Giving birth after caesarean: Identifying shared preferences among pregnant women using Q methodology

Effect of previous caesarean section on reproductive and pregnancy outcomes after assisted reproductive technology: A systematic review and meta‑analysis

Pregnancies following previous caesarean section (CS) are associated with higher incidence of infections, postpartum haemorrhage and obstetric complications. The present study aimed to explore the effect of previous CS on reproductive, maternal and neonatal outcomes in women who underwent assisted reproductive techniques (ART). A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess reproductive and pregnancy outcomes following ART in women with and without a previous CS. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Eligible language articles written in English, published up to October 2023, were identified in Medline, Google Scholar and Science Direct databases. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. A total of 19 articles, reporting on 13 different outcomes met the inclusion criteria. It was revealed that women with previous CS had 9% lower clinical pregnancy rates, 13% lower live birth rates, 11% lower implantation rates and 28% lower multiple pregnancy rates compared with women who had prior natural vaginal deliveries. Additionally, previous CS was associated with an 8-fold higher risk of difficult embryo transfers. No significant differences were noted in ectopic pregnancy rates, miscarriage rates or biochemical pregnancy rates. The present systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that previous CS is associated with decreased prospects of clinical pregnancy, live birth and successful embryo implantation during ART. The findings of the present study underscored the need to counsel women with prior CS regarding its potential impact on ART outcomes.

Women's views and preferences regarding the mode of birth after cesarean section: Polish cross-sectional web-based survey

OBJECTIVE

Currently, the most common indication for cesarean section is a previous cesarean section. Some of them are performed for no medical reasons. Therefore, it is crucial to recognize the preferences and expectations of women concerning birth after cesarean section. This study's main aim was to understand the women's points of view on the mode of birth after cesarean.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was conducted, and data was collected using an original structured online questionnaire. The study group consisted of 733 pregnant Polish women who had previously undergone a cesarean birth.

RESULTS

Women more often preferred vaginal birth after cesarean section (73.26%) and less frequently (23.33%) chose elective cesarean section. Women preferring VBAC when making decisions were guided by the benefits, opportunities, and risks associated with each mode of birth. For women preferring elective cesarean section the only highly significant factor was the experience of previous deliveries. Women mainly use Internet sources and the support of other women giving birth after cesarean section. More than half of the women did not talk about the mode of birth with their midwife, and every fifth did not talk about it with the obstetrician.

CONCLUSION

Obstetric history and personal beliefs about birth after cesarean section, motivations, and concerns about childbirth affect women's preferences regarding the mode of birth. It is necessary to educate women, in particular, talks about the opportunities and risks associated with cesarean birth carried out by the medical staff at an early stage of pregnancy.

The Effect of Skin-to-Skin Contact on Postoperative Depression and Physical Recovery of Parturients after Cesarean Section in Obstetrics and Gynecology Department

The effect of skin-to-skin contact (SSC) on postpartum depression and physical rehabilitation of cesarean section women was explored. 280 parturients undergoing cesarean section were selected and were rolled into two groups randomly. The parturients in the control group (Con group, 140 cases) received routine care, and those in the experimental group (Exp group, 140 cases) received SSC on the basis of routine care. The postpartum depression and physical recovery of parturients in two groups were compared. It was found that, in the Exp group, the number of pregnant women with no or with very mild depression was much more 85% vs. 55%), the number of women with adequate lactation was more (53 cases vs. 27 cases), the first lactation time (FLT) was dramatically shorter (41.25 ± 4.81 h vs. 58.43 ± 5.43 h), the breastfeeding success rate (BFSR) and breastfeeding rate (BFR) were obvious higher, the days for uterine involution was much shorter (6.96 ± 1.13 days vs. 9.47 ± 1.75 days), the descent of uterine fundus 24 hours after delivery (24 h-DUF) was obviously larger (3.17 ± 0.26 mm vs. 1.56 ± 0.43 mm), the duration of lochia (DOL) was remarkably shorter (33.21 ± 5.32 days vs. 25.32 ± 3.54 days), and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score was lower (4.88 ± 0.32 points vs. 3.41 ± 0.53 points), showing statistical differences for all above indicators (P < 0.05). It suggested that SSC could effectively relieve the postpartum depression of uterine parturients, promote the lactation, increase the BFR, facilitate uterine involution, and alleviate chronic uterine inflammation and postpartum pain, showing high clinical application and promotion value.

Women's views of birth after cesarean section

BACKGROUND

Vaginal birth is a safe mode of childbirth for the majority of women after cesarean section (CS). However, data show that women who have undergone a CS are more likely to have an elective CS (ECS) than a vaginal birth after CS (VBAC) in many areas of the world.

AIM

This study aimed to review the literature about women's mode of birth preferences and attitudes and the underlying reasons for, and factors associated with, their preferences.

METHODS

This is narrative literature review. PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched, limiting the results to non-interventional studies published between 1990 and 2020. Twenty-one articles were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

The review found 34 different factors that influence women's preferences. Five factors influenced both VBAC and ECS preference, depending on the study. The most common factors having a dualistic effect on preference were: medical staff recommendation, doctor's opinion, and fear of pain. The most common factors were: desire to experience natural childbirth, faster/easier recovery, support from doctor's, and midwife's opinion. Among the factors influencing the preference for ECS, two were particularly prominent: predictability, controllability and comfortability of CS and the belief that CS is safer for the baby and/or mother.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review showed that there are a variety of factors that influence women's preference for the mode of delivery after CS. Some of these have a dualistic effect according to the study. The key to making an informed decision regarding the mode of delivery is communication with medical professionals.

Impact of previous Caesarean section on reproductive outcomes after assisted reproductive technology: systematic review and meta-analyses

This meta-analysis investigated whether a previous Caesarean section has an impact on the outcomes of treatment with assisted reproductive technology (ART). PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched. Clinical trials published in English up to May 2020 were included. Seven studies performed between 2016 and 2020 met all the inclusion criteria. It was found that previous Caesarean section leads to significantly decreased clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) (risk ratio [RR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81, 0.92; P < 0.00001) and live birth rate (LBR) (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.73, 0.86; P < 0.00001). Caesarean section increased the miscarriage rate (RR 1.39; 95% CI 1.18, 1.64; P < 0.0001), and difficult transfer (RR 8.23; 95% CI 4.63, 14.65; P < 0.00001) after ART compared with women who had previous vaginal delivery. The combined results also showed similar endometrial thickness, number of oocytes retrieved, implantation rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, preterm birth and stillbirth between women with previous Caesarean section and women with previous vaginal delivery. In conclusion, Caesarean sections have a detrimental effect on CPR and LBR, and increase the risk of miscarriage and difficult transfer. The indications for Caesarean section should be strictly controlled, and full consultation should be provided to pregnant women. Further studies with stratification analysis of twin and single pregnancies are needed to evaluate the impact of Caesarean section.

Women's experiences of planning a vaginal birth after caesarean in different models of maternity care in Australia

BACKGROUND

Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is a safe mode of birth for most women but internationally VBAC rates remain low. In Australia women planning a VBAC may experience different models of care including continuity of care (CoC). There are a limited number of studies exploring the impact and influence of CoC on women's experiences of planning a VBAC. Continuity of care (CoC) with a midwife has been found to increase spontaneous vaginal birth and decrease some interventions. Women planning a VBAC prefer and benefit from CoC with a known care provider. This study aimed to explore the influence, and impact, of continuity of care on women's experiences when planning a VBAC in Australia.

METHODS

The Australian VBAC survey was designed and distributed via social media. Outcomes and experiences of women who had planned a VBAC in the past 5 years were compared by model of care. Standard fragmented maternity care was compared to continuity of care with a midwife or doctor.

RESULTS

In total, 490 women completed the survey and respondents came from every State and Territory in Australia. Women who had CoC with a midwife were more likely to feel in control of their decision making and feel their health care provider positively supported their decision to have a VBAC. Women who had CoC with a midwife were more likely to have been active in labour, experience water immersion and have an upright birthing position. Women who received fragmented care experienced lower autonomy and lower respect compared to CoC.

CONCLUSION

This study recruited a non-probability based, self-selected, sample of women using social media. Women found having a VBAC less traumatic than their previous caesarean and women planning a VBAC benefited from CoC models, particularly midwifery continuity of care. Women seeking VBAC are often excluded from these models as they are considered to have risk factors. There needs to be a focus on increasing shared belief and confidence in VBAC across professions and an expansion of midwifery led continuity of care models for women seeking a VBAC.