician's shift completed.
Yee LM; McGee P; Bailit JL; Wapner RJ; Varner MW; Thorp JM; Caritis SN; Prasad M; Tita ATN; Saade GR; Sorokin Y; Rouse DJ; Blackwell SC; Tolosa JE;
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Oct; 225(4):430.e1-430.e11. PubMed ID: 33812810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Effect of managed care enrollment on primary and repeat cesarean rates among U.S. Department of Defense health care beneficiaries in military and civilian hospitals worldwide, 1999-2002.
Linton A; Peterson MR
Birth; 2004 Dec; 31(4):254-64. PubMed ID: 15566337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Effect of severity of illness on cesarean delivery rates in Washington State.
Hitti J; Walker S; Benedetti TJ
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Oct; 217(4):474.e1-474.e5. PubMed ID: 28666693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Effects of obstetrician characteristics on cesarean delivery rates. A community hospital experience.
Poma PA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1999 Jun; 180(6 Pt 1):1364-72. PubMed ID: 10368473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. The impact of labor at term on measures of neonatal outcome.
Richardson BS; Czikk MJ; daSilva O; Natale R
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Jan; 192(1):219-26. PubMed ID: 15672028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Comparison of maternal and infant outcomes from primary cesarean delivery during the second compared with first stage of labor.
Alexander JM; Leveno KJ; Rouse DJ; Landon MB; Gilbert S; Spong CY; Varner MW; Moawad AH; Caritis SN; Harper M; Wapner RJ; Sorokin Y; Miodovnik M; O'Sullivan MJ; Sibai BM; Langer O; Gabbe SG;
Obstet Gynecol; 2007 Apr; 109(4):917-21. PubMed ID: 17400854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Timing of scheduled cesarean delivery in patients on a teaching versus private service: adherence to American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines and neonatal outcomes.
Laye MR; Dellinger EH
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2006 Aug; 195(2):577-82; discussion 582-4. PubMed ID: 16777051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Safety Assessment of a Large-Scale Improvement Collaborative to Reduce Nulliparous Cesarean Delivery Rates.
Main EK; Chang SC; Cape V; Sakowski C; Smith H; Vasher J
Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Apr; 133(4):613-623. PubMed ID: 30870288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. The relationship between cesarean section and labor induction.
Wilson BL; Effken J; Butler RJ
J Nurs Scholarsh; 2010 Jun; 42(2):130-8. PubMed ID: 20618597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Impact of surgeon annual volume on short-term maternal outcome in cesarean delivery.
Drukker L; Hants Y; Farkash R; Grisaru-Granovsky S; Shen O; Samueloff A; Sela HY
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Jul; 215(1):85.e1-8. PubMed ID: 27005515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Refining the clinical definition of active phase arrest of dilation in nulliparous women to consider degree of cervical dilation as well as duration of arrest.
Kawakita T; Gold SL; Huang JC; Iqbal SN
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Sep; 225(3):294.e1-294.e14. PubMed ID: 33798479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. The continuing effectiveness of active management of first labor, despite a doubling in overall nulliparous cesarean delivery.
Foley ME; Alarab M; Daly L; Keane D; Rath A; O'herlihy C
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Sep; 191(3):891-5. PubMed ID: 15467560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Trends and outcomes of induction of labour among nullipara at term.
Patterson JA; Roberts CL; Ford JB; Morris JM
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2011 Dec; 51(6):510-7. PubMed ID: 21806594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Influence of Patient-Level Factors on Mode of Delivery among Operative Vaginal Delivery Candidates in Modern Practice.
Metz TD; Gonzalez C; Allshouse AA; Henry E; Esplin S
Am J Perinatol; 2017 Aug; 34(10):974-981. PubMed ID: 28376550
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
60. Cesarean section on request at 39 weeks: impact on shoulder dystocia, fetal trauma, neonatal encephalopathy, and intrauterine fetal demise.
Hankins GD; Clark SM; Munn MB
Semin Perinatol; 2006 Oct; 30(5):276-87. PubMed ID: 17011400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
