A Description of the Management and Outcomes of Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Birth in the Homebirth Setting

Vaginal birth after cesarean: neonatal outcomes and United States birth setting

BACKGROUND

Women who seek vaginal birth after cesarean delivery may find limited in-hospital options. Increasing numbers of women in the United States are delivering by vaginal birth after cesarean delivery out-of-hospital. Little is known about neonatal outcomes among those who deliver by vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in- vs out-of-hospital.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare neonatal outcomes between women who deliver via vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in-hospital vs out-of-hospital (home and freestanding birth center).

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using 2007-2010 linked United States birth and death records to compare singleton, term, vertex, nonanomolous, and liveborn neonates who delivered by vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in- or out-of-hospital. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to estimate unadjusted, absolute, and relative birth-setting risk differences. Analyses were stratified by parity and history of vaginal birth. Sensitivity analyses that involved 3 transfer status scenarios were conducted.

RESULTS

Of women in the United States with a history of cesarean delivery (n=1,138,813), only a small proportion delivered by vaginal birth after cesarean delivery with the subsequent pregnancy (n=109,970; 9.65%). The proportion of home vaginal birth after cesarean delivery births increased from 1.78-2.45%. A pattern of increased neonatal morbidity was noted in unadjusted analysis (neonatal seizures, Apgar score <7 or <4, neonatal seizures), with higher morbidity noted in the out-of-hospital setting (neonatal seizures, 23 [0.02%] vs 6 [0.19%; P<.001]; Apgar score <7, 2859 [2.68%] vs 139 [4.42%; P<.001; Apgar score <4, 431 [0.4%] vs 23 [0.73; P=.01]). A similar, but nonsignificant, pattern of increased risk was observed for neonatal death and ventilator support among those neonates who were born in the out-of-hospital setting. Multivariate regression estimated that neonates who were born in an out-of-hospital setting had higher odds of poor outcomes (neonatal seizures [adjusted odds ratio, 8.53; 95% confidence interval, 2.87-25.4); Apgar score <7 [adjusted odds ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-1.96]; Apgar score <4 [adjusted odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-2.79]). Although the odds of neonatal death (adjusted odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-6.05; P=.18) and ventilator support (adjusted odds ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-2.46) appeared to be increased in out-of-hospital settings, findings did not reach statistical significance. Women birthing their second child by vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in out-of-hospital settings had higher odds of neonatal morbidity and death compared with women of higher parity. Women who had not birthed vaginally prior to out-of-hospital vaginal birth after cesarean delivery had higher odds of neonatal morbidity and mortality compared with women who had birthed vaginally prior to out-of-hospital vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Sensitivity analyses generated distributions of plausible alternative estimates by outcome.

CONCLUSION

Fewer than 1 in 10 women in the United States with a previous cesarean delivery delivered by vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in any setting, and increasing proportions of these women delivered in an out-of-hospital setting. Adverse outcomes were more frequent for neonates who were born in an out-of-hospital setting, with risk concentrated among women birthing their second child and women without a history of vaginal birth. This information urgently signals the need to increase availability of in-hospital vaginal birth after cesarean delivery and suggests that there may be benefit associated with increasing options that support physiologic birth and may prevent primary cesarean delivery safely. Results may inform evidence-based recommendations for birthplace among women who seek vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.

Serious adverse neonatal outcomes such as 5-minute Apgar score of zero and seizures or severe neurologic dysfunction are increased in planned home births after cesarean delivery

The United States is with 37,451 home births in 2014 the country with the largest absolute number of home births among all developed countries. The purpose of this study was to examine the occurrence and risks of a 5-minute Apgar score of zero and neonatal seizures or serious neurologic dysfunction in women with a history of prior cesarean delivery for planned home vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC), compared to hospital VBAC and hospital birth cesarean deliveries for term normal weight infants in the United States from 2007-2014. We report in this study outcomes of women who had one or more prior cesarean deliveries and included women who had a successful vaginal birth after a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) at home and in the hospital, and a repeat cesarean delivery in the hospital. We excluded preterm births (<37 weeks) and infants weighing under 2500 g. Hospital VBACS were the reference. Women with a planned home birth VBAC had an approximately 10-fold and higher increase in adverse neonatal outcomes when compared to hospital VBACS and hospital repeat cesarean deliveries, a significantly higher incidence and risk of a 5-minute Apgar score of 0 of 1 in 890 (11.24/10,000, relative risk 9.04, 95% confidence interval 4-20.39, p<.0001) and an incidence of neonatal seizures or severe neurologic dysfunction of 1 in 814 (Incidence: 12.27/10,000, relative risk 11.19, 95% confidence interval 5.13-24.29, p<.0001). Because of the significantly increased neonatal risks, obstetric providers should therefore not offer or perform planned home TOLACs and for those desiring a VBAC should strongly recommend a planned TOLAC in the appropriate hospital setting. We emphasize that this stance should be accompanied by effective efforts to make TOLAC available in the appropriate hospital setting.

Maternal and perinatal outcomes in women planning vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) at home in England: secondary analysis of the Birthplace national prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare vaginal birth rates in women planning vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) at home versus in an obstetric unit (OU) and explore transfer rates in women planning home VBAC.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

OUs and planned home births in England.

POPULATION

1436 women planning VBAC in the Birthplace cohort, including 209 planning home VBAC.

METHODS

We used Poisson regression to calculate relative risks adjusted for maternal characteristics.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

MAIN OUTCOMES

(i) vaginal birth and (ii) transfer from planned home birth to OU during labour or immediately after birth.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

(i) composite of maternal blood transfusion or admission to higher level care, (ii) stillbirth or Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes, (iii) neonatal unit admission.

RESULTS

Planned VBAC at home was associated with a statistically significant increase in the chances of having a vaginal birth compared with planned VBAC in an OU (adjusted relative risk 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.24). The risk of an adverse maternal outcome was around 2-3% in both settings, with a similar risk of an adverse neonatal outcome. Transfer rates were high (37%) and varied markedly by parity (para 1, 56.7% versus para 2+, 24.6%).

CONCLUSION

Women in the cohort who planned VBAC at home had an increased chance of a vaginal birth compared with those planning VBAC in an OU, but transfer rates were high, particularly for women with only one previous birth, and the risk of an adverse maternal or perinatal outcome was around 2-3%. No change in guidance can be recommended.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Higher vaginal birth rates in planned VBAC at home versus in OU but 2-3% adverse outcomes and high transfer rate.

Planned Home VBAC in the United States, 2004-2009: Outcomes, Maternity Care Practices, and Implications for Shared Decision Making

BACKGROUND

In the United States, the number of planned home vaginal births after cesarean (VBACs) has increased. This study describes the maternal and neonatal outcomes for women who planned a VBAC at home with midwives who were contributing data to the Midwives Alliance of North America Statistics Project 2.0 cohort during the years 2004-2009.

METHOD

Two subsamples were created from the parent cohort: 12,092 multiparous women without a prior cesarean and 1,052 women with a prior cesarean. Descriptive statistics were calculated for maternal and neonatal outcomes for both groups. Sensitivity analyses comparing women with a prior vaginal birth and those who were at the lowest risk with various subgroups in the parent cohort were also conducted.

RESULTS

Women with a prior cesarean had a VBAC rate of 87 percent, although transfer rates were higher compared with women without a prior cesarean (18% vs 7%, p < 0.001). The most common indication for transfer was failure to progress. Women with a prior cesarean had higher proportions of blood loss, maternal postpartum infections, uterine rupture, and neonatal intensive care unit admissions than those without a prior cesarean. Five neonatal deaths (4.75/1,000) occurred in the prior cesarean group compared with 1.24/1,000 in multiparas without a history of cesarean (p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

Although there is a high likelihood of a vaginal birth at home, women planning a home VBAC should be counseled regarding maternal transfer rates and potential for increased risk to the newborn, particularly if uterine rupture occurs in the home setting.

Women's reasons for, and experiences of, choosing a homebirth following a caesarean section

Background

Caesarean section is rising in the developed world and vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is declining. There are increased reports of women seeking a homebirth following a caesarean section (HBAC) in Australia but little is known about the reasons for this study aimed to explore women's reasons for and experiences of choosing a HBAC.

Methods

Twelve women participated in a semi-structured one-to-one interview. The interviews were digitally recorded, then transcribed verbatim. These data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

The overarching theme that emerged was ‘It’s never happening again’. Women clearly articulated why it [caesarean section] was never happening again under the following sub themes: ‘treated like a piece of meat’, ‘I was traumatised by it for years’, ‘you can smell the fear in the room’, ‘re-traumatised by the system’. They also described how it [caesarean section] was never happening again under the sub themes: ‘getting informed and gaining confidence’, ‘avoiding judgment through selective telling’, ‘preparing for birth’, ‘gathering support’ and ‘all about safety but I came first’. The women then identified the impact of their HBAC under the subthemes ‘I felt like superwoman’ and ‘there is just no comparison’.

Conclusions

Birth intervention may cause physical and emotional trauma that can have a significant impact on some women. Inflexible hospital systems and inflexible attitudes around policy and care led some women to seek other options. Women report that achieving a HBAC has benefits for the relationship with their baby. VBAC policies and practices in hospitals need to be flexible to enable women to negotiate the care that they wish to have.

Vaginal birth after cesarean in German out-of-hospital settings: maternal and neonatal outcomes of women with their second child

BACKGROUND

To offer vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) in a hospital setting is recommended in international guidelines, but offering VBAC in out-of-hospital settings is considered controversial. This study describes neonatal and maternal outcomes in mothers who started labor in German out-of-hospital settings.

METHOD

In a retrospective analysis of German out-of-hospital data from 2005 to 2011, included were 24,545 parae II with a singleton pregnancy in a cephalic presentation at term (1,927 with a prior cesarean and 22,618 with a prior vaginal birth).

RESULT

The overall VBAC rate was 77.8 percent. The intrapartum transfer rate to hospital was 38.3 percent (prior cesarean) versus 4.6 percent (prior vaginal) (p < 0.05), and the 10-minute Apgar < 7 rate was 0.6 versus 0.2 percent (p < 0.05), and the nonemergency intrapartum transfer rate was 91.5 versus 85.0 percent (p < 0.05). Prolonged first stage of labor was the most common reason for intrapartum transfer in both groups. The leading reason for postpartum transfer was retained placenta.

DISCUSSION

There was a high rate of successful VBAC in this study. The high nonemergency transfer rate for women with VBAC might mean that midwives are more cautious when attending women with a prior cesarean in out-of-hospital settings. Further studies are necessary to evaluate which women are suitable for VBAC in out-of-hospital settings.

Counseling women with a previous cesarean birth: toward a shared decision-making partnership

Pregnant women who had a previous cesarean birth must choose whether to have a repeat cesarean or to attempt a vaginal birth. Many of these women are candidates for a trial of labor. Current practice guidelines recommend that women should be thoroughly counseled during prenatal care about the benefits and harms of both a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) and an elective repeat cesarean delivery and be offered the opportunity to make an informed decision about mode of birth in collaboration with their provider. The purpose of this article is to improve the process of counseling, decision making, and informed consent by increasing health care providers' knowledge about the essential elements of shared decision making. Factors that affect the decisions to be made and concepts that are critical for effective counseling are explored, including clinical considerations, women's perspectives, decision-making models, health literacy and numeracy, communicating risk, and the use of decision aids. Issues related to birth sites for TOLAC are also discussed, including access, safety, refusal of surgery, and clinical management.