Exploring unwarranted clinical variation: The attitudes of midwives and obstetric medical staff regarding induction of labour and planned caesarean section

Examining provider practice-level disparities in delivery outcomes among patients with a history of Cesarean Delivery

BACKGROUND

Choosing whether to pursue a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) or scheduled repeat cesarean delivery (SRCD) requires prenatal assessment of risks and benefits. Providers and patients play a central role in this process. However, the influence of provider-associated characteristics on delivery methods remains unclear. We hypothesized that different provider practice groups have different obstetric outcomes in patients with one prior cesarean delivery (CD).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of deliveries between April 29, 2015 - April 29, 2020. Subjects were divided into three cohorts: SRCD, successful VBAC, and unsuccessful VBAC (patients who chose TOLAC but had a CD). Disparities were reviewed between five different obstetric provider practice groups, determined from a breakdown of different providers delivering at the study site during the study period. Proportional differences were examined using Chi-squared tests and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

1,439 deliveries were included in the study. There were significant proportional disparities between patients in the different groups. Specifically, patients from Group D were significantly more likely to undergo successful VBAC, while patients seeing a provider from Group A were more likely to deliver by SRCD. In our multivariate analysis of successful versus unsuccessful VBAC, patients from Group D had greater odds ratios of successful VBAC compared to Group A. Patients delivered by Group E had a significantly lower odds ratio of successful VBAC.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests an association between provider practice groups and delivery outcomes among patients with one prior CD. These data contribute to a growing body of literature around patient choice in pregnancy and the interplay of patients and providers. These findings help to guide future investigations to improve outcomes among patients with a history of CD.

Conflicting attitudes between clinicians and women regarding maternal requested caesarean section: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Caesarean section (CS) can be a life-saving operation but might also negatively affect the health of both the woman and the baby. The aim of this study was to synthesize and contrast women's and clinicians' attitudes toward maternal-requested CS, and their experiences of the decision-making process around CS.

METHODS

The databases of CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycInfo and Scopus were screened. All qualitative studies that answered the study question and that were assessed to have minor or moderate methodological limitations were included. Synthesised findings were assessed using GRADE-CERQual.

RESULTS

The Qualitative Evidence Synthesis included 14 qualitative studies (published 2000-2022), involving 242 women and 141 clinicians. From the women's perspectives, two themes arose: women regarded CS as the safest mode of birth; and women's rights to receive support and acceptance for a CS request. From the clinicians' perspectives, four themes emerged: clinicians were concerned about health risks associated with CS; demanding experience to consult women with a CS request; conflicting attitudes about women's rights to choose a CS; and the importance of respectful and constructive dialogue about birthing options.

CONCLUSION

Women and clinicians often had different perceptions regarding the right of a woman to choose CS, the risks associated with CS, and the kind of support that should be part of the decision-making process. While women expected to receive acceptance for their CS request, clinicians perceived that their role was to support the woman in the decision-making process through consultation and discussion. While clinicians thought it was important to show respect for a woman's birth preferences, they also felt the need to resist a woman's request for CS and encourage her to give birth vaginally due to the associated increases in health risks.

Factors Associated with Vaginal/Cesarean Birth Attitudes among Medical Students

Background: Polish perinatal care is facing a high, ever-increasing cesarean section (CS) rate that is currently at 43%. Crucially, reports have revealed that the attitudes, experiences, and skills of clinicians directly contribute to this elevated CS rate. Methods: This cross-sectional study, which included 748 Polish medical students, aimed to identify medical students’ attitudes regarding birth methods. A descriptive questionnaire was distributed via the academic email addresses of surveyed medical students. Group comparisons were performed using Welch’s t-test for continuous data or a Chi-squared test for categorical data. We also used the Mann–Whitney U test and Kruskal–Wallis H test. Results: Midwifery students (96.2%) were the most unified group of students, with most agreeing that VB (vaginal birth) presents a safer option for women at low risk for VB-related complications vs. cesarean section. Of Medical Faculty students, 68% believed that fewer complications typically occur during vaginal birth than during CS. Students in their final vs. initial years of study furthermore considered VB more beneficial for women than CS. Conclusions: An important factor identified at the individual clinician level is the presence of leadership and executive support. For medical students, we can interpret this as support from their trainers and supervisors.

Inter-hospital and inter-disciplinary variation in planned birth practices and readiness for change: a survey study

BACKGROUND

How the application of evidence to planned birth practices, induction of labour (IOL) and prelabour caesarean (CS), differs between Australian maternity units remains poorly understood. Perceptions of readiness for practice change and resources to implement change in individual units are also unclear.

AIM

To identify inter-hospital and inter-professional variations in relation to current planned birth practices and readiness for change, reported by clinicians in 7 maternity units.

METHOD

Custom-created survey of maternity staff at 7 Sydney hospitals, with questions about women's engagement with decision making, indications for planned birth, timing of birth and readiness for change. Responses from midwives and medical staff, and from each hospital, were compared.

FINDINGS

Of 245 completed surveys (27% response rate), 78% were midwives and 22% medical staff. Substantial inter-hospital variation was noted for stated planned birth indication, timing, women's involvement in decision-making practices, as well as in staff perceptions of their unit's readiness for change. Overall, 48% (range 31-64%) and 64% (range 39-89%) agreed on a need to change their unit's caesarean and induction practices respectively. The three units where greatest need for change was perceived also had least readiness for change in terms of leadership, culture, and resources. Regarding inter-disciplinary variation, medical staff were more likely than midwifery staff to believe women were appropriately informed and less likely to believe unit practice change was required.

CONCLUSION

Planned birth practices and change readiness varied between participating hospitals and professional groups. Hospitals with greatest perceived need for change perceived least resources to implement such change.