• 1
    World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet 1985;2(8452):436467.
  • 2
    Health Canada. Canadian Perinatal Health Report, 2003. Ottawa, Canada: Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, 2003.
  • 3
    Canadian Institute for Health Information. Giving Birth in Canada: Providers of Maternity and Infant Care. Ottawa, Canada: CIHI, 2004.
  • 4
    Parliamentary Office of Science & Technology. Cesarean sections. Postnote 2002;184:14.
  • 5
    Hager RM, Daltveit AK, Hofoss D, et al. Complications of cesarean deliveries: Rates and risk factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;190(2):428434.
  • 6
    Rageth JC, Juzi C, Grossenbacher H. Delivery after previous cesarean: A risk evaluation. Obstet Gynecol 1999;93:332337.
  • 7
    Hibbard JU, Ismail MA, Wang Y, et al. Failed vaginal birth after a cesarean section: How risky is it? I. Maternal morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;184:13651371.
  • 8
    National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health. Caesarean Section. Clinical Guideline. London, UK: RCOG Press, 2004.
  • 9
    Grimshaw J, McAuley LM, Bero LA, et al. Systematic reviews of the effectiveness of quality improvement strategies and programmes. Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12(4):298303.
  • 10
    Davis DA, Taylor-Vaisey A. Translating guidelines into practice. A systematic review of theoretic concepts, practical experience and research evidence in the adoption of clinical practice guidelines. CMAJ 1997;157(4):408416.
  • 11
    Thomson O’Brien MA, Oxman AD, Davis DA, et al. Audit and feedback versus alternative strategies: Effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3. Oxford Update Software, 1999.
  • 12
    Durieux P, Ravaud P, Dosquet P, Durocher A. Efficacité des méthodes de mise en œuvre des recommandations médicales [Efficacy of Medical Guideline Implementation Methods]. ANAES Report. Paris, France: Agence Nationale d’Accréditation et d’Évaluation en Santé, Service des recommandations et références professionnelles, 2000.
  • 13
    Richens Y, Jo RM. Getting guidelines into practice: A literature review. Nurs Stand 2004;18(50):3340.
  • 14
    Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC). The data collection checklist. Available at: Accessed November 2005.
  • 15
    Lomas J, Anderson GM, Domnick-Pierre K, et al. Do practice guidelines guide practice? N Engl J Med 1989;321:13061311.
  • 16
    Kosecoff J, Kanouse DE, Rogers WH, et al. Effects of the National Institute of Health Consensus Development Program on physicians practice. JAMA 1987;258:27082713.
  • 17
    Denig P, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Zijsling DH. Impact of a drug bulletin on the knowledge, perception of drug utility, and prescribing behavior of physicians. DICP 1990;24:8792.
  • 18
    Davis D, Thomson O’Brien MA, Freemantle N, et al. Impact of formal continuing medical education. Do conferences, workshops, rounds, and other traditional continuing education activities change physician behavior of healthcare outcomes? JAMA 1999;282:867874.
  • 19
    Ecstrom E, Hickam DH, Lessler DS, Buchner DM. Changing physician practice of physical activity counseling. J Gen Intern Med 1999;14:376378.
  • 20
    Schectman JM, Schroth WS, Verme D, Voss JD. Randomized controlled trial of education and feedback for implementation of guidelines for acute low back pain. J Gen Intern Med 2003;18(10):773780.
  • 21
    Soumerai SB, McLaughlin TJ, Gurwitz JH, et al. Effect of local medical opinion leaders on quality of care for acute myocardial infarction: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1998;279:13581363.
  • 22
    Berner ES, Baker CS, Funkhouser E, et al. Do local opinion leaders augment hospital quality improvement efforts? A randomized trial to promote adherence to unstable angina guidelines. Med Care 2003;41(3):420431.
  • 23
    Lomas J, Enkin M, Anderson GM, et al. Opinion leaders vs audit and feedback to implement practice guidelines. Delivery after previous cesarean section. JAMA 1991;265(17):22022207.
  • 24
    Myers SA, Gleicher N. A successful program to lower cesarean-section rates. N Engl J Med 1988;319(23):15111516.
  • 25
    Wahlstrom R, Kounnavong S, Sisounthone B, et al. Effectiveness of feedback for improving case management of malaria, diarrhoea and pneumonia—A randomized controlled trial at provincial hospitals in Lao PDR. Trop Med Int Health 2003;8(10):901909.
  • 26
    Shortell SM, Bennet CL, Byck GR. Assessing the impact of continuous quality improvement on clinical practice: What it will take to accelerate progress. Milbank Q 1998;76:593624.
  • 27
    Gorman P, Redfern C, Liaw T, Mahon S. Computer generated paper reminders: Effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (Protocol for a Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2004.
  • 28
    Rowe R, Wyatt JC, Grimshaw JM, et al. Manual paper reminders: Effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (Protocol for a Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2004.
  • 29
    Steele MA, Bess DT, Franse VL, et al. Cost-effectiveness of two interventions for reducing outpatient prescribing costs. DICP 1989;23:497500.
  • 30
    Wyatt J, Bradburn MJ, Fisk NM, et al. Randomised trial of educational visits to enhance use of systematic reviews in 25 obstetric units. BMJ 1998;317(7165):10411046.
  • 31
    Cheater F, Closs S. The effectiveness of methods of dissemination and implementation of clinical guidelines for nursing practice: A selective review. Clin Effect Nurs 1997;1(1):415.
  • 32
    West BJM, Wimpenny P, Duff L, et al. An Educational Initiative to Promote the Use of Clinical Guidelines in Nursing Practice. Aberdeen, UK: The Centre for Nurse Practice Research and Development, 2001.
  • 33
    Grimshaw J, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, et al. Systematic review of the effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004;8(6):184.
  • 34
    Nigenda G, Langer A, Kuchaisit C, et al. Women’s opinions on antenatal care in developing countries: Results of a study in Cuba, Thailand, Saudi Arabia and Argentina. BMC Publ Health 2003;3(1):17.
  • 35
    Graham ID, Logan J, Davies B, Nimrod C. Changing the use of electronic fetal monitoring and labor support: A case study of barriers and facilitators. Birth 2004;31(4):293301.
  • 36
    Rowe AK, De Savigny D, Lanata CF, Victora CG. How can we achieve and maintain high-quality performance of health workers in low-resource setting? Lancet 2005;366(9490):10261035.
  • 37
    Higgins JPT, Green S., eds. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions 4.2.5 [updated May 2005]. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2005.
  • 38
    Grilli R, Oxman AD, Julian JA. Chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. How much benefit is enough? J Clin Oncol 1993;11:18661872.
  • 39
    Dersimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986;7:177188.
  • 40
    Althabe F, Belizan JM, Villar J, et al. Mandatory second opinion to reduce rates of unnecessary caesarean sections in Latin America: A cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004;363(9425):19341940.
  • 41
    Donner A. Issues in the meta-analysis of cluster randomized trials. Stat Med 2002;21:29712980.
  • 42
    Donner A. Meta-analyses of cluster randomization trials power considerations. Eval Health Prof 2005;26(3):340351.
  • 43
    Ukoumunne OC, Gulliford MC, Chinn S, et al. Methods for evaluating area-wide and organisation based interventions in health and health care: A systematic review. Health Technol Asses 1999;3:iii92.
  • 44
    Grimshaw J, Eccles M, Campbell M, Elbourne D. Cluster randomized trials of professional and organizational behavior change interventions. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 2005;599(1):7193.
  • 45
    Cook TD, Campbell DT. Quasi-experiments: Interrupted Time-Series Designs in Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston, Mass: Houghton Mifflin, 1979.
  • 46
    Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Inc. SPSS Base 11.0 for Windows. Chicago, Ill: SPSS Inc, 2006.
  • 47
    Stata Statistical Software for Professional Inc. Stata Base 7.0 for Windows. College Station, Tex: Statacorp LP, 2006.
  • 48
    Dillon WP, Choate JW, Nusbaum ML, et al. Obstetric care and cesarean birth rates: A program to monitor quality of care. Obstet Gynecol 1992;80(5):731737.
  • 49
    Main EK. Reducing cesarean birth rates with data-driven quality improvement activities. Pediatrics 1999;103(1, Suppl E):374–383.
  • 50
    Madi BC, Sandall J, Bennett R, MacLeod C. Effects of female relative support in labor: A randomized controlled trial. Birth 1999;26(1):48.
  • 51
    Harvey S, Jarrell J, Brant R, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of nurse-midwifery care. Birth 1996;23(3):128135.
  • 52
    Flamm BL, Berwick DM, Kabcenell A. Reducing cesarean section rates safely: Lessons from a “breakthrough series” collaborative. Birth 1998;25(2):117124.
  • 53
    Iglesias S, Burn R, Saunders LD. Reducing the cesarean section rate in a rural community hospital. CMAJ 1991;145(11):14591464.
  • 54
    Hamilton E, Platt R, Gauthier R, et al. The effect of computer-assisted evaluation of labor on cesarean rates. J Healthc Qual 2004;26(1):3744.
  • 55
    Treacy BJ, Mathews NB, Rayburn WF. The escalating cesarean section rate: A 25 year experience at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. Nebr Med J 1991;76(8):271273.
  • 56
    Tay SK, Tsakok FH, Ng CS. The use of intradepartmental audit to contain cesarean section rate. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1992;39(2):99103.
  • 57
    Rust OA, Place JC, Melendez D, Leyro PA. Lowering the cesarean rate at a small USAF hospital. Mil Med 1993;158(1):2226.
  • 58
    Kiwanuka AI, Moore WM. Influence of audit and feedback on use of caesarean section in a geographically-defined population. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1993;50(1):5964.
  • 59
    Maher CF, Cave DG, Haran MV. Caesarean section rate reduced. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1994;34(4):389392.
  • 60
    Studnicki J, Remmel R, Campbell R, Werner DC. The impact of legislatively imposed practice guidelines on cesarean section rates: The Florida experience. Am J Med Qual 1997;12(1):6268.
  • 61
    Bickell NA, Zdeb MS, Applegate MS, et al. Effect of external peer review on cesarean delivery rates: A statewide program. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87(5, pt 1):664667.
  • 62
    Liang WH, Yuan CC, Hung JH, et al. Effect of peer review and trial of labor on lowering cesarean section rates. J Chin Med Assoc 2004;67(6):281286.
  • 63
    Robson MS, Scudamore IW, Walsh SM. Using the medical audit cycle to reduce cesarean section rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174:199205.
  • 64
    Frigoletto FD Jr, Lieberman E, Lang JM, et al. A clinical trial of active management of labor. N Engl J Med 1995;333(12):745750.
  • 65
    Lopez-Zeno JA, Peaceman AM, Adashek JA, Socol ML. A controlled trial of a program for the active management of labor. N Engl J Med 1992;326(7):450454.
  • 66
    Homer CS, Davis GK, Brodie PM, et al. Collaboration in maternity care: A randomised controlled trial comparing community-based continuity of care with standard hospital care. BJOG 2001;108(1):1622.
  • 67
    Socol ML, Garcia PM, Peaceman AM, Dooley SL. Reducing cesarean births at a primarily private university hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;168(6, pt 1):17481758.
  • 68
    Poma PA. Effect of departmental policies on cesarean delivery rates: A community hospital experience. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91(6):10131018.
  • 69
    Lagrew DC Jr, Morgan MA. Decreasing the cesarean section rate in a private hospital: Success without mandated clinical changes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174(1, pt 1):184191.
  • 70
    Landon MB, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 2004;351(25):25812589.
  • 71
    Rortveit G, Daltveit AK, Hannestad YS, et al. Urinary incontinence after vaginal delivery or cesarean section. N Engl J Med 2003;348(10):900907.
  • 72
    Klein MC, Kaczorowski J, Firoz T, et al. A comparison of urinary and sexual outcomes in women experiencing vaginal and caesarean births. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2005;27(4):332339.