Variations in the use of oxytocin for augmentation of labour in Sweden: a population-based cohort study.

National Swedish data shows substantial variation in the use of oxytocin for augmentation of spontaneous labour between obstetric units. This study aimed to investigate if variations in the use of oxytocin augmentation are associated with maternal and infant characteristics or clinical factors. We used a cohort design including women allocated to Robson group 1 (nulliparous women, gestational week ≥ 37 + 0, with singleton births in cephalic presentation and spontaneous onset of labour) and 3 (parous women, gestational week ≥ 37 + 0, with singleton births in cephalic presentation, spontaneous onset of labour, and no previous caesarean birth). Crude and adjusted logistic regression models with marginal standardisation were used to estimate risk ratios (RR) and risk differences (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for oxytocin use by obstetric unit. An interaction analysis was performed to investigate the potential modifying effect of epidural. The use of oxytocin varied between 47 and 73% in Robson group 1, and 10% and 33% in Robson group 3. Compared to the remainder of Sweden, the risk of oxytocin augmentation ranged from 13% lower (RD - 13.0, 95% CI - 15.5 to - 10.6) to 14% higher (RD 14.0, 95% CI 12.3-15.8) in Robson group 1, and from 6% lower (RD - 5.6, 95% CI - 6.8 to - 4.5) to 18% higher (RD 17.9, 95% CI 16.5-19.4) in Robson group 3. The most notable differences in risk estimates were observed among women in Robson group 3 with epidural. In conclusion, variations in oxytocin use remained despite adjusting for risk factors. This indicates unjustified differences in use of oxytocin in clinical practice.

Key outcomes in childbirth: Development of a perinatal core outcome set for management of labor and delivery at or near term.

INTRODUCTION: Consistency and relevance of perinatal outcome measures are necessary basics for obstetric research, audit, and clinical counseling. Still, there is an unwarranted variation in reported perinatal outcomes, which impairs research synthesis, validity, and implementation, as well as clinical benchmarking and longitudinal comparisons. The aim of this study was to develop a short-term perinatal (fetal and neonatal) Core Outcome Set to be used in research and quality assurance of management of labor and delivery at or near term. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The methods were guided by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative Handbook. The project was prospectively registered on July 2, 2020 in the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) data base (reference number 1593). A list of potential outcomes was created based on a systematic review of studies evaluating interventions for peripartum management at or near term (≥34 weeks of gestation), including decisions regarding timing and type of onset of labor, intrapartum care, and mode of delivery. The list was entered into a two-round Delphi survey with predefined consensus criteria. Participants (n = 67) included clinicians, researchers, lay persons with experience of childbirth (patient representatives), and other stakeholders. A consensus meeting was held to reach a final agreement. RESULTS: Response rates were 82.1% (55/67) and 92.7% (51/55) for the first and second Delphi rounds, respectively. In total, 17 outcomes were included in the final core outcome set, reflecting mortality, health or morbidity, including asphyxia, central nervous system status, infection, neonatal resuscitation and admission, breastfeeding and mother-infant interaction, operative delivery due to fetal distress, as well as birthweight and gestational age. Two of these outcomes were suggested by patient representatives. CONCLUSIONS: The Swedish Perinatal Core Outcome Set (SPeCOS) study involved a broad circle of relevant stakeholders and reached consensus on a minimal set of perinatal outcomes that should be collected and reported in a standardized way in all future studies on management of labor and delivery at or near term, regardless of the specific population or condition studied. This could improve obstetric research, evidence synthesis, uptake, implementation, and adherence, as well as clinical practice, audit, and comparisons in childbirth care.

The effect of organizational belonging and profession on clinicians' attitudes toward supporting vaginal birth and interprofessional teamwork-a cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of organizational belonging and profession on clinicians' attitudes toward supporting vaginal birth and interprofessional teamwork in Swedish maternity care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study used a cross-sectional design, with a web-based survey sent to midwives, physicians and nurse assistants at five labor wards in Sweden. The survey consisted of two validated scales: the Swedish version of the Labor Culture Survey (S-LCS), measuring attitudes toward supporting vaginal birth, and the Assessment of Collaborative Environments (ACE-15), measuring attitudes toward interprofessional teamwork. Two-way ANOVA was conducted to assess the main effect of and interaction effect between organizational belonging and profession for the different subscales of the S-LCS and the ACE-15, together with Tukey's honest significant difference post-hoc analysis and partial eta squared to determine effect size. The relation between the subscales was assessed using the Pearson's correlation analysis. RESULTS: A total of 539 midwives, physicians and nurse assistants completed the survey. Organizational belonging significantly influenced attitudes toward supporting vaginal birth and interprofessional teamwork, with the largest effect for Positive team culture (F = 38.88, effect size = 0.25, p < 0.001). The effect of profession was strongest for the subscale Best practices (F = 59.43, effect size = 0.20, p < 0.001), with midwives being more supportive of strategies proposed to support vaginal birth than physicians and nurse assistants. A significant interaction effect was found for four of the subscales of the S-LCS, with the strongest effect for items reflecting the Unpredictability of vaginal birth (F = 4.49, effect size = 0.07, p < 0.001). Labor ward culture (unit microculture) specifically related to supporting vaginal birth was strongly correlated to interprofessional teamwork (r = 0.598, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, both organizational belonging and profession influenced attitudes toward supporting vaginal birth and interprofessional teamwork. Positive team culture was positively correlated to an organizational culture supportive of vaginal birth. Interventions to support vaginal births should include efforts to strengthen teamwork between professions, as well as considering women's values, preferences and informed choices.

Risk of negative birth experience in trial of labor after cesarean delivery: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To improve care for women going through trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC), we need to understand their birth experience better. We investigated the association between mode of delivery on birth experience in second birth among women with a first cesarean. METHODS: A population-based cohort study based on the Swedish Pregnancy Register with 808 women with a first cesarean and eligible for TOLAC in 2014-2017. Outcomes were mean birth experience measured by visual analogue scale (VAS) score from 1-10 and having a negative birth experience defined as VAS score ≤5. Linear and logistic regression analyses were performed with ß-estimates and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Mean VAS score among women with an elective repeat cesarean (n = 251 (31%)), vaginal birth (n = 388 (48%)) or unplanned repeat cesarean (n = 169 (21%)) in second birth were 8.8 (standard deviation SD 1.4), 8.0 (SD 2.0) and 7.6 (SD 2.1), respectively. Compared to women having an elective repeat cesarean, women having an unplanned repeat cesarean delivery had five-fold higher odds of negative birth experience (adjusted OR 5.0, 95% CI 1.5-16.5). Women having a first elective cesarean and a subsequent unplanned repeat cesarean delivery had the highest odds of negative birth experience (crude OR 7.3, 95% CI 1.5-35.5). CONCLUSIONS: Most women with a first cesarean scored their second birth experience as positive irrespective of mode of delivery. However, the odds of a negative birth experience increased among women having an unplanned repeat cesarean delivery, especially when the first cesarean delivery was elective.

Severe perineal trauma among women undergoing vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To examine risk of severe perineal trauma among nulliparous women and those undergoing vaginal birth after cesarean delivery (VBAC). METHODS: This is a population-based cohort study of all births to women with their two first consecutive singleton pregnancies in Stockholm-Gotland Sweden between 2008 and 2014. Risk of severe perineal trauma was compared between nulliparous women and those undergoing VBAC with severe perineal trauma being the main outcome measure. Associations between indication and timing of primary cesarean delivery and risk of severe perineal trauma in subsequent vaginal birth were analyzed using Poisson regression analysis. RESULTS: The rate of severe perineal trauma among nulliparous women and those undergoing VBAC was 7.0% and 12.3%, respectively. Compared with nulliparous women, those undergoing VBAC were significantly older, had a shorter stature, and gave birth in a non-upright position to heavier infants with larger head circumferences. The rate of instrumental vaginal delivery among nulliparous women and those undergoing VBAC was 19.3% and 20.2%, respectively (P = 0.331). An increased risk of severe perineal trauma remained after adjustments among those undergoing VBAC (adjusted risk ratio 1.42, 95% CI 1.23-1.63). Level of risk was not associated with indication (dystocia or signs of fetal distress) of primary cesarean delivery, nor how far the woman had progressed in labor (fully dilated versus planned cesarean delivery) before delivering by cesarean. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with nulliparous women, those undergoing VBAC are at increased risk of severe perineal trauma, irrespective of indication and timing of primary cesarean delivery.

Risk of repeat cesarean delivery in women undergoing trial of labor: A population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to consult women on best mode of delivery after a first cesarean section, more knowledge regarding risk for a repeat unplanned cesarean is needed. We investigated the association between indication of first cesarean and cervical dilation during labor preceding the first cesarean and risk of repeat cesarean in women undergoing trial of labor. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A population-based cohort study using electronic medical records of all women delivering in the Stockholm-Gotland region, Sweden, between 2008 and 2014. The population consisted of 3116 women with a first cesarean undergoing a trial of labor with a singleton infant in cephalic presentation at ≥37 weeks of gestation. Relative risks (RR) with 95% CI were estimated using Poisson regression analyses. RESULTS: Women with a first unplanned cesarean had higher risk of repeat cesarean compared with women with elective first cesarean (35.7% vs 20.7%, adjusted RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.43-1.89). In women with a cesarean due to dystocia, increasing cervical dilation in first labor decreased the risk of repeat cesarean in second labor. The adjusted RR of repeat cesarean was 2.48 with dilation ≤5 cm, 1.98 with dilation 6-10 cm, and 1.46 if fully dilated. CONCLUSIONS: Almost 70% of all women eligible for trial of labor after cesarean had a vaginal birth, even women with a history of labor dystocia had a good chance of success. A greater cervical dilation in the first delivery ending with a cesarean was not in vain, since the chance of vaginal birth in the subsequent delivery increased with greater dilation.

Outcome of attempted vaginal delivery after a previous vacuum extraction: a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Few studies have investigated long-term effects of a first vaginal instrumental delivery on subsequent mode of delivery. We investigated risks of repeat vacuum extraction and risk factors associated with a repeat vacuum extraction delivery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a population-based register study including 391 160 women with two consecutive singleton term (≥37 weeks) live births in cephalic presentation between/within the time period of 1992-2010 in Sweden. Rates and risk ratios of mode of delivery in second pregnancy in relation to primary mode of delivery were calculated using descriptive analyses and generalized linear models. Risk of repeat vacuum extraction was adjusted for maternal age and height, interpregnancy interval, gestational length, birthweight, induction, sex and occiput posterior position. RESULTS: Compared with women with a primary spontaneous vaginal delivery, women with a primary vacuum extraction had an almost five-fold risk of vacuum extraction delivery and nearly a three-fold risk of emergency cesarean section at second delivery. For women with a primary emergency cesarean section, corresponding risks were substantially higher. Risk factors for a repeat vacuum extraction were increasing maternal age and an interpregnancy interval >4 years, decreasing maternal stature, increasing gestation length and birthweight, induction, giving birth to a male infant and occiput posterior position. CONCLUSIONS: Nine of ten women who attempted a vaginal birth after a primary vacuum extraction succeeded in having a spontaneous vaginal delivery at second delivery. Compared with women with a primary spontaneous vaginal delivery, women with a primary vacuum extraction were at increased risk of repeat vacuum extraction and emergency cesarean section in subsequent delivery although their risk was not as high as that of women with a primary emergency cesarean section.

Birth position and obstetric anal sphincter injury: a population-based study of 113 000 spontaneous births.

BACKGROUND: The association between birth position and obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS) in spontaneous vaginal deliveries is unclear. METHODS: The study was based on the Stockholm-Gotland Obstetric Database (Sweden) from Jan 1(st) 2008 to Oct 22(nd) 2014 and included 113 279 singleton spontaneous vaginal births with no episiotomy. We studied risk of OASIS with respect to the following birth positions: a) sitting, b) lithotomy, c) lateral, d) standing on knees, e) birth seat, f) supine, g) squatting, h) standing and i) all fours. All analyses were stratified for parity. General linear models were used to calculate risk ratios (RR) adjusted for maternal, pregnancy and fetal characteristics. RESULTS: The rates of OASIS among nulliparous women, parous women and women undergoing vaginal birth after a caesarean (VBAC) were 5.7%, 1.3% and 10.6%, respectively. The rates varied by birth position: from 3.7 to 7.1% in nulliparous women, 0.6% to 2.6% in parous women and 5.6% to 18.2% in women undergoing VBAC. Regardless of parity, the lowest rates were found among women giving birth in standing position and the highest rates among women birthing in the lithotomy position. Compared with sitting position, the lithotomy position involved an increased risk of OASIS among nulliparous (adjusted RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.06-1.29) and parous women (adjusted RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.35-2.05). Birth seat and squatting position involved an increased risk of OASIS among parous women (adjusted RR [95% CI] 1.36 [1.03-1.80] and 2.16 [1.15-4.07], respectively). Independent risk factors for OASIS were maternal age, head circumference ≥35 cm, birth weight ≥4000 g, length of gestation ≥ 40 weeks, prolonged second stage of labour, non-occiput anterior presentation and oxytocin augmentation. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with sitting position, lateral position has a slightly protective effect in nulliparous women whilst an increased risk is noted among women in the lithotomy position, irrespective of parity. Squatting and birth seat position involve an increase in risk among parous women.

Birth experience in women with low, intermediate or high levels of fear: findings from the first baby study.

BACKGROUND: Fear of childbirth and mode of delivery are two known factors that affect birth experience. The interactions between these two factors are unknown. The aim of this study was to estimate the effects of different levels of fear of birth and mode of delivery on birth experience 1 month after birth. METHODS: As part of an ongoing prospective study, we interviewed 3,006 women in their third trimester and 1 month after first childbirth to assess fear of birth and birth experience. Logistic regression was performed to examine the interactions and associations between fear of birth, mode of delivery and birth experience. RESULTS: Compared with women with low levels of fear of birth, women with intermediate levels of fear, and women with high levels of fear had a more negative birth experience and were more affected by an unplanned cesarean section or instrumental vaginal delivery. Compared with women with low levels of fears with a noninstrumental vaginal delivery, women with high levels of fear who were delivered by unplanned cesarean section had a 12-fold increased risk of reporting a negative birth experience (OR 12.25; 95% CI 7.19-20.86). A noninstrumental vaginal delivery was associated with the most positive birth experience among the women in this study. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that both levels of prenatal fear of childbirth and mode of delivery are important for birth experience. Women with low fear of childbirth who had a noninstrumental vaginal delivery reported the most positive birth experience.

Reason for the increasing use of vacuum extraction in Sweden: a population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: To explain the increasing rates of vacuum extraction in Sweden. DESIGN: Population-based register study. SETTING: Nationwide study in Sweden. POPULATION: A total of 589 108 primiparous women with singleton, term live births in 1992-2010. METHODS: Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were estimated for potential risk factors for vacuum extraction and emergency cesarean. To explain the increase in vacuum extraction over time, we successively adjusted for maternal and infant characteristics in four different models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Vacuum extraction. RESULTS: Rates of vacuum extraction increased from 11.5% in 1992 to 14.8% in 2010. The risk of vacuum extraction increased with maternal age and gestational length, but decreased with increasing maternal height. The increased use of vacuum extraction over time was partly explained by increasing maternal age and increased use of epidural anesthesia. Among women with and without epidural analgesia, the increase in vacuum extraction over time was confined to vacuum extraction due to signs of fetal distress. CONCLUSIONS: Depending on risk factors, the odds of being delivered by vacuum extraction can vary immensely from one woman to another. Increasing maternal age explains a substantial fraction of the increase in vacuum extraction use since 1992. Whether the increase in vacuum extractions due to fetal distress reflects a true increase in fetal distress during labor remains to be explained.

The influence of fetal head circumference on labor outcome: a population-based register study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between postnatal head circumference and the occurrence of the three main indications for instrumental delivery, namely prolonged labor, signs of fetal distress and maternal distress. We also studied the association between postnatal fetal head circumference and the use of vacuum extraction and emergency cesarean section. DESIGN: Population-based register study. SETTING: Nationwide study in Sweden. POPULATION: A total of 265 456 singleton neonates born to nulliparous women at term between 1999 and 2008 in Sweden. METHODS: Register study with data from the Swedish Medical Birth Register. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prolonged labor, signs of fetal distress, maternal distress, use of vacuum extraction and emergency cesarean section. RESULTS: The prevalence of each outcome increased gradually as the head circumference increased. Compared with women giving birth to a neonate with average size head circumference (35 cm), women giving birth to an infant with a very large head circumference (39-41 cm) had significantly higher odds of being diagnosed with prolonged labor [odds ratio (OR) 1.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33-1.67], signs of fetal distress (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.49-2.03) and maternal distress (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.96-2.95). The odds ratios for vacuum extraction and cesarean section were thereby elevated to 3.47 (95% CI 3.10-3.88) and 1.22 (95% CI 1.04-1.42), respectively. The attributable risk proportion percentages associated with vacuum extraction and cesarean section were 46 and 39%, respectively among the cases exposed to a head circumference of 37-41 cm. CONCLUSIONS: Large fetal head circumference is associated with complicated labor and is etiological to a considerable proportion of assisted vaginal births and emergency cesarean sections.