Will there ever be an end to the Caesarean section rate debate?

Pelvic floor in females with anorectal malformations--findings on perineal ultrasonography and aspects of delivery mode

BACKGROUND

Advice on the mode of delivery to females born with anorectal malformation (ARM) is needed. The primary aim was to evaluate the anatomy of the pelvic floor muscles in females with ARM operated with posterior sagittal anorectal plasty (PSARP). The second aim was to correlate the extent of muscle defects to the bowel symptoms.

METHODS

This interventional study with perineal 4D/3D ultrasonography describes the smooth muscles in the intestinal wall (neo-IAS), external sphincter, levators and anal canal using a muscle score (0-6 worst). The bowel symptoms were prospectively registered with Krickenbeck criteria score (0-7 worst).

RESULTS

Forty females with different subtypes of ARM, median age 13 (4-21), were followed up regarding bowel symptoms. Seventeen were examined with ultrasonography. Bowel symptoms were similar for those examined with ultrasonography and those not, median score 5 and 3 (1-7) respectively, (p=0.223, Fisher's exact test). All the females had at least one muscular defect. There was no significant correlation between muscle defects and bowel symptoms (p=0.094, Spearman's correlation).

CONCLUSION

Females with ARM have considerable defects in the pelvic floor without any significant correlation to bowel symptoms. All women with ARM would benefit from individualized predelivery evaluations and caesarian section should be considered.

Cesarean section rate in Iran, multidimensional approaches for behavioral change of providers: a qualitative study

Background

The cesarean section rate has been steadily rising from 35% in 2000 to 40% in 2005 in Iran. The objective of this study was to identify barriers of reduce the cesarean section rate in Iran, as perceived by obstetricians and midwives as the main behavioral change target groups.

Methods

A qualitative study with purposive sampling was designed in which data were collected through in-depth interviews and document analyses. Hospitals were selected on the bases of being public and or private and their response to the ministry's C-section reduction interventions. The hospital director, obstetricians and midwives from each hospital were included in the study. The classification of barriers suggested by Grol and Wensing was used for the thematic analysis.

Results

After 26 in-depth interviews and document analyses, the barriers were identified as: financial, insurance and judicial problems at the economic and political context level; the type and ownership of hospitals, absence of an on call physician, absence of clear job-descriptions for obstetricians and midwives, too many interventions in the delivery process and shortage of human resources and facilities at the organizational context level; distrust and insufficient collaborations between obstetricians and midwives from macro to micro level at the social context level; attitudes toward complications of C-section, reduced capabilities of obstetricians, midwives and residents at the individual professional level; and finally, at the innovation level, vaginal delivery is time consuming, imposes high stress levels and is unpredictable.

Conclusion

Changing service providers' behavior is not possible through presentation of scientific evidence alone. A multi-level and multidisciplinary approach using behavior change theories is unavoidable. In future studies, the effect of the barriers should be determined to help policy makers recognize the most effective interventional package.

A history of caesarean section: From ancient world to the modern era

Caesarean section has been recorded in history since ancient times in both Western and non-Western literature. Although the first use of the term in obstetrics was from the seventeenth century, its early history is obscured by mythology. The origin of the term caesarean is believed to be from the birth of Julius Caesar; however, this is unlikely considering his mother Aurelia Cotta lived for many years afterwards. In ancient times, it was performed only when the woman was dead or dying as an attempt to rescue the fetus. With few exceptions, this was the pattern until the era of anaesthesia in the nineteenth century. Developments in surgical technique from the later nineteenth century and through the twentieth century have refined the procedure, with resulting low morbidity and mortality. As a consequence, the objectives of caesarean section have evolved from rescuing the fetus or for cultural or religious reasons towards concerns for the safety of mother and child as well as considering the mother's preferences.

Repeat cesarean delivery: what indications are recorded in the medical chart?

BACKGROUND

National surveillance estimates reported a troubling 63 percent decline in the rate of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery (VBAC) from 1996 (28.3%) to 2003 (10.6%), with subsequent rising rates of repeat cesarean delivery. The study objective was to examine patterns of documented indications for repeat cesarean delivery in women with and without labor.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based validation study of 19 nonfederal short-stay hospitals in Washington state. Of the 4,541 women who had live births in 2000, 11 percent (n = 493) had repeat cesarean without labor and 3 percent (n = 138) had repeat cesarean with labor. Incidence of medical conditions and pregnancy complications, patterns of documented indications for repeat cesarean delivery, and perioperative complications in relation to repeat cesarean delivery with and without labor were calculated.

RESULTS

Of the 493 women who underwent a repeat cesarean delivery without labor, "elective"(36%) and "maternal request"(18%) were the most common indications. Indications for maternal medical conditions (3.0%) were uncommon. Among the 138 women with repeat cesarean delivery with labor, 60.1 percent had failure to progress, 24.6 percent a non-reassuring fetal heart rate, 8.0 percent cephalopelvic disproportion, and 7.2 percent maternal request during labor. Fetal indications were less common (5.8%). Breech, failed vacuum, abruptio placentae, maternal complications, and failed forceps were all indicated less than 5.0 percent. Women's perioperative complications did not vary significantly between women without and with labor. Regardless of a woman's labor status, nearly 10 percent of women with repeat cesarean delivery had no documented indication as to why a cesarean delivery was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

"Elective" and "maternal request" were common indications among women undergoing repeat cesarean delivery without labor, and nearly 10 percent of women had undocumented indications for repeat cesarean delivery in their medical record. Improvements in standardization of indication nomenclature and documentation of indication are especially important for understanding falling VBAC rates. Future research should examine how clinicians and women anticipate, discuss, and make decisions about childbirth after a previous cesarean delivery within the context of actual antepartum care.

Pelvic floor trauma in childbirth - myth or reality?

The issue of traumatic damage to the pelvic floor in childbirth is attracting more and more attention amongst obstetric caregivers and laypersons alike. This is partly due to the fact that elective Caesarean section, as a potentially preventative intervention, is increasingly available and perceived as safe. As there are a multitude of emotive issues involved, including health economics and the relative roles of healthcare providers, the discussion surrounding pelvic floor trauma in childbirth has not always been completely rational. However, after 25 years of urogynaecological research in this field it should be possible to determine whether pelvic floor trauma in childbirth is myth or reality. On reviewing the available evidence, it appears that there are sufficient grounds to assume that vaginal delivery (or even the attempt at vaginal delivery) can cause damage to the pudendal nerve, the caudal aspects of the levator ani muscle, fascial pelvic organ supports and the external and internal anal sphincter. Risk factors for such damage have been defined and variously include operative vaginal delivery, a long second stage, and macrosomia. It is much less clear, however, whether such trauma is clinically relevant, and how important it is in the aetiology of pelvic floor morbidity later in life.

Childbirth and pelvic floor trauma

The issue of traumatic damage to the pelvic floor in childbirth is attracting more and more attention amongst obstetric caregivers and laypersons alike. This is partly due to the fact that elective caesarean section as a potentially preventative intervention is increasingly available and perceived as safe. As there is a multitude of emotive issues involved, including health economics and the relative roles of healthcare providers, the discussion surrounding pelvic floor trauma in childbirth has not always been completely rational. However, after 25 years of urogynaecological research in this field it should be possible to determine whether pelvic floor trauma in childbirth is myth or reality, and, if real, whether it matters for the pathogenesis of incontinence and prolapse. On reviewing the available evidence, it appears that there are sufficient grounds to assume that vaginal delivery (or even the attempt at vaginal delivery) can cause damage to the pudendal nerve, the inferior aspects of the levator ani muscle and fascial pelvic organ supports. Risk factors for such damage have been defined and variously include operative vaginal delivery, a long second stage, and macrosomia. It is much less clear, however, whether such trauma is clinically relevant, and how important it is in the aetiology of pelvic floor morbidity later in life.