Literature DB >> 20860784

Preferences for mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: what do women want, what do they get and how do they value outcomes?

Clare L Emmett1, Alan A Montgomery, Deirdre J Murphy.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Women with one previous caesarean section must decide which mode of delivery they would prefer in their next pregnancy. This involves a choice between attempted vaginal birth and elective caesarean section.
OBJECTIVE: To explore women's mode of delivery preferences and the values placed on the outcomes of decision making. Greater insight into these issues could benefit both clinical care and future research.
DESIGN: Observational study using longitudinal data collected within a randomized controlled trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Seven hundred and forty-two women with one previous caesarean section recruited at four antenatal clinics in South West England and Scotland. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mode of delivery preference recorded at 19 and 37 weeks' gestation and visual analogue scale ratings of health and delivery outcomes.
RESULTS: Comparison of mid and late pregnancy preferences and actual mode of delivery shows that 57% of women hold the same mode of delivery preferences at both times and 65% of women actually have the birth they prefer. The visual analogue scale ratings show variation in the way women value the outcomes of the decision. DISCUSSION AND
CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the way women's mode of delivery preferences change, how these relate to actual mode of delivery and how women value the outcomes of their decision will be beneficial to health professionals who wish to support women both during pregnancy and after birth. In addition, the visual analogue scale ratings provide evidence that may improve the development of population-level and economic models of decision making.
© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20860784      PMCID: PMC5060598          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00635.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  16 in total

1.  Visual analog scales: do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states?

Authors:  G W Torrance; D Feeny; W Furlong
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2001 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  What influences a woman to choose vaginal birth after cesarean?

Authors:  Renee T Ridley; Peggy A Davis; Jane H Bright; Donna Sinclair
Journal:  J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec

3.  Vaginal birth after caesarean section versus elective repeat caesarean section: assessment of maternal downstream health outcomes.

Authors:  Emmanuelle Paré; Joanne N Quiñones; George A Macones
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 6.531

4.  Women's experiences and preferences following Caesarean birth.

Authors:  Jodie Dodd; Elizabeth Pearce; Caroline Crowther
Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.100

5.  Childbirth and the development of acute trauma symptoms: incidence and contributing factors.

Authors:  D K Creedy; I M Shochet; J Horsfall
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.689

6.  Women's experience of decision making about mode of delivery after a previous caesarean section: the role of health professionals and information about health risks.

Authors:  C L Emmett; A R G Shaw; A A Montgomery; D J Murphy
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 6.531

7.  Decision making about mode of delivery among pregnant women who have previously had a caesarean section: A qualitative study.

Authors:  M A Moffat; J S Bell; M A Porter; S Lawton; V Hundley; P Danielian; S Bhattacharya
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 6.531

Review 8.  Childbirth preferences after cesarean birth: a review of the evidence.

Authors:  Karen B Eden; Jason N Hashima; Patricia Osterweil; Peggy Nygren; Jeanne-Marie Guise
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.689

9.  Decision-making about mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: development and piloting of two computer-based decision aids.

Authors:  Clare L Emmett; Deirdre J Murphy; Roshni R Patel; Tom Fahey; Claire Jones; Ian W Ricketts; Peter Gregor; Maureen Macleod; Alan A Montgomery
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Vaginal birth after cesarean section: trial of labor or repeat cesarean section? A decision analysis.

Authors:  David D Mankuta; Moshe M Leshno; Moshe M Menasche; Mayer M Brezis
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 8.661

View more
  5 in total

1.  Mode of delivery preferences in a diverse population of pregnant women.

Authors:  Lynn M Yee; Anjali J Kaimal; Kathryn A Houston; Erica Wu; Mari-Paule Thiet; Sanae Nakagawa; Aaron B Caughey; Atoosa Firouzian; Miriam Kuppermann
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-10-18       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Strength of preference for vaginal birth as a predictor of delivery mode among women who attempt a vaginal delivery.

Authors:  Erica Wu; Anjali J Kaimal; Kathryn Houston; Lynn M Yee; Sanae Nakagawa; Miriam Kuppermann
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-11-16       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  Caesarean section in uninsured women in the USA: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ilir Hoxha; Medina Braha; Lamprini Syrogiannouli; David C Goodman; Peter Jüni
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-03-03       Impact factor: 2.692

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

Authors:  Charlotte Lindblad Wollmann; Can Liu; Sissel Saltvedt; Charlotte Elvander; Mia Ahlberg; Olof Stephansson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-03-06       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Public target interventions to reduce the inappropriate use of medicines or medical procedures: a systematic review.

Authors:  Leesa Lin; Prima Alam; Elizabeth Fearon; James R Hargreaves
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2020-10-20       Impact factor: 7.327

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.