Worth the Weight? Recent Trends in Obstetric Practices, Gestational Age, and Birth Weight in the United States

Abstract

Birth weight in the United States declined substantially during the 1990s and 2000s. We suggest that the declines were likely due to shifts in gestational age resulting from changes in obstetric practices. Using restricted National Vital Statistics System data linked birth/infant death data for 1990–2013, we analyze trends in obstetric practices, gestational age distributions, and birth weights among first-birth singletons born to U.S. non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Latina women. We use life table techniques to analyze the joint probabilities of gestational age-specific birth and gestational age-specific obstetric intervention (i.e., induced cesarean delivery, induced vaginal delivery, not-induced cesarean delivery, and not-induced vaginal delivery) to fully document trends in obstetric practices by gestational age. We use simulation techniques to estimate counterfactual changes in birth weight distributions if obstetric practices did not change between 1990 and 2013. Results show that between 1990 and 2013, the likelihood of induced labors and cesarean deliveries increased at all gestational ages, and the gestational age distribution of U.S. births significantly shifted. Births became much less likely to occur beyond gestational week 40 and much more likely to occur during weeks 37–39. Overall, nearly 18% of births from not-induced labor and vaginal delivery at later gestational ages were replaced with births occurring at earlier gestational ages from obstetric interventions. Results suggest that if rates of obstetric practices had not changed between 1990 and 2013, then the average U.S. birth weight would have increased over this time. Findings strongly indicate that recent declines in U.S. birth weight were due to increases in induced labor and cesarean delivery at select gestational ages.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Notes

  1. 1.

    Gestational-specific life tables for births in 1998 and 2005 as well as for births to non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, and Latina women are available in the online appendix.

  2. 2.

    Results from only the first and fourth model are presented here. All other results are available in the online appendix.

  3. 3.

    Analytic scripts are available in the online appendix.

References

  1. Aizer, A., & Currie, J. (2014). The intergenerational transmission of inequality: Maternal disadvantage and health at birth. Science, 344, 856–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ananth, C. V., & Vintzileos, A. M. (2011). Trends in cesarean delivery at preterm gestation and association with perinatal mortality. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 204, 505.e1–505.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.01.062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Arima, Y., Guthrie, B. L., Rhew, I. C., & De Roos, A. J. (2009). The impact of the First Steps prenatal care program on birth outcomes among women receiving Medicaid in Washington State. Health Policy, 92, 49–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ashton, D. M. (2010). Elective delivery at less than 39 weeks. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 22, 506–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Barber, E. L., Lundsberg, L. S., Belanger, K., Pettker, C. M., Funai, E. F., & Illuzzi, J. L. (2011). Indications contributing to the increasing cesarean delivery rate. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 118, 29–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Barker, D. J. P. (2012). Developmental origins of chronic disease. Public Health, 126, 185–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ben-Shlomo, Y., & Kuh, D. (2002). A life course approach to chronic disease epidemiology: Conceptual models, empirical challenges and interdisciplinary perspectives. International Journal of Epidemiology, 31, 285–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Berkman, L. F. (2009). Social epidemiology: Social determinants of health in the United States: Are we losing ground? Annual Review of Public Health, 30, 27–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Betrán, A. P., Torloni, M. R., Zhang, J. J., Gülmezoglu, A. M., WHO Working Group on Caesarean Section, Aleem, H. A., ... Deneux‐Tharaux, C. (2016). WHO statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 123, 667–670.

  10. Blondel, B., Kogan, M. D., Alexander, G. R., Dattani, N., Kramer, M. S., Macfarlane, A., & Wen, S. W. (2002). The impact of the increasing number of multiple births on the rates of preterm birth and low birthweight: An international study. American Journal of Public Health, 92, 1323–1330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Catov, J. M., Lee, M., Roberts, J. M., Xu, J., & Simhan, H. N. (2015). Race disparities and decreasing birth weight: Are all babies getting smaller? American Journal of Epidemiology, 183, 15–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chomitz, V. R., Cheung, L. W., & Lieberman, E. (1995). The role of lifestyle in preventing low birth weight. Future of Children, 5(1), 121–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Curtin, S. C., & Mathews, T. J. (2016). Smoking prevalence and cessation before and during pregnancy: Data from the birth certificate, 2014 (National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 65, No. 1). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  14. Davidoff, M. J., Dias, T., Damus, K., Russell, R., Bettegowda, V. R., Dolan, S., ... Petrini, J. (2006). Changes in the gestational age distribution among US singleton births: Impact on rates of late preterm birth, 1992 to 2002. Seminars in Perinatology, 30, 8–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Declercq, E., Menacker, F., & MacDorman, M. (2006). Maternal risk profiles and the primary cesarean rate in the United States, 1991–2002. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 867–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Donahue, S. M., Kleinman, K. P., Gillman, M. W., & Oken, E. (2010). Trends in birth weight and gestational length among singleton term births in the United States: 1990–2005. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 115, 357–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Durie, D. E., Thornburg, L. L., & Glantz, J. C. (2011). Effect of second-trimester and third-trimester rate of gestational weight gain on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 118, 569–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gamble, J., Creedy, D. K., McCourt, C., Weaver, J., & Beake, S. (2007). A critique of the literature on women’s request for cesarean section. Birth, 34, 331–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Goldstein, R. F., Abell, S. K., Ranasinha, S., Misso, M., Boyle, J. A., Black, M. H., ... Kim, Y. (2017). Association of gestational weight gain with maternal and infant outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, 317, 2207–2225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Guise, J. M., Eden, K., Emeis, C., Denman, M., Marshall, N., Fu, R., ... McDonagh, M. (2010). Vaginal birth after cesarean: New insights (Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 191/AHRQ Publication No, 10-E003). Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Hanson, M. A., & Gluckman, P. D. (2008). Developmental origins of health and disease: New insights. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology, 102, 90–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hong, S. C., & Lee, J. (2014). The puzzle of declining birth weight (Working paper). Retrieved from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Puzzle-of-Declining-Birth-Weight-Hong-Lee/6244347dc117c7bf6d6683fdf21c28944f01896f

  23. Ickovics, J. R., Kershaw, T. S., Westdahl, C., Magriples, U., Massey, Z., Reynolds, H., & Rising, S. S. (2007). Group prenatal care and perinatal outcomes: A randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 110, 330–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kitagawa, E. M. (1955). Components of a difference between two rates. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 50, 1168–1194.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kleinman, J. C., & Madans, J. H. (1985). The effects of maternal smoking, physical stature, and educational attainment on the incidence of low birth weight. American Journal of Epidemiology, 121, 843–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kogan, M. D., Martin, J. A., Alexander, G. R., Kotelchuck, M., Ventura, S. J., & Frigoletto, F. D. (1998). The changing pattern of prenatal care utilization in the United States, 1981–1995, using different prenatal care indices. JAMA, 279, 1623–1628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lantos, J. D., & Lauderdale, D. S. (2011). What is behind the rising rates of preterm birth in the United States? Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal, 2(4), e0065. https://doi.org/10.5041/RMMJ.10065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. MacDorman, M. F., Declercq, E., Menacker, F., & Malloy, M. H. (2006). Infant and neonatal mortality for primary cesarean and vaginal births to women with “no indicated risk,” United States, 1998–2001 birth cohorts. Birth, 33, 175–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. MacDorman, M. F., Declercq, E., & Zhang, J. (2010). Obstetrical intervention and the singleton preterm birth rate in the United States from 1991–2006. American Journal of Public Health, 100, 2241–2247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Osterman, M. J. K., Curtin, S. C., & Mathews, T. J. (2015). Births: Final data for 2013 (National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 64, No. 1). Vol. 64 No. 1. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  32. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Osterman, M. J. K., Driscoll, A. K., & Mathews, T. J. (2017). Births: Final data for 2015 (National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 66, No. 1)., Vol. 66 No. 1. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  33. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Sutton, P. D., Ventura, S. J., Menacker, F., Kirmeyer, S., & Munson, M. L. (2007). Births: Final data for 2005 (National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 56, No. 6). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  34. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Sutton, P. D., Ventura, S. J., Menacker, F., & Munson, M. L. (2005). Births: Final data for 2003 (National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 54, No. 2). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  35. Mathews, T. J., & Hamilton, B. E. (2002). Mean age of mother, 1970–2000 (National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 51, No. 1). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  36. Mathews, T. J., & Hamilton, B. E. (2016). Mean age of mothers is on the rise: United States, 2000–2014. (NCHS Data Brief, No. 232). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  37. Menacker, F., Declercq, E., & Macdorman, M. F. (2006). Cesarean delivery: Background, trends, and epidemiology. Seminars in Perinatology, 30, 235–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Miesnik, S. R., & Reale, B. J. (2007). A review of issues surrounding medically elective cesarean delivery. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing, 36, 605–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Morisaki, N., Esplin, M. S., Varner, M. W., Henry, E., & Oken, E. (2013). Declines in birth weight and fetal growth independent of gestational length. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 121, 51–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). (n.d.). Linked births infant deaths 1990–2013 [Data set]. Hyattsville, MD: Vital Statistics Cooperative Program.

  41. OECD. (2017). Health at a glance 2017: OECD indicators [Database]. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1787/health_glance-2017-en

  42. Olsen, I. E., Groveman, S. A., Lawson, M. L., Clark, R. H., & Zemel, B. S. (2010). New intrauterine growth curves based on United States data. Pediatrics, 125, e214–e224. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-0913

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Osterman, M. J. K., & Martin, J. A. (2014a). Trends in low-risk cesarean delivery in the United States, 1990–2013 (National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 63, No. 6). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  44. Osterman, M. J. K., & Martin, J. A. (2014b). Recent declines in induction of labor by gestational age (NCHS Data Brief No. 155). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  45. Paneth, N. S. (1995). The problem of low birth weight. Future of Children, 5(1), 19–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Poobalan, A. S., Aucott, L. S., Gurung, T., Smith, W. C. S., & Bhattacharya, S. (2009). Obesity as an independent risk factor for elective and emergency caesarean delivery in nulliparous women—Systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Obesity Reviews, 10, 28–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Restrepo-Méndez, M. C., Lawlor, D. A., Horta, B. L., Matijasevich, A., Santos, I. S., Menezes, A. M., ... Victora, C. G. (2015). The association of maternal age with birthweight and gestational age: A cross-cohort comparison. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 29, 31–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Simpson, K. R., & Thorman, K. E. (2005). Obstetric “conveniences”: Elective induction of labor, cesarean birth on demand, and other potentially unnecessary interventions. Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing, 19(2), 134–144.

  49. Spong, C. Y., Berghella, V., Wenstrom, K. D., Mercer, B. M., & Saade, G. R. (2012). Preventing the first cesarean delivery: Summary of a joint Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists workshop. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 120, 1181–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. VanderWeele, T. J., Lantos, J. D., & Lauderdale, D. S. (2012). Rising preterm birth rates, 1989–2004: Changing demographics or changing obstetric practice? Social Science & Medicine, 74, 196–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Vaupel, J. W., & Yashin, A. I. (1985). Heterogeneity’s ruses: Some surprising effects of selection on population dynamics. American Statistician, 39, 176–185.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Weaver, J. J., Statham, H., & Richards, M. (2007). Are there “unnecessary” cesarean sections? Perceptions of women and obstetricians about cesarean sections for nonclinical indications. Birth, 34, 32–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Zhang, X., Joseph, K. S., & Kramer, M. S. (2010). Decreased term and postterm birthweight in the United States: Impact of labor induction. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 203(2), 124.e1–124.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2010.03.044

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)–funded University of Colorado Population Center (Award Number P2C HD066613) for development, administrative, and computing support; and the National Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems and the National Vital Statistics Systems for providing data access. We also thank the anonymous referees for providing helpful comments and suggestions, and to jimi adams for his invaluable advice. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NICHD, the National Institutes of Health, NAPHSIS, or the NVSS. Previous versions of this manuscript were presented at the University of Colorado Boulder Sociology Department’s Population and Health Working Group and at the 2018 annual meeting of the Population Association of America in Denver, CO.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea M. Tilstra.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 116 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tilstra, A.M., Masters, R.K. Worth the Weight? Recent Trends in Obstetric Practices, Gestational Age, and Birth Weight in the United States. Demography 57, 99–121 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-019-00843-w

Download citation

Keywords

  • Obstetric practices
  • Gestational age
  • Birth weight
  • Simulations
  • Decomposition