Nationwide implementation of a decision aid on vaginal birth after cesarean: a before and after cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Woman with a history of a previous cesarean section (CS) can choose between an elective repeat CS (ERCS) and a trial of labor (TOL), which can end in a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) or an unplanned CS. Guidelines describe women's rights to make an informed decision between an ERCS or a TOL. However, the rates of TOL and vaginal birth after CS varies greatly between and within countries. The objective of this study is to asses nation-wide implementation of counselling with a decision aid (DA) including a prediction model, on intended delivery compared to care as usual. We hypothesize that this may result in a reduction in practice variation without an increase in cesarean rates or complications. METHODS: In a multicenter controlled before and after cohort study we evaluate the effect of nation-wide implementation of a DA. Practice variation was defined as the standard deviation (SD) of TOL percentages. RESULTS: A total of 27 hospitals and 1,364 women were included. A significant decrease was found in practice variation (SD TOL rates: 0.17 control group vs. 0.10 intervention group following decision aid implementation, p=0.011). There was no significant difference in the ERCS rate or overall CS rates. A 21% reduction in the combined maternal and perinatal adverse outcomes was seen. CONCLUSIONS: Nationwide implementation of the DA showed a significant reduction in practice variation without an increase in the rate of cesarean section or complications, suggesting an improvement in equality of care.

Decision-making during trial of labour after caesarean; a qualitative study with gynaecologists.

OBJECTIVE: The attempt of a woman to deliver vaginally after having had a caesarean in a previous pregnancy is increasingly common in current obstetric practice. During a trial of labour after caesarean, gynaecologists consider whether continuing vaginal birth is safe or, alternately, whether a repeat caesarean is advised. There is large variation in the success rates of women with comparable medical risk factors, requiring better insight in how this assessment is made. As a window of opportunity to intervene in this unexplained variation in practice in specific, and in the globally rising caesarean rate in general, our aim was to increase understanding of gynaecologists' decision-making during trial of labour. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a constructivist grounded theory study, interviewing Dutch gynaecologists. Data collection and analysis were performed concurrently. Initial convenience sampling shifted to theoretical sampling as the study progressed. Data collection continued until theoretical sufficiency was reached. We applied open and axial codes to transcripts of the interviews, and then assembled the axial codes into themes that built up to an emerging theoretical framework. RESULTS: Nine gynaecologists were interviewed. Data indicated they continuously weighed the chance of a successful outcome of trial of labour against the likelihood of adversities. Patients' opinions, aspects of progress of labour and gynaecologists' personal stances regarding trial of labour played a role in the decision-making process; these factors are influenced by organisational affordances and culture. Variation in the assessment of individuals' chances of success and variable thresholds for a repeat caesarean added to the complexity of the decision-making. CONCLUSION: This study pieced together patient-, delivery-, physician- and society-related factors that result in vitally important decisions during trial of labour after caesarean; it reveals the complexity as well as the repetitive patterns involved in this process. Exposing these factors offers opportunities to incorporate the decision-making process in targeted educational interventions, with the aim of modifying the underlying assumptions and concepts in order to reduce practice variation.

No. 155-Guidelines for Vaginal Birth After Previous Caesarean Birth.

OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based guidelines for the provision of a trial of labour (TOL) after Caesarean section. OUTCOME: Fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality associated with vaginal birth after Caesarean (VBAC) and repeat Caesarean section. EVIDENCE: MEDLINE database was searched for articles published from January 1, 1995, to February 28, 2004, using the key words "vaginal birth after Caesarean (Cesarean) section." The quality of evidence is described using the Evaluation of Evidence criteria outlined in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Exam. RECOMMENDATIONS: VALIDATION: These guidelines were approved by the Clinical Practice Obstetrics and Executive Committees of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.

Trial of labour and vaginal birth after previous caesarean section: A population based study of Eastern African immigrants in Victoria, Australia.

OBJECTIVES: Variations in caesarean section (CS) between some immigrant groups and receiving country populations have been widely reported. Often, African immigrant women are at higher risk of CS than the receiving population in developed countries. However, evidence about subsequent mode of birth following CS for African women post-migration is lacking. The objective of this study was to examine differences in attempted and successful vaginal birth after previous caesarean (VBAC) for Eastern African immigrants (Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia and Sudan) compared with Australian-born women. DESIGN: A population-based observational study was conducted using the Victorian Perinatal Data Collection. Pearson's chi-square test and logistic regression analysis were performed to generate adjusted odds ratios for attempted and successful VBAC. SETTING: Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 554 Eastern African immigrants and 24,587 Australian-born eligible women with previous CS having singleton births in public care. FINDINGS: 41.5% of Eastern African immigrant women and 26.1% Australian-born women attempted a VBAC with 50.9% of Eastern African immigrants and 60.5% of Australian-born women being successful. After adjusting for maternal demographic characteristics and available clinical confounding factors, Eastern African immigrants were more likely to attempt (ORadj 1.94, 95% CI 1.57-2.47) but less likely to succeed (ORadj 0.54 95% CI 0.41-0.71) in having a VBAC. CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: There are disparities in attempted and successful VBAC between Eastern African origin and Australian-born women. Unsuccessful VBAC attempt is more common among Eastern African immigrants, suggesting the need for improved strategies to select and support potential candidates for vaginal birth among these immigrants to enhance success and reduce potential complications associated with failed VBAC attempt.

Simplified and standardized intrapartum management can yield high rates of successful VBAC in spontaneous labor.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the outcomes of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) in women, in spontaneous labor, delivering after 37 weeks' gestation at an institution where trial of labor after a previous cesarean delivery (TOLAC) is encouraged and management of labor is standardized. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 3071 women with one previous cesarean only and no vaginal delivery who underwent a trial of labor from 2001 to 2011. Women were managed using the standardized "active management of labor" intrapartum protocol. Outcomes and characteristics of women who delivered vaginally were compared with those who required cesarean delivery. RESULTS: In spontaneous labor in their second pregnancy, those who attempted TOLAC had a 72.5% (1611/2222) rate of successful VBAC. Women who had a successful VBAC had smaller babies (3584 ± 452 g versus 3799 ± 489 g; p < 0.0001) at earlier gestations than those who had a repeat intrapartum cesarean delivery. They also required less intrapartum intervention, such as oxytocin augmentation (14.5% [234/1611] versus 41% [251/611]; p < 0.0001) and epidural anesthesia (64.8% [1044/1611] versus 82.8% [506/611]; p < 0.0001). The rate of uterine rupture was 0.54% (12/2222), while the rate of peri-partum hysterectomy was 0.18% (4/2222). CONCLUSION: This study shows that serious complications associated with TOLAC are rare providing intrapartum care and decision-making is made simple for the benefit of staff and patients alike. This is achieved through a standardized labor management protocol.

[Inter-observer variability of decision concerning the route of delivery in case of one previous cesarean section and abnormal pelvic measures]. / Étude de la variabilité inter-observateur de la décision de la voie d'accouchement en cas d'utérus uni-cicatriciel et bassin anormal.

OBJECTIVES: To study inter-observer variability of decision concerning the route of delivery using pelvimetry in case of one previous cesarean section and abnormal pelvic measures. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Observational study conducted in 2014 in 4 university maternity units among 36 obstetricians. Two groups of obstetricians - as they practiced in a center where pelvimetry was routinely performed (n=12) or not (n=24) - had to choose a route of delivery for 10 clinical cases of women with a single uterine scar and a tight pelvis. The "routine pelvimetry" group had pelvimetry results. The group "no pelvimetry" became aware of pelvimetry results as a second step and had to indicate whether this information changed or not their management. The measurement of the inter-observer variability was estimated by estimating the proportion of agreement according to Grant method. RESULTS: The proportion of agreements of an attempted vaginal delivery between obstetricians in the group "routine pelvimetry" was 64.7% (95% CI [61-68.5]) and 97.3% (95% CI [96.4 to 98.3]) in the group "no pelvimetry", prior knowledge of pelvimetry results. An attempted vaginal delivery was decided in 77.5% versus 98.7% (P<0.001). After knowledge of pelvimetry results in the group "no pelvimetry" had, the number of attempted vaginal deliver was not different (77.5% vs. 78%, P=0.920). CONCLUSION: In women with one previous cesarean section, in case of tight pelvis discovered after pelvimetry, inter-observer variability of decision concerning the route of delivery is increased. Centers that choose to continue using the routine pelvimetry should develop procedures to limit this variability.

Maternity Care Plans: A retrospective review of a process aiming to support women who decline standard care.

BACKGROUND: All competent adults have the right to refuse medical treatment. When pregnant women do so, ethical and medico-legal concerns arise and women may face difficulties accessing care. Policies guiding the provision of maternity care in these circumstances are rare and unstudied. One tertiary hospital in Australia has a process for clinicians to plan non-standard maternity care via a Maternity Care Plan (MCP). AIM: To review processes and outcomes associated with MCPs from the first three and a half years of the policy's implementation. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study comprising chart audit, review of demographic data and clinical outcomes, and content analysis of MCPs. FINDINGS: MCPs (n=52) were most commonly created when women declined recommended caesareans, preferring vaginal birth after two caesareans (VBAC2, n=23; 44.2%) or vaginal breech birth (n=7, 13.5%) or when women declined continuous intrapartum monitoring for vaginal birth after one caesarean (n=8, 15.4%). Intrapartum care deviated from MCPs in 50% of cases, due to new or worsening clinical indications or changed maternal preferences. Clinical outcomes were reassuring. Most VBAC2 or VBAC>2 (69%) and vaginal breech births (96.3%) were attempted without MCPs, but women with MCPs appeared more likely to birth vaginally (VBAC2 success rate 66.7% with MCP, 17.5% without; vaginal breech birth success rate, 50% with MCP, 32.5% without). CONCLUSIONS: MCPs enabled clinicians to provide care outside of hospital policies but were utilised for a narrow range of situations, with significant variation in their application. Further research is needed to understand the experiences of women and clinicians.

Birth after a previous cesarean section - what is most important in making a decision?

OBJECTIVE: A retrospective analysis of the course of labour in patients after one caesarean section (CS) and of factors influencing successful attempt of vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC). DESIGN: A group of 296 patients after one CS was divided into: group G1 (206 patients) - elective CS, group G2 (90) - VBAC attempt, and G2 to: G2a (35) - VBAC and G2b (55) - CS after an unsuccessful VB attempt. A comparative analysis between the groups and logistic regression analysis of factors influencing a successful VBAC was made. RESULTS: There were no differences regarding age, BMI, weight gain during pregnancy or gestational age between groups G1 and G2, as well as G2a and G2b. G2a patients had more often already given VB previously (28.6% vs 10.9%; p=0.03). The most frequent indication for a repeat elective CS was the lack of informed consent for VBAC (29.13% of all indications). The mean neonatal birthweight was highest in G1 (3 410 g), and in G2b higher than in G2a (3 275 g vs 3 098 g; p=0.009). There were no differences in newborns' general condition between the group. There were no cases of uterine rupture and 4 cases of uterine scar dehiscence in G1 and 1 in G2. Of all the analysed factors only spontaneous delivery onset (OR 7.78) and previous vaginal birth after the caesarean (OR 1.99) or before the caesarean (OR 2.03) had significant influence on successful VBAC trial. CONCLUSION: The right classification of patients is a significant factor having effect on the success of a VB attempt after CS.

A checklist for timeout on labor and delivery: a pilot study to improve communication and safety.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact on staff communication of a standardized checklist for timeout for patients undergoing a trial of labor after cesarean section and/or elective induction at term. STUDY DESIGN: A comparison of presurvey and postsurvey questionnaire results for labor and delivery personnel assessing communication before and after checklist implementation. RESULTS: From October 2011 through March 2012, 52.9% (N=37) of 70 eligible patients had the standardized checklist for timeout performed. Prior to implementation of the checklist, 66% of respondents (48.8% of nurses, 100% of residents, 90% of attendings) slightly or strongly agreed that their opinions were heard versus 83% of respondents during the study period (73.7% of nurses, 100% of residents, 100% of attendings). Following the intervention, nurses reported that they were more likely to feel as though their opinions were heard (p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Implementation of a formalized obstetric timeout improved the subjective perception of communication among obstetric staff. This tool has the potential to improve patient safety in labor and delivery.

Delivery for women with a previous cesarean: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF).

The primary cause of uterine scars is a previous cesarean. In women with a previous cesarean, the risks of maternal complications are rare and similar after a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) and after an elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD), but the risk of uterine rupture is higher with TOLAC (level of evidence [LE]2). Maternal morbidity in women with previous cesareans is higher when TOLAC fails than when it leads to successful vaginal delivery (LE2). Although maternal morbidity increases progressively with the number of ERCD, maternal morbidity of TOLAC decreases with the number of successful previous TOLAC (LE2). The risk-benefit ratio considering the risks of short- and long-term maternal complications is favorable to TOLAC in most cases (LE3). Globally, neonatal complications are rare regardless of the mode of delivery for women with previous cesareans. The risks of fetal, perinatal, and neonatal mortality during TOLAC are low. Nonetheless, these risks are significantly higher than those associated with ERCD (LE2). The risks of mask ventilation, intubation for meconium-stained amniotic fluid, and neonatal sepsis all increase in TOLAC (LE2). The risk of transient respiratory distress increases in ERCD (LE2). To reduce this risk, and except in particular situations, ERCD must not be performed before 39 weeks (grade B). TOLAC is possible for women with a previous cesarean before 37 weeks, with 2 previous cesareans, with a uterine malformation, a low vertical incision or an unknown incision, with a myomectomy, postpartum fever, an interval of less than 6 months between the last cesarean delivery and the conception of the following pregnancy, if the obstetric conditions are favorable (professional consensus). ERCD is recommended in women with a scar in the uterine body (grade B) and a history of 3 or more cesareans (professional consensus). Ultrasound assessment of the risk of uterine rupture in women with uterine scars has not been shown to have any clinical utility and is therefore not recommended during pregnancy to help decide the mode of delivery (professional consensus). Use of X-ray pelvimetry to decide about TOLAC is associated with an increase in the repeat cesarean rate without any reduction in the rate of uterine rupture (LE2). It is unnecessary for deciding mode of delivery and for managing labor during TOLAC (grade C). TOLAC should be encouraged for women with a previous vaginal delivery either before or after the cesarean, a favorable Bishop score or spontaneous labor, and for preterm births (grade C). For women with a fetus with an estimated weight of more than 4500 g, especially in the absence of a previous vaginal delivery and those with supermorbid obesity (BMI>50), ERCD must be planned from the outset (grade C). For all of the other clinical situations envisioned (maternal age>35 years, diabetes, morbid obesity, prolonged pregnancy, breech presentation and twin pregnancy), TOLAC is possible but the available data do not allow specific guidelines about the choice of mode of delivery, in view of the low levels of proof (grade C). The decision about planned mode of delivery must be shared by the patient and her physician and made by the 8th month, taking into account the individual risk factors for TOLAC failure and uterine rupture (professional consensus). TOLAC is the preferred choice for women who do not have several risk factors (professional consensus). The availability onsite of an obstetrician and anesthetist must be pointed out to the patient. If the woman continues to prefer a repeat cesarean after adequate information and time to think about it, her preference should be honored (professional consensus). Labor should be induced in woman with a previous cesarean only for medical indications (professional consensus). Induction of labor increases the risk of uterine rupture, which can be estimated at 1% if oxytocin is used and 2% with vaginal prostaglandins (LE2). Mechanical methods of induction have not been studied sufficiently. Misoprostol appears to increase the risk of uterine rupture strongly (LE4). Based on the information now available, its use is not recommended (professional consensus). Routine use of internal tocodynamometry does not prevent uterine rupture (professional consensus). The increased risk of uterine rupture associated with oxytocin use is dose-dependent (LE3). In the active phase, it is recommended that the total duration of failure to progress should not exceed 3h; at that point, a cesarean should be performed (professional consensus). Epidural analgesia must be encouraged. The simple existence of a uterine scar is not an indication for a routine manual uterine examination after VBAC (grade C).

The anesthesiologist's role during attempted VBAC.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' guidelines on vaginal birth after cesarean had both intended and unintended consequences for anesthesiologists. Epidural analgesia continues to play an important role in patient acceptance of a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. It does not impact the success rate of vaginal birth after cesarean and may be a diagnostic tool when uterine rupture occurs. Preanesthesia evaluation and counseling should occur early in the patient's care. Intrapartum management includes appropriate oral intake and close communication between anesthesiologist and obstetrician. If uterine rupture or postpartum hemorrhage occur, appropriate algorithms should be followed.

Why VBAC in Northern New England is still viable: the Northern New England perinatal quality improvement network.

Under the strong leadership of Maternal-Fetal Medicine specialists and the support of the tertiary care centers serving the region, Northern New England (NNE) initiated a collaborative project to improve the availability and safety of trial of labor after cesarean delivery. The project involved over 250 individuals from over 30 organizations and resulted in a strong regional guideline that has been implemented by institutions across the nation. The availability of trial of labor after cesarean in NNE has increased. The work led to the creation of the NNE Perinatal Quality Improvement Network, whose work has improved regional outcomes.

Vaginal birth after cesarean and trial of labor after cesarean: what should we be recommending relative to maternal risk:benefit?

Trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) delivery is currently a hot obstetrical topic owing to the acute rise in the rate of cesarean deliveries, both primary and repeat. When the physician and patient are considering TOLAC, several factors should be considered: risk of uterine rupture, contraindications, minimizing risk and morbidity, choosing the appropriate candidate and whether or not to induce. Each patient has her own set of individual risk factors that may decrease her chance of successful vaginal birth after cesarean delivery or increase her risks with TOLAC. Once all things are considered, the risk:benefit of TOLAC should be weighed up before a decision is reached. Each of these factors is discussed in respect to maternal risk:benefit, with the focus on evidence presented in the current literature.

Providers' perspectives on the vaginal birth after cesarean guidelines in Florida, United States: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Women's access to vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) in the United States has declined steadily since the mid-1990s, with a current rate of 8.2%. In the State of Florida, less than 1% of women with a previous cesarean deliver vaginally. This downturn is thought to be largely related to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) VBAC guidelines, which mandate that a physician and anesthesiologist be "immediately available" during a trial of labor. The aim of this exploratory qualitative study was to explore the barriers associated with the ACOG VBAC guidelines, as well as the strategies that obstetricians and midwives use to minimize their legal risks when offering a trial of labor after cesarean. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 obstetricians, 12 midwives, and a hospital administrator (n = 24). Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis informed the findings. RESULTS: Fear of liability was a central reason for obstetricians and midwives to avoid attending VBACs. Providers who continued to offer a trial of labor attempted to minimize their legal risks by being highly selective in choosing potential candidates. Definitions of "immediately available" varied widely among hospitals, and providers in solo or small practices often favored the convenience of a repeat cesarean delivery rather than having to remain in-house during a trial of labor. Midwives were often marginalized due to restrictive hospital policies and by their consulting physicians, even though women with previous cesareans were actively seeking their care. CONCLUSIONS: The current ACOG VBAC guidelines limit US obstetricians' and midwives' ability to provide care for women with a previous cesarean, particularly in community and rural hospitals. Although ACOG has proposed that women be allowed to accept "higher levels of risk" in order to be able to attempt a trial of labor in some settings, access to VBAC is unlikely to increase in Florida as long as systemic barriers and liability risks remain high.

Nonclinical factors affecting women's access to trial of labor after cesarean delivery.

The use of trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) has declined in the last decade, and the clinical risks of TOLAC remain low. Nonclinical factors continue to affect women's access to TOLAC. This article considers 5 categories of factors that seem to be influencing rates of TOLAC and vaginal birth after cesarean: opinion leaders and professional guidelines, hospital facilities and cesarean availability, reimbursement for providing TOLAC, medical liability, and patient-level factors. An evidence base and strategies to provide guidance to create a safe environment for vaginal birth after cesarean are needed. Obstetric information systems are critical to this effort.

Delivery after prior cesarean: success rate and factors.

Cesarean delivery rates in the United States have reached an all-time high. The current rate of 31% is 6 times higher than the 1970s rate. Many factors including physician preference and hospital accessibility account for this trend. A decreased vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) rate and an increased repeat cesarean rate have important consequences for women in future pregnancies. Because of these considerations, VBAC has been an important issue within the obstetric community for over 3 decades. Identifying the best candidates for VBAC using factors available to the obstetrician can increase the VBAC success rate while minimizing maternal morbidity.

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

BACKGROUND: The rising rates of primary caesarean section have resulted in a larger obstetric population with scarred uteri. Subsequent pregnancies in these women are risk-prone and may complicate. Besides ensuring standardised management, care pathways could be used to evaluate for perinatal outcomes in these high risk pregnancies. We aim to demonstrate the use of a care pathway for vaginal birth after caesarean section as a service evaluation tool to determine perinatal outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective service evaluation by review of delivery case notes and records was undertaken at the Aga Khan University Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya between January 2008 and December 2009. Women with ≥2 previous caesarean sections, previous classical caesarean section, multiple gestation, breech presentation, severe pre-eclampsia, transverse lie, placenta praevia, conditions requiring induction of labour and incomplete records were excluded. Outcome measures included the proportion of eligible women who opted for test of scar (ToS), success rate of vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC); proportion on women opting for elective repeat caesarean section (ERCS) and their perinatal outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 215 women with one previous caesarean section were followed up using a standard care pathway. The median parity (minimum-maximum) was 1.01234. The other demographic characteristics were comparable. Only 44.6% of eligible mothers opted to have a ToS. The success rate for VBAC was 49.4% with the commonest (31.8%) reason for failure being protracted active phase of labour. Maternal morbidity was comparable for the failed and successful VBAC group. The incidence of hemorrhage was 2.3% and 4.4% for the successful and failed VBAC groups respectively. The proportion of babies with acidotic arterial PH (< 7.10) was 3.1% and 22.2% among the successful and failed VBAC groups respectively. No perinatal mortality was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Besides ensuring standardised management, care pathways could be objective audit and service evaluation tools for determining perinatal outcomes.