Literature DB >> 17138788

Cesarean delivery on maternal request: maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Anthony G Visco1, Meera Viswanathan, Kathleen N Lohr, Mary Ellen Wechter, Gerald Gartlehner, Jennifer M Wu, Rachel Palmieri, Michele Jonsson Funk, Linda Lux, Tammeka Swinson, Katherine Hartmann.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To review systematically the evidence about maternal and infant outcomes of cesarean delivery on maternal request and planned vaginal delivery. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Collaboration resources, and Embase and identified 1,406 articles through dual review using a priori inclusion criteria. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We included English language studies published from 1990 to June 2005 that compared the key reference group (cesarean delivery on maternal request or proxies) and planned vaginal delivery. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND
RESULTS: We identified 54 articles for maternal and infant outcomes. Virtually no studies exist on cesarean delivery on maternal request, so the knowledge base rests on indirect evidence from proxies with unique and significant limitations. Most studies compared outcomes by actual routes of delivery, resulting in variable relevance to planned routes of delivery. Primary cesarean delivery on maternal request and planned vaginal delivery likely differ with respect to individual outcomes; for instance, risks of urinary incontinence and maternal hemorrhage were lower with planned cesarean, whereas the risk of neonatal respiratory morbidity was higher and maternal length of stay was longer with planned cesarean delivery. However, our comprehensive assessment, across many outcomes, suggests no major differences between primary cesarean delivery on maternal request and planned vaginal delivery, but the evidence is too weak to conclude definitively that differences are completely absent. If a woman chooses to have a cesarean delivery in her first delivery, she is more likely to have subsequent deliveries by cesarean. With increasing numbers of cesarean delivery, risks occur with increasing frequency.
CONCLUSION: The evidence is significantly limited by its minimal relevance to primary cesarean delivery on maternal request. Future research requires developing consensus about terminology, creating a minimum data set for cesarean delivery on maternal request, improving study design and statistical analyses, attending to major outcomes and their special measurement issues, assessing both short- and long-term outcomes with better measurement strategies, dealing better with confounders, and considering the value or utility of different outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17138788     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000241092.79282.87

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  19 in total

1.  Is planned cesarean childbirth a safe alternative?

Authors:  B Anthony Armson
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2007-02-13       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  Neonatal morbidity and mortality after elective cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Caroline Signore; Mark Klebanoff
Journal:  Clin Perinatol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.430

3.  Deconstruction junction: how to separate the good evidence from the bad (from the ugly).

Authors:  Amy M Romano
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2009

4.  Delivery route preferences of urban women of low socioeconomic status.

Authors:  Bela Kudish; Shobha Mehta; Michael Kruger; Evie Russell; Robert J Sokol
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2010-06-26       Impact factor: 3.561

5.  Fertility after cesarean delivery among Somali-born women resident in the USA.

Authors:  Wael Salem; Priscilla Flynn; Amy Weaver; Brian Brost
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2011-06

6.  A conceptual framework for future research on mode of delivery.

Authors:  Jennifer M Wu; Meera Viswanathan; Julie S Ivy
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2012-10

7.  Pelvic floor consequences of cesarean delivery on maternal request in women with a single birth: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Xiao Xu; Julie S Ivy; Divya A Patel; Sejal N Patel; Dean G Smith; Scott B Ransom; Dee Fenner; John O L Delancey
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.681

8.  Scheduled cesarean delivery: maternal and neonatal risks in primiparous women in a community hospital setting.

Authors:  Lieschen H Quiroz; Howard Chang; Joan L Blomquist; Yvonne K Okoh; Victoria L Handa
Journal:  Am J Perinatol       Date:  2008-11-19       Impact factor: 1.862

9.  The Ontario Mother and Infant Study (TOMIS) III: a multi-site cohort study of the impact of delivery method on health, service use, and costs of care in the first postpartum year.

Authors:  Wendy Sword; Susan Watt; Paul Krueger; Lehana Thabane; Christine Kurtz Landy; Dan Farine; Marilyn Swinton
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2009-04-28       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  Cesarean delivery on maternal request: can the ethical problem be solved by the principlist approach?

Authors:  Tore Nilstun; Marwan Habiba; Göran Lingman; Rodolfo Saracci; Monica Da Frè; Marina Cuttini
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2008-06-17       Impact factor: 2.652

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.