The utility of clinical care pathways in determining perinatal outcomes for women with one previous caesarean section; a retrospective service evaluation

Factors associated with successful vaginal birth after a cesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence for the relationship between maternal and perinatal factors and the success of vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) is conflicting. We aimed to systematically analyze published data on maternal and fetal factors for successful VBAC.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of Medline, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, from each database's inception to March 16, 2018. Observational studies, identifying women with a trial of labor after one previous low-transverse cesarean section were included. Two reviewers independently abstracted the data. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

We included 94 eligible observational studies (239,006 pregnant women with 163,502 VBAC). Factors were associated with successful VBAC with the following odds ratios (OR;95%CI): age (0.92;0.86-0.98), obesity (0.50;0.39-0.64), diabetes (0.50;0.42-0.60), hypertensive disorders complicating pregnancy (HDCP) (0.54;0.44-0.67), Bishop score (3.77;2.17-6.53), labor induction (0.58;0.50-0.67), macrosomia (0.56;0.50-0.64), white race (1.39;1.26-1.54), previous vaginal birth before cesarean section (3.14;2.62-3.77), previous VBAC (4.71;4.33-5.12), the indications for the previous cesarean section (cephalopelvic disproportion (0.54;0.36-0.80), dystocia or failure to progress (0.54;0.41-0.70), failed induction (0.56;0.37-0.85), and fetal malpresentation (1.66;1.38-2.01)). Adjusted ORs were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes, HDCP, Bishop score, labor induction, macrosomia, age, obesity, previous vaginal birth, and the indications for the previous CS should be considered as the factors affecting the success of VBAC.

Evaluating Facility-Based Decision-Making in Women with a Prior Cesarean Delivery and Association with Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes

Objective To describe facility-based decision-making for women with one prior cesarean delivery (CD) in a resource-limited setting and to characterize maternal and perinatal outcomes in these groups. Methods One year retrospective study of women with one prior CD delivering at Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital (KBTH), Ghana. Women were categorized into three groups based on initial plan of management on admission [trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC), emergency repeat CD (EMCD) or non-emergent repeat CD (RCD)]. Characteristics and outcomes across these groups were then compared. Results During the study period, 1247 women with one prior CD delivered at KBTH, of which 377 (30.2%) were triaged to RCD, 439 (35.2%) to EMCD and 431 (34.6%) to TOLAC. Twelve uterine ruptures and no maternal deaths occurred. Perinatal mortality was 4.2% (n = 52). Compared to the RCD group, the TOLAC group had a lower risk for maternal adverse events (aOR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-1.0; p = 0.04) and non-significant higher risk of perinatal adverse events (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 0.7-3.3; p = 0.25). Compared to women triaged to RCD, the EMCD group had a non-significant increase in risk of maternal adverse events (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 0.8-3.5; p = 0.2) and a significantly higher rate of perinatal adverse events (aOR 2.4, 95% CI 1.2-4.9; p = 0.01). Conclusions for Practice Women triaged to EMCD at admission are different when compared to women allowed a TOLAC or offered a non-emergent RCD. These women bear increased rates of adverse outcomes and should be considered as a separate group for analysis in future studies conducted in similar settings.

Stage of labor at admission among Ugandan women with a prior cesarean, and its impact on management and delivery outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To describe stage of labor at admission among women with a prior cesarean, and examine its impact on intrapartum management and delivery mode.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study, women admitted to Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, Uganda, for delivery were enrolled between March and June 2015. Rates of vaginal delivery (VBAC) and in-hospital trial of labor (TOL) were compared between early (<4 cm dilation) and late (≥4 cm) presenters. Women were interviewed after delivery about decision making and labor preferences.

RESULTS

Overall, 188 women comprised the study sample; 98 (52.1%) and 65 (34.6%) women presented at ≥4 cm and ≥6 cm, respectively, and 18 (9.6%) were fully dilated. In-hospital TOL and VBAC rates were 25.5% (42/165) and 9.6% (18/188), respectively. Compared with early presenters, late presenters were significantly more likely to undergo TOL (28/88 [31.8%] vs 14/77 [18.2%]; odds ratio [OR] 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-5.0), and achieve VBAC (16/98 [16.3%] vs 2/90 [2.2%]; OR 7.6, 95% CI 1.7-35.1).

CONCLUSION

Most women arrived in active labor, but most had a repeat cesarean. Work is needed to understand the clinical decision making and provider management driving low TOL and VBAC rates.

Vaginal Birth After Caesarean Section in Low Resource Settings: The Clinical and Ethical Dilemma

Vaginal birth after Caesarean section (VBAC) has long been practised in low resource settings using unconventional methods. This not only poses danger to the woman and her baby, but could also have serious legal and ethical implications. The adoption of this practice has been informed by observational studies with many deficiencies; this is so despite other studies from settings in which the standard of care is much better that show that elective repeat Caesarean section (ERCS) may actually be safer than VBAC. This raises questions about whether we should insist on a dangerous practice when there are safer alternatives. We highlight some of the challenges faced in making this decision, and discuss why the fear of ERCS may not be justified after all in low resource settings. Since a reduction in rates of Caesarean section may not be applicable in these regions, because their rates are already low, the emphasis should instead be on adequate birth spacing and safer primary operative delivery.

Issues arising when crossing a border to give birth: an exploratory study on the French-Belgian border

BACKGROUND

Anecdotal evidence suggests that many organised initiatives for cross-border collaboration in healthcare in border regions originate from the need for women to give birth close to home. Despite this, there is remarkably little research on these practices and the specific modes of collaboration between providers and experiences and needs of these women. In this paper we describe the experiences of French women who choose to give birth in Belgium.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 key informants and captured the experiences of 14 French mothers using a 40-item questionnaire.

RESULTS

The chief motivations for French mothers to cross the border to deliver a baby in Belgium were geographical proximity as well as perceived better quality of care. Several procedural differences between France and Belgium were highlighted as possibly affecting the quality of follow-up care, including the absence, in some cases, of a contact person in France, and communication problems between providers.

CONCLUSION

There is a tension between the testimony of patients who are clearly satisfied and evidence of problems in communication and weak collaboration between providers on either side of this cross border collaboration. This paradox requires more research efforts to generate clear evidence of the added value of these cross-border collaborations for patients.