Preference toward future mode of delivery: how do antepartum preferences and prior delivery experience contribute?

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.

Utility of Patient-reported Symptoms and Health Conditions for Predicting Surgical Candidacy and Utilization of Surgery via an Outpatient Spine Clinic Nomogram

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

Identify the nonradiographic predictors of a patient's decision to undergo elective spine surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Up to 132 million people seek elective evaluation by spine surgeons annually, though 55%-82% of specialty referrals may be inappropriate. We sought to determine which clinical and psychosocial factors are associated with surgical utilization by patients seeking surgical evaluation for degenerative spine pathologies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive elective outpatient visits seen in a single clinic between May 2016 and April 2017 for degenerative spine pathologies were reviewed. Data were collected on presenting symptoms, baseline medical illness, demographics, and previous spine care. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to determine which factors were associated with surgical candidacy and surgical utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 353 patients were seen during the period reviewed, of which 144 had complete medical records. Our cohort included 90 nonsurgical candidates, 25 surgical candidates who declined surgery, and 29 patients who underwent surgery. In multivariable analysis, factors negatively associated with surgical candidacy were age, a history of smoking, and osteoporosis, where those positively associated with surgical candidacy were reports of spine-specific pain, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, pain medication use, number of neurological symptoms, and being myelopathic. Factors positively associated with surgical utilization included proportion of all complaints that were neurological in nature, being myelopathic, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, and report of pain as chronic, whereas being osteoporotic was negatively associated with surgical use. A receiver operating curve constructed for these models produced c-statistics of 0.75 and 0.80, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the results of standard clinic intake questions, such as review of systems, medical history, and chief complaints, may be predictive of surgical candidacy before evaluation by a surgeon. The present pilot study suggests a preliminary algorithm that can be further validated and expanded upon to help decide on optimal patient referrals to spine surgery specialists.